What planes can you all think of that have 1100lbs useful load or more and can burn mogas?

My mission profile keeps bringing me back to the 180/182. Thought I'd see if there is some planes I'm missing.

Maule claims the M9 has 1100lbs of useful load.

OregonMaule has an older version but he does run Mogas so it may simply depend on the engine choice/settings. I'm not sure, but can't most engines run mogas by retarding the timing if you're willing to give up some horsepower?

Bearhawk, in anything up to a 260hp.

It sounds like you are in the market for a 180/182 as you indicated. There was a great deal on a C-182B in this group from 29singlespeed in Arizona for about $43k. That airplane I think sold already.

I am really wanting a C-180 myself, but can not get away from my C-182B right now. Check the link out below for this C-180 for sale about 200 miles south of you. If I could swing it I would buy it myself. Low time unmolested 180 seems to be pretty hard to find. Good Luck-

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/detail/Single+Engine+Piston/1960/Cessna/180C/1621240.html

150.

(F150)

NimpoCub wrote:150.

(F150)

I prefer my oil burning dmax...I just can't afford an oil burning airplane.

An early 182 is not an 1100 pound useful airplane. More like 900 and some change. A Mooney M20C can do that.

EB

Isn't the 180 for sale in Utah this one?
http://vimeo.com/34379086

If it is, it was well loved.

A bare bones Stinson 108-3 will be close to 1100lbs and the F165 loves mogas.

What about an early Bonanza?

To be honest... it sounds like you want a 180.

I think a Cherokee 180 will get you almost 1100 useful too.

The Tundra is 1100 useful load. Pick your engine accordingly but mogas works in all of them at high density altitudes even higher compression engines. Watch the manifold pressures below 5000' and keep it under 26 inches or even go half and half.

GroundLooper wrote:Maule claims the M9 has 1100lbs of useful load.

OregonMaule has an older version but he does run Mogas so it may simply depend on the engine choice/settings. I'm not sure, but can't most engines run mogas by retarding the timing if you're willing to give up some horsepower?

Want to run mogas legally???? Better check that out.

mountainmatt wrote:A bare bones Stinson 108-3 will be close to 1100lbs and the F165 loves mogas.

What about an early Bonanza?

To be honest... it sounds like you want a 180.

You beat me to it Matt, everybody always forgets about the Stinson. But yeah, a 180 will do it better, it will just cost 3 times as much.

I'd like to have a little fat tired tail wheel plane to screw off in by myself, I'm not opposed to tailwheels, but it sure is nice to carry 1100 pounds of family and camping gear into almost anywhere I want in the 182 and not worry about much. Insurance is cheaper than the 180, it's roomier, the three blade has ample clearance, and cross winds are a non event.

Matt is correct the 108=3 will get you there. This plane is a great handling plane, hauls a lot, is not fast but will get you there.

They are not a 180, but in some ways are just as good or better, just slower. But we buy planes to fly I thought.

You would have more options if you are open to experimentals, especially with mogas. One of the larger versions of that Comp-Air experimental airplane, with an aluminum V8, would probably do it. Murphy Moose with the big M-14 radial might do it, most of the non-turbo models are low compression engines.

On the certified front, the Cessna 175 is listed as having just over 1000 lb useful, and can be had for less than a 180.

Emory Bored wrote:An early 182 is not an 1100 pound useful airplane. More like 900 and some change. A Mooney M20C can do that.

EB

N5502B 1515 Empty Weight now = 1035 useful .I do have set of wings with Wing-x(Flint tip tanks off 206) good for another +300 lbs.Yes it can run on mogas .P.S. I have set of digital scales for Weight &Balance-and
computer program -all certified and calibrated ever other year.

A bearhawk would be my preference but I can't see spending $40K on a kit that I'd have to add another $30k on top of to have a finished plane.

I looked long and hard at the Stinson but decided that it doesn't quite fit and I'm not sure the F165 would provide the performance I desire. I haven't completely ruled them out so I guess I need to make my way to Twin Falls and have soaringhiggy take me for a ride.

A Bo, Mooney or Cherokee have no appeal to me.

Honestly I think the C180 is one heck of an airplane but they aren't my dream plane and I dislike the fact that they seem to fit my mission better than any other plane I can think of, which is why I started this thread.

whee wrote:........ I think the C180 is one heck of an airplane but they aren't my dream plane and I dislike the fact that they seem to fit my mission better than any other plane I can think of, which is why I started this thread.

What is your dream plane & why? If the C180 (or 182) "fits my mission better than any other plane I can think of", why would it not be the dream plane?
A dream plane that doen't fit your mission is kinda lke marrying a hot babe only to discover that she can't perform any of her wifely duties worth a darn.

whee wrote:A bearhawk would be my preference but I can't see spending $40K on a kit that I'd have to add another $30k on top of to have a finished plane.

And even that is very optimistic. Try another $50-60K.

There is a lot to be said for having a brand new plane though, versus a 60 year old one. $100K still brings you in under the new Maule price point, but the commitment to build is something few can follow through on.