As I have hinted on this forum, I will be getting out of my partnership in the 182B. I thought it fair that since I am instigating the breakup, my parter should have right to first refusal. His decission has to be made by Dec. 15th.

My preference is for me to buy out my partner cus as we have all finally agreed, the 182B is the best plane on earth. If that cannot be accomplished then I would like to get a tail dragger.

Have considered the Maul, Pacer, and the Stinson. I know of a Stinson 108-2 with a Continental O-470. I have flown the 182B about 800 hrs so I am quite familiar with this engine.

The big downside to the 108-2 is the 40 gallons fuel. With that small quantity of fuel it virtually eliminates much flying in Mexico cus the airports are far and few between. Is a trip to Alaska also out of the question with 40 gal total.

Any STC's for bigger tanks? What think you?

Tim

great plane.

they have he small tanks and the 108-3 wings with the larger tanks are not approved on the -2. There are some out there, if the IA does not catch it on the annual.

There was a 3rd tank approved that went behind the back seat, rare as hens teeth. I think the original plans for that tank are floating around in the stinson club.

Other than that, nope.

qmdv wrote: I know of a Stinson 108-2 with a Continental O-470. I have flown the 182B about 800 hrs so I am quite familiar with this engine. The big downside to the 108-2 is the 40 gallons fuel. Is a trip to Alaska also out of the question with 40 gal total.

That means 2.8 hour legs and a sit and squirm reserve. You could do it, but if it was me, I'd have a few gas cans in the back. Sad thing is, it limits you to sticking close to the road, and you'll miss out on some great stuff to do and see. Of course at $5.67 a gallon for 100LL at my old stomping grounds, you might want to just stay at the airport and drink beers.

Gump

Unfortunately -3 wings (with the 50gal tanks) aren't approved to go on the -2. When my conversion to the 470 is done I don't expect that my range will change much from when I was running the 165. I conservatively planned for 2.5hrs w/30min reserve. The 165 wasn't that efficient really - I planned 10 gal/hr once level and that only made 100kts. Even when the 470 burns more in the climb, the climb rate is about tripled so the time spent at full throttle should be correspondingly reduced. And 10gal/hr in cruise on the 470 is reported to give you something more than 100kts.

Bottom line is 40gals just isn't much, so if you need range on a -2 you'll need the jugs in the back. Added peace of mind would come from a well-calibrated and verified fuel flow gauge.

Don't know if this helps, but there's a very nice looking metalized Stinson 108-2 with a newly overhauled lycoming 6 cylinder 190hp engine and cs prop for sale in Placerville. Something close to $60K if I remember right. Don't know much about it other than it's a real eye-catcher on the ramp.

I looked at it, but the internal space doesn't come close to a similar Cessna/Maul product, so I lost interest. If anyone is interested I'll get the sellers info and pass it on.

I don't know anything about the fuel tanks...

Vick wrote: Even when the 470 burns more in the climb, the climb rate is about tripled so the time spent at full throttle should be correspondingly reduced. And 10gal/hr in cruise on the 470 is reported to give you something more than 100kts.

We have a fuel flow meter and engine analizer on the 182 and using real hours not engine hours, I burn lots at climb out then throutle back to 20 inches and 2200 rpm at lets say 8500 ft. I will cruise at 120 kts, just over 9 gpm and average 10 gpm over 4 hrs flying. You will average less cus you have less range. My cruise speed is low cus of big fork, 600 nose tire, no pants and 700 mains.

Tim

Hang on, as the FAA is almost through with my STC for a 13 gallon aux tank that goes behind the back wall of the cabin, forward of the baggage. It's pumped up into the left main tank, and will be available for the 108 series very shortly (so they tell me).
John

That is cool!

It will help a LOT for us that go slow.

Hang on, as the FAA is almost through with my STC for a 13 gallon aux tank that goes behind the back wall of the cabin, forward of the baggage. It's pumped up into the left main tank, and will be available for the 108 series very shortly (so they tell me).
John

Wow, awesome news! I haven't even heard a rumor about this - do you have any more info?

It's in the final approval stages, and is two tanks, one on each side of your control cables, interconnected, that will transfer 13 gallons to the left main. They fill from the outside, above and forward of the baggage door. I've got the prototype already out there, and it lives in WA. That's about all I can say for right now, but I'll be hollering as soon as I get the paperwork back from the FAA, which should be very soon.
John

well it sounds like you need one living in Idaho.

Let me know.

I still want some observer windows as well.

Dane

I'll do it for sure, Dane! Winter's coming and that's when the "projects" get to take shape. I'll be doing some other "domed" windows as well.
I'll be sure and make plenty of announcements everywhere I can as to the STC.
John

I've heard of an outfit in Ca that manufactures bubble windows for the 108 but haven't been able to get in touch with them. I'm interested in a pair, so when you have yours ready please let us know.

I have a 108-2 with the 0470 had 25 gal. Tanks. So it can be done.

There is a 108-1 with the Lycoming 360 and fixed pitch prop lurking as a project in a hangar in the UK.

I am told this is a good combination of bullet proof engine and airframe, hope it is back in circulation soon.

I am guessing cruise at 9.5 gph is around 110 KTAS, for a conservative 350nm VFR range.

The POH shows the 108-1 approved for loops and barrel rolls which strikes me as a bit quaint - no doubt barrel rolls would be quite fun.

I am guessing cruise at 9.5 gph is around 110 KTAS, for a conservative 350nm VFR range.

...the manual says only 36 usg useable, so more like 300nm for range with VFR reserves...

L18C-95 wrote:

I am guessing cruise at 9.5 gph is around 110 KTAS, for a conservative 350nm VFR range.

...the manual says only 36 usg useable, so more like 300nm for range with VFR reserves...

FWIW, I've flown one of my tanks dry intentionally, and I was able to cram 21 US gallons into it when it was filled up to the neck.

I started this thread a long time ago. I fly a 1956 /Cessna 182 and keep it at my place. Sweet.