Does anyone here have a C175 with the o470 that would be willing to share their empty weight and balance numbers/sheet. I am just starting to get back into my 175 project and I want to make sure I can match the real life w&b numbers of the O470 conversion. I would also be interested in whether you are running fixed pitch or CS and if you have added weight in the tail.
Thanks
Ken

I have done two of these conversion... Both were YEARS ago...One was tricycle gear and the other was converted to tail wheel... What I do remember was the STC requires 11 pounds of weight bolted to the bulkhead above the horizontal tail and the tail dragger needed almost twice that much weight to get the weight and balance right. I still have the XLS files for both airplanes..

Sterling 175 is the tail dragger..
Lian 175 is the Tri Gear..

Both airplanes were CS props and the STC adds I believe 200 pounds to the gross weight.. (going by memory there)

Brian.

When looking at these two files, scroll left to right for the pages. Its an old file that I shamelessly stole of the internet but still works pretty well.

Brian, thanks for posting those.
I was particularly interested in the C175 taildragger W&B,
I see that the empty W&B just about matches that of my own '53 180.

A while back, AOPA Pilot magazine had a feature on a C175TD with a 470.
Other than the wing slats it had, I didn't see much advantage to that plane vs a stock (light) early 180,
other than maybe being somewhat lighter.
But after seeing the W&B you posted, I'm thinking now that might not be the case.

hotrod180 wrote:Brian, thanks for posting those.
I was particularly interested in the C175 taildragger W&B,
I see that the empty W&B just about matches that of my own '53 180.

A while back, AOPA Pilot magazine had a feature on a C175TD with a 470.
Other than the wing slats it had, I didn't see much advantage to that plane vs a stock (light) early 180,
other than maybe being somewhat lighter.
But after seeing the W&B you posted, I'm thinking now that might not be the case.

I agree… The 175 in that article lives north of me near Eugene Oregon.. He has it under Experimental Exhibition..

After doing these two my impression of their flying quality is not great… Sure they will get off the ground and climb like homesick angels.. But, nose heavy, even with the tail weight, runs out of elevator trim since it is a trim tab system.. and the overall lightness of feel is no longer there.. The best conversion for a 175 is an 0-360 Lycoming.. IMO

Brian

I agree with Brian. I’ve flown a totally stripped down (as in NO interior, one radio, and no nav…etc) 175 with O-470 conversion. It was mechanically sound. But it was very fwd CG, even loaded. It was not fun to fly.

No way I’d do that to one of these planes. An IO-360 Lyc will make one sing, and much better balanced.

MTV

Thanks very much Brian. I now have some real life numbers to work with.

Brian-StevesAircraft wrote:

hotrod180 wrote:....A while back, AOPA Pilot magazine had a feature on a C175TD with a 470.
Other than the wing slats it had, I didn't see much advantage to that plane vs a stock (light) early 180,
other than maybe being somewhat lighter.....

....The 175 in that article lives north of me near Eugene Oregon.. He has it under Experimental Exhibition.....

The other thought I had was that while some pretty cool mods can be done on that airplane without needing stc's etc,
the experimental-exhibition registration does come with some pretty inconvenient restrictions.
Even if they're not being enforced now, some day they might be.
And there is always the "everything is good until it's not" as in the case of a mishap.
There's a current thread here on BCP about this whole issue.

https://backcountrypilot.org/forum/topi ... ead#unread

175 glider
http://www.soarkansas.org/soar/Stories.aspx?s=31

I was lucky to get my project accepted in the amateur built program. One of the last before they closed the door on taking a certified plane and going amateur built.
I also had the option of going in the Owner Maintenance program but that has too many restriction and basically it cannot be flown in the USA.
We also have an Experimental class up here but it is basically the same as your Experimental- Exhibition but it has a 2 year life span then it has to be converted back.
They have put quite a few stop/inspect points on this project but I am ok with that but inspection costs can add up pretty quick.

brown bear wrote:175 glider
http://www.soarkansas.org/soar/Stories.aspx?s=31

I got to know Bob a bit when i was dropping an O-470 in a 175, and he told me this story...then backed it up with a video he sent me of the towing with the Goldwing as well as the 182!
It's one of my treasured gifts as well as his conversations and friendship.
John

That story has a lot more to it . Bob's dealings with the FAA made him a legend around these parts .
doug

Yeah, he was a character! We talked the one day and it turned out that he dealt with an FAA guy that I'd gone to A&P school with in South Dakota...Jim Badhorse. We swapped some good stories about him!
John