I know the 182 will handle the 1100 ft but that was never the question. Thought I stated the mission pretty well but maybe a little long. I want to replace the 182 with a comperable tailwheel plane but not in one weekend. Want to gradually work my way into it.

Tim

With that price range, I would say a Pacer. Anything in that price range will be slow, small and underpowered compared to a 182. Double your price range and a 235 Maule is in reach, Which I think will compare to a 182.

i would highly recommend a champ for an all around fun airplane that is very cheap to fly. next would be a small piper like a j-3 or pa-11. they are just as fun (or more) but usually come at a slightly higher purchase price.

and while you are building time in your new tube and rag----> you will have plenty of time to convert your straight tail 182 into a taildragger you already have the best canidate for a t/w conversion. find a local cessna guru that has done this before, and pick his brain about cost and downtime. then compare this to a similarly equipped 180 with similar SMOH times.

I believe with my 182 all that needs to be done is to build the gear box and mount the tailwheel. The cowl flaps are already there. Have no verification of this but I was told that in 59 for a while they were putting both the conventional and tricycle gear boxes in the planes in 59. That would be too good to be true.

Tim

qmdv wrote:I believe with my 182 all that needs to be done is to build the gear box and mount the tailwheel. The cowl flaps are already there. Have no verification of this but I was told that in 59 for a while they were putting both the conventional and tricycle gear boxes in the planes in 59. That would be too good to be true.

Tim

Hop up the road to Yreka/Rohrer Field. There's a C182 in the open hangar that has been converted to conventional gear. I never flew that particular airplane, but it looks pretty... Dave will give you the scoop on it.

That is a 58 182 that belongs to a friend of mine by the name of John Brinton. Have floan in it.

Tim

qmdv wrote:That is a 58 182 that belongs to a friend of mine by the name of John Brinton. Have floan in it.

Tim

Well.... Cost of a gear conversion is a heck of a lot less than the expense of buying/feeding a second airplane. In 15,000+ hours of flying, most north of the Arctic Circle, the airplane I miss the most and loved the best were my Cessna 180's. In my opinion, the best all around airplane out there for doing a bit of everything well, and really nothing poorly.

Gump

After your mission statement, I'd say to just sell off the 182 and buy a 180. It isn't just tailwheel time but also make/model time that they'll base insurance prices on. So you pay a bit more for insurance the first year-- so what? Better than screwing around selling/buying again a year or so from now.
180 asking prices seem to have levelled off, or actually seem to have gone down lately. This might be the time to just go for it.
IMHO there's nothing else like a 180. The 180 and the Supercub are the two back-country airplanes that everything else is compared to.

Eric

Lots of good points and I will be looking forward to discussing this in detail at Johnson Creek.

Tim

Hi gang! I have not posted in a while but I read the BCP post every day,even before I read the sports section in my paper. Is that dedication or what? I wanted to let QMDV know that there is a Christavia 4 for sale in Ogden Utah that would fill your requirements, In Spades! and then some. I have talked to the fellow that owns it. He is asking 22,500 and it looks like it is worth every penny. If you go to Barnstormers.com, click search and type in Christavia 4 it will bring up pictures. and specs. I would like to buy it myself but I lost allof my retirement in the Enron debacle and I,am starting from scratch @ age 58! not a very good thing. So good luck in your search, and everyone keep up the great post. You guys are one of the brightest part of my day. Linehand

A tcraft aint that hard to get down and in short. Just need to have someone who knows how to fly them show a newbie how to do it right. Problem is there aint that many qualified Tcraft drivers with true short field/off airport experience. For less than 20K you can have a great airplane.

Jason "back in the NW"
N22KY

Converting the 182 to a taildragger or just buying a 180 are not bad ideas, but here are my thoughts and experience. I had a 182 for several years and decided to get a 185 with no taildragger experience, there were two schools of thought, one was to get experience in something a little more calm and the others that said get the Skywagon, learn in it, because it will be a different ball game anyway. I bought the 185 and learned in it. If I were to do it again I would either buy something docile and learn in it or rent something rather tame to train in. If you are only working on grass it probably would not be such a big deal but hard surface in a faster plane without some experience can bite you, and it can be as expensive as the starter plane you are looking for. I added a Super Cub last year as a stable mate to the 185 and after flying that pussy cat I knew that I had bought the planes in the wrong order. You will love the bigger plane but my vote is to learn in something a little calmer before you put a rocket between your legs, if nothing else the wind will be a bigger deal than it is in your 182. Others may disagree but that is the opinion of this farm boy.

steve wrote:Converting the 182 to a taildragger or just buying a 180 are not bad ideas You will love the bigger plane but my vote is to learn in something a little calmer before you put a rocket between your legs, but that is the opinion of this farm boy.

A C180 and C185 are completely different beasts. A lightly loaded C180 is as docile and as gentle as a lamb, especially the mid 1950s variety which is lighter yet. Just enough horsepower to get you out of trouble when you really work hard to screw something up, yet not a snarling beast like the C185 thinks it is once in a while, so you end up learning to fly with a fingertip, not your fist.

Master the C180, and most anything else you ever fly will thank you.

Gump

I converted my '57 182 1600 hours ago. The gear boxes were not there. I have not seen any gear boxes on any plane newer than 1956. The whole process took six weeks but that included a Texas Skyways O-520. The ground handling is much tamer than the Champ I learned in. I would do it again if I could find an early 182 cheap enough.
Dave

Superdave wrote:I converted my '57 182 1600 hours ago. The gear boxes were not there. I have not seen any gear boxes on any plane newer than 1956. The whole process took six weeks but that included a Texas Skyways O-520. The ground handling is much tamer than the Champ I learned in. I would do it again if I could find an early 182 cheap enough.
Dave

Just don't get your heart set on being pals with the 180/185 Association.

Hey, why was your c-180 the most fun and missed up north? Where's the old DHC-2 in that equation???

To me, the perfect combo is the pa-18 and a dhc-2!

Just don't get your heart set on being pals with the 180/185 Association. [/quote]

Do they accually snub a guy with an early 182 tailwheel conversion.

Also, sombody told me that a Tripacer converted to a Pacer is more squirly than an original pacer. Makes no sence to me.

Tim

jgerard wrote:A tcraft aint that hard to get down and in short...For less than 20K you can have a great airplane.
Jason "back in the NW" N22KY

I met a gal in Watson Lake who flew a T-craft for years, sold it when her flying requirements changed, then BOUGHT it back a few years later, and now that's what she still flies.
If someone will buy back a plane they've previously gotten rid of, that must say something for the type.
And they're cheap enough.
Have fun! Berk

"Why do you have two airplanes?" - "Because I can't afford three!"

qmdv wrote:Just don't get your heart set on being pals with the 180/185 Association.

Do they accually snub a guy with an early 182 tailwheel conversion.

Also, sombody told me that a Tripacer converted to a Pacer is more squirly than an original pacer. Makes no sence to me.

Tim[/quote]

180/185 Club: as I recall, their membership application has a blank space for you to fill in the serial number of your 180/185. Ownership of one IS a membership requirement, because (in their words) they don't want any wannabe's. That attitude alone is enough to turn me off.
Pacers: a TriPacer conversion (PA-22/20) CAN be more squirrelly than an original Pacer (PA-20). The reason being is that new forward main gear attach fitting are welded on as part of the tailwheel conversion. If care is not taken, it's possible to end up with misaligned gear. However, it's defnitely not a given. A friend of mine converted one several years ago, and it handles great. I have some time in it myself, and can vouch for that.
But even an original Pacer can be squirrelly, just like any other airplane, if the gear has somehow become misaligned

Eric

Yes you will be snubbed. Requirement for membership is owning a 180/185. There is some discussion at the moment about changing it.
Jay