Define your needs/ identify the candidates/make your best choice.

When you boil these 100 pages of "type" discussion down...this is what you are left with. Simple 3 step program that everyone can understand.

The next person that interprets the original question as "tell me about a Maule" is getting banned.
































Not really, but seriously folks. Reading comprehension. I'm starting to feel sorry for people who ask about non-Maule types.

Hey Ravi,

The 170 looks great! Little tip, start Google and type in the N number. You will find all kinds of stuff. Plus, if it has ever been in the FAA accident list, that will come up to.

My plane was chock full of instruments when I bought it. I struggled over that because I didn't think I needed them and there is always the extra expense of maintaining them. But much to my delight, I have found I am having fun playing with to see if I can figure out what they do!

Cheers!

zane wrote:The next person that interprets the original question as "tell me about a Maule" is getting banned.
Not really, but seriously folks. Reading comprehension. I'm starting to feel sorry for people who ask about non-Maule types.

What's a Mall?

zero.one.victor wrote:

zane wrote:The next person that interprets the original question as "tell me about a Maule" is getting banned.
Not really, but seriously folks. Reading comprehension. I'm starting to feel sorry for people who ask about non-Maule types.

What's a Mall?

A place where you go to spend lots of money on insurance!

Would y'all do me a favor.

Sell what you are flying now and by Maules. Then don't wreck em. See that way my insurance will go down.

Thank you in advance for you help in this matter.

Ha Ha Ha... Rob

Ravi,
If you want to come dome to Exec you can fly my stock 170. Take it over to clarksburg and play on the grass. If you want to talk offline I can give you my take on why I passed on the c-180, almost bought an M4210c and after looking at all MY variables, decided to stick with the 170 with an eventual motor upgrade. BTW I just got back from a trip flying a 180hp 170 with a fixed prop. Just my 2 cents on what works for me. I know mine is stock but it may help you in your decision whether or not to go look at that 170.
Steve
[email protected]

Well, the decision may have been made for me...I worked 35 of the last 48 hours, so I'm too tired to have a look today. Thunderstorms are forecast for tomorrow afternoon, then my plane goes into annual. If she's still for sale when my plane comes out of annual, I'll fly up and have a look.

Everyone has brought up good points, and I enjoy hearing them all, even the ones that tell me to buy a Maule. Which I just might. But what I was really asking is what people think of THIS 170. Of course, it's all but impossible to look at one airplane for 72K and not compare it to other planes of similar cost.

Cost is obviously a big part of this plane, because it's getting into the range where there are several other planes one could choose from.

Personally, I think that with this 170 you're buying a lot of IFR instruments for a plane that isn't a very good IFR candidate for where I live...not enough range or endurance. Put that panel in a 180 and I'd start thinking about doing some serious IFR flying, but in a 170 I'm not so sure.

That Garmin GPS looks great, but if you're not flying IFR, it really doesn't do anything that my $600 Lowrance 2000c doesn't do, except weigh more.

As MTV said, this looks like a GREAT plane to get an IFR license in, and that alone might be worth paying for the panel.

I'm not sure whether the visibility of a big engine 170 mentioned earlier is due to the climb out angle of attack or the low cowling on a 170. One thing I immediately thought of when I saw this plane is "hope that custom panel doesn't give it the rotten visibility of a 172".

I completely agree that it's important to buy a plane you love. I really don't need a tail wheel, and truth be told my wife would probably not miss one. I could buy a nosewheel plane that fits my needs for a LOT less money, but I don't like them. For just a little more money I could buy a '91 Maule that's in my area, only problem is that obscene appendage hanging out the bottom of the cowling. The only nose wheel plane that ever made my heart throb was a NA OV-10, and it's out of my price range.

In the mean time, my wife is still doing touch and go's and I'm still trying to learn what the world is supposed to look like from the right seat. Between the two of us we've already put 35 hours on Prosecco this month...she's a good little plane.

ravi,
Give the IFR thing some serious consideration. It is a real safety thing in my mind. It will also open up a lot of flying opportunities that you don't have now. It will even pay for it's self in lower insurance costs.
Hell it's even fun, once you get enough time to be proficient in it, it's a real feeling of accomplishment to break out on an ILS right over the approach lights.
It does however take more dedication and work than most pleasure pilots are willing to do.

Ravi

As to the alleged shortage of fuel for the 180hp versions of the 170B.
I have the Delair LONG range tanks in mine that gives me 67 gals total.

I have stated elsewhere that my recommendation is that you only go for the EXTENDED range option for an additional 15 gals. instead of the additional 30 gals. Reason is in the EXTRA difficulty in going out two ribs instead of one rib extension. The EXTENDED range version puts you well back into the 4-5 hr range depending on altitude and power settings.

These tanks are "simply" a one or two rib extensions welded onto the end of the original tanks. No wingtip weight, kinetic energy, electrical pumps, etc. The fuel system continues to work like a "stock" unit.

That said, I have what may be a new thread here.

The 170B with 180hp conversion, which comes with an lectric "boost" pump. Question, does the red warning zones on the old Cessna fuel guages still apply?!?

The prime reason for the "Do Not Take Off" red zone, so I am told, has to do with maintaing the "Head Pressure" of the gravity fed fuel system during a max. load, vX, departure. Too steep an angle with low quantity of fuel equals not enough head pressure to feed the carburetor during high angle max power take offs.

NOW, with the 180 hp engine, at 20 degrees flaps, which equals near flat levitation, can I still take off safely with the fuel gages in the "red"?!?

Curious bout the opines of others here.

Chris

NOW, with the 180 hp engine, at 20 degrees flaps, which equals near flat levitation, can I still take off safely with the fuel gages in the "red"?!?

!!I suppose that depends on how far you need to fly!!

I also wonder if part of it has to do with maneuvering flight close to the ground. My 140 has a left, right, and both fuel selector, but many don't. I've had my engine hickup while turing x-wind to down wind while running off the left tank when it was in the red...all the fuel sloshed to the other side of the tank in the turn.

I don't know how the fuel pump works on a modified 170, but my experience with pumps is that they don't like any interuption in flow. If you're in the red and the sloshing action is letting air into the line feeding the fuel pump, that might be bad.

Stock engine or Modified, I think you'd have a hard time getting the carburetor on ANY 170 above the fuel tanks in ANY sustainable climb.

I suspect the reason for the red marks have to do with the notion that if you are in that range, you may not have a legal FAA reserve.

As to replacement of the fuel line segment in modified 170's, that has been done and the FAA field approved removal of the electric pump. I seriously doubt you could get that done now, under the current field approval process. Also, why would you want to? It reduces the weight by a little bit, but.....

And, no, you cannot remove the engine driven pump in any case. The electric pump is just there to back up the engine driven pump, but I don't know of anyone who's gotten away with removing the engine driven pump, and again, I see no reason to do so.

MTV