O.K., my buddy bought a real nice C-175 with the 220 hp Franklin. Now we are wondering if any of you out there know anyone capable of converting the plane to conventional gear. Preferrably in the southwest, but I guess anywhere west of the Mississippi would be considered. Thanks Gary

Take a look at the FAA's web site. Do a search for STC's. Search first for Cessna, then for 175.

You'll find a couple there that converted the 175 to a tailwheel aircraft. One of those is Texas taildragger.

I don't know who owns those STC's now, but a little poking around should find them.

It's going to be some serious work, though, and not cheap.

MTV

This is a converted 172 straight tail.
I have heard the swept tails suffer a bit of directional control when converted.
I have also heard Bolen and Bush both had stc's but have not confirmed either or where those stc's might be found. I had some more info on the process from somebody that had done it but I'll have to search the archives.

I second Mark's call on the Bolen and Bush Conversions. I've seen tailwheel 175's here and there, so they definitely exist. Tough to tell apart from a 180 with that straight tail, which I think is so cool lookin.

There is a guy on cessna170.org who has been converting an old 172 to conventional gear, and has been posting a great project log with lots of photos. Take a look over there.

Z

Thanks guys. There is also a fellow that is a member of UBCP that was at Smiley Creek that has a 175 T/W w/an O-470 that is based out of Montrose. That's pretty close to me if I can find him and see what he did. Gary

The guy next door to me has a 56 172 with a bush conversion and franklin 220. I've flown it and the climb rate is awesome. I don't see him on the web but if you PM me I can put you in touch.
Dave

Uh, as I noted earlier, do a search of the FAA STC database: Here's one--

STC Number:
SA00297NY

This certificate issued to:
Manary Lowell

STC Holder's Address:
75 Homestead Drive
S Glastonbury CT 06073
United States

Description of the Type Design Change:
Conversion of tricycle landing gear to tail dragger.

Application Date:


Status:
Issued, 04/04/1995

Responsible Office:
ANE-150 Boston Aircraft Certification Office Tel: (781) 238-7151

TC Number -- Make -- Model:
3A17 -- Cessna Aircraft Company, The -- 175

Full Text of STC:


Comments
Comments
Comments:


I'm not going to take the time to search all the stc's for the 175, but you can very easily. Just go to:

http://www.faa.gov/library/

and look for certifications, aircraft, supplemental type certificates.

It really isn't that hard to find this information yourself.

MTV

Thanks MTV I will pass the info on. Gary

There is person who does the 175 conversions on a regular basis at a private field near Caldwell Idaho. Call some people at the Caldwell airport and ask around.

They may be at Cox Field just out side of Caldwell.

We did find one guy up there in that area and he had only done one, so we are still looking. Thanks Gary

a cut and paste from:
http://www.popularaviation.com/Cessna17 ... asp?Page=1

"'58 Cessna 175 I have converted my 175 to a taildragger and float plane with Baumann BF2550 floats. Engine upgrade to the IO-360 200hp Lycoming with the 80" Hartzell propeller, and 3000 Landis Skis. Cruises on wheels at 150mph and 135mph on floats 140 on Skis and burns 8.5 gph @ 7000ft. Aux fuel tank for a 70gal cap. It's a great plane for Alaska where I live. The panel is simple and light. I've installed the VM-1000 engine monitor with King radio and transponder. Lowrance Airmap 500 GPS. I'm working on another one just like it now, let's talk. Dave Stoots "

Dave's Fairbanks, Ak airport phone number is 907-474-4039

HOWDY ALL,Call steve aircraft or on the web at www.steveaircraft.com steve has done the convertion and jeff sterling has a c-175 that been conv to tail wheel and has a 0-470 I think jeff did it him self not sure talk to steve or brain there the guys.SEE YOU BEAGLE

If I'm not mistaken, the O-470 stc was rescinded some time ago. I'm not sure whether Stoots got a field approval or stc for the 200 hp Lycoming in the 175, but it made a nice, though expensive airplane.

MTV

Beagle I tried that web address and it didn't go anywhere. Would you check that for me? thanks Gary

o-470 stc is active.owned by Robert Park in Kansas.Ihave a 175 I am rebuilding.I have an o-470-R for it.This stc originated in Washington some years ago,Kennemeyer I think was the original holder.Bob Park aquired it from his family.Interesting thing,this stc does not specify Landplane and or Seaplane as many do.Anyone know if this means it is legal to use it either way or would there be a problem trying to float it ?The 175 has some interesting history.175 from58-63,P172D for one year then pulled from civilian market.Cessna sold it to the military as the T41B with the IO-360 Continental,then brought it back as the Hawk XP.An IO-360 goes on with all factory parts an there is a multiple STC it belongs to a guy in Colorado.I thought about tailwheel also.I think Gross wt. on the later 175 is 2450 early ones less.Factory 175 Floatplane w/GO-300 lists a 90-44? prop! Interesting airplane mostly forgotten.I bet w/O-470 and keeping it light as possible you could take some cash from 180 drivers! Bill

Shortfielder,

Try http://stevesaircraft.com It needs an s in there.

Willie,

I've flown two of the O-470 converted 175's. I flew one quite a bit on both wheels and floats. It was still a tricycle gear plane. The other I only flew on floats.

They are a VERY far forward Center of Gravity airplane. They do perform well, but they use a lot of gas.

Both the planes I flew with this conversion were very light. They both performed well, but they were bordering on scary forward CG airplanes when you didn't have anything in them.

Neither had enough elevator or horizontal stab to land them power off when empty without carrying a LOT of speed. That could be an issue if the engine puked. I always landed with some power, and fast to give me some elevator effectiveness.

If the original STC does not prohibit floats (note that the AVCON 180 hp conversion specifies LANDPLANES ONLY, for example) then you should be able to mount the plane on any set of floats that are approved for that make and model of plane. The two I flew were both on PeeKay B2300 floats.

If it was me, I'd look at one of the other conversions, my ownself.

MTV

mtv The stc for the O-470 calls for adding lead balast [12+lbs] back in the tail to correct c.g. I have talked to others who claim nose heaviness and wonder if they took the time and effort to properly weigh and balance the a/c.My logic is that if the c.g. is corrected to what it was with the original configuration the airframe should not care what engine is up front?Now I do think this series [172/175] could stand more low speed elevator authority[in the flair,full flaps] and an out the front c.g. in this situation would certainly cause people to say it was nose heavy.Maybe vg,s under the stab would help?Is my logic flawed?I'd appreciate your input I know you have flown a lot of differently configured a/c from reading your posts and respect your opinion. Bill

P.S. I saw your 170 at OSH, wanted to meet you but you were not around.

Willie,

Sorry I missed you at OSH. Next time, leave a note, with a cell phone number, if you can, and I'll call you . Always fun to meet folks from these forums.

One of the 175's I flew with the 470 did not have the requisite ballast installed. To be fair, it also had no interior. Get in, turn around and you could see all the way into the tail cone from the driver's seat. If I recall, we could get 12 foot lumber into the thing, whole. It was a load hauler, but as I said, coming home was pretty interesting.

The other airplane did have the ballast. It was better in the CG department, but the feel of the airplane was still pretty out of whack to me. You still had to carry some extra speed into the flare, or some power as well.

ANyway, I like the feel of a Lycoming conversion or a Franklin, where the airplane feels a little more balanced.

I've flown a few amphibians that required ballast on the tail (one required 38 pounds on the tail stinger) and none of those airplanes were my favorite. You can add all the power you want, but adding weight will severely restrict the capability of the aircraft in many situations, and eventually, you'll find that a lesser powered airplane will perform as well, OVERALL.

The "feel" of the plane is also an issue that you deal with on every flight. I'd recommend you see if you can get a flight in one of these airplanes before you go that route, in any case.

MTV

MTV
How,s this sound for utility a/c wheels+floats.175,light interior,front seats,Dodge folding rear.VFR panel.O-320/160 with 80" Hartzell or Borer.Landes fork with 8.50's all around,double puck clevelands,sportsman stall?,VG's?I think it would be kinda fun!

What would be your ideal combo? Bill