We currently have McCauley double puck brakes on our '55 180 with 800-6 tires and 1.5" axles. Looking to upgrade these to either ABI or Cleveland 199-62. Any opinions on which is better?

Thanks!

ABI is lighter I believe. The black wheels also look awesome!

A1Skinner wrote:ABI is lighter I believe. The black wheels also look awesome!

Not sure if you're referring to the whole kit, but by itself Aluminum (ABI) is about 50% heavier than Magnesium (Clevelands). On the other hand- yeah, the black wheels are cool.

denalipilot wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:ABI is lighter I believe. The black wheels also look awesome!

Not sure if you're referring to the whole kit, but by itself Aluminum (ABI) is about 50% heavier than Magnesium (Clevelands). On the other hand- yeah, the black wheels are cool.

Gotcha. Sorry about that. They do look awesome though!

Don't know about the weights, but I never paint anything black near a possible petroleum leak or the instigation of a nebulous crack . Just me.

Landing slow with full flaps and angling across the runway to take out part of a severe crosswind, I got along fine with original puck brakes. Just me I guess.

Aren't the ABI just a little cheaper? Aluminum is always going to be a touch heavier than magnesium (Cleveland offers both) but magnesium is more corrosion prone. I think the discs for double puck calipers, appropriate to heavy gross weight aircraft as well, are thicker at 3/8".

Airframes Alaska customer service is great, they support BCP, and they're a backcountry-specific small company unlike Parker-Hannifin, though no complaints there either. My Cleveland kit that I put on my 170 years ago was top notch. I put ABI on my Bearhawk though.

Bought two sets of wheels at the same time from somewhere close to Joseph Or. Hope they were Alum.
Back then I had to do a work-around set of STCs just to put then on 180 legs. There was no direct to a 170 STC at that time. One came from Quebec as I recall. MTV is free to Whup me if the old TCD says different.

Got to test a Magn. pack frame for the North Face once. Copies of the old Kelty frame. It was light, but after reading up on the material, I did not want to work on it.

Be safe either way
Chris C

I don't think you can get 1 1/2 axle with magnesium. I have 11/4 axles on my cub and the magnesium six bolt double puck is 5 lbs lighter, But I don't think you can get it with an 11/2 axle. If you find it please post the find because I have not seen it. Given no weight advantage I would go with airframes due to price and service. Great people to work with every day of the year! If you can get 11/2 double puck for a better weight and price They will understand but I don't think it will happen.
DENNY

DENNY wrote:I don't think you can get 1 1/2 axle with magnesium. I have 11/4 axles on my cub and the magnesium six bolt double puck is 5 lbs lighter, But I don't think you can get it with an 11/2 axle. If you find it please post the find because I have not seen it. Given no weight advantage I would go with airframes due to price and service. Great people to work with every day of the year! If you can get 11/2 double puck for a better weight and price They will understand but I don't think it will happen.
DENNY

Here ya go;
http://www.airframesalaska.com/ABI-Clev ... s/1513.htm


Incidentally, I am running 1 1/4" axels on my cub as we'll, but 3 bolt mag wheels. Even lighter yet

Heard plenty of stories of strength issues re 3 bolt vs 6 bolt, but a quick call to Parker Hannifin's customer service squelches any concerns there. Barring over loaded C206 weights and poor landing techniques I don't sweat 3 bolts, to the point that the B-Wheel on my 180 are mounted on the same.

Take care, Rob

Ace007 wrote: We currently have McCauley double puck brakes on our '55 180 with 800-6 tires and 1.5" axles. Looking to upgrade these to either ABI or Cleveland 199-62. ....

So you're switching from double-puck brakes to.....double-puck brakes.
I'm curious why? Is there a problem with your McCauley wheels & brakes, or a problem with McCauley W&B in general (ADs, whatever)?

Rob
Thanks! I get to learn something new today. I remember looking up the weight 11/2 vs 11/4 when I was getting new gear. I did not find the 11/2 mag wheels than. One advantage of the 11/2 axle is there are more of them around so if you have a problem when out playing it might be a little easier to find a wheel to get home on. I carry a set of spacers so I sleeve up in case I am stuck somewhere. I saw the new exp rims a while back and they are sweet!!!
DENNY

wannabe wrote:Don't know about the weights, but I never paint anything black near a possible petroleum leak or the instigation of a nebulous crack . Just me.

Just for the record the ABI wheels are not painted black, they are hard coat anodized. This is a fantastic finish for aluminum, very scratch and corrosion resistant.

Since they are not coated per say cracks will show readily and the matte finish will reveal wet fluid leaks.

You're welcome [emoji2]

Ace007,

I'm in longmont with mccauley brakes and wheels as well - if you end up upgrading, can we talk about selling your old wheels so I can have a spare?

contactflying wrote:Landing slow with full flaps and angling across the runway to take out part of a severe crosswind, I got along fine with original puck brakes. Just me I guess.

Yes, but double pucks are required if you're running Bushwheels. Personally I don't think single puck brakes are enough for anything larger than an 8.50x6. Also, double pucks will be a benifit on heavier aircraft like a 180/185.

I went with the ABI kit. I only have three landings so far but the brakes seem a little better. The new tires handle a lot better than the old ones (both Air Hawks but old ones were really worn). The ABI wheels/brakes are actually a couple pounds lighter than the McCauley's but the hubs have a much better design with bolt bosses extending all the way to the hub interface plane.

My calipers were mounted behind the gear leg and that's where I mounted the new ones. I noticed several planes have them mounted in front of the gear leg. The caliper is a little higher mounted in front than behind the leg but its still well below the gear leg and isn't protected. Is there another reason to put them in front of the leg?

My old anchor plate was installed flipped to what the instructions say and I double checked that my old configuration was correct on another 180. The diagram on page 21 on the installation instructions appears to be incorrect.

http://www.airframesalaska.com/v/vspfiles/pdf/ABI%20199-62-4%20Rev%20A.pdf

Thanks!

My C180 has the Cleveland 199-62 double-puck brake kit installed, the calipers are mounted forward of the gear leg. This is as shown on Cleveland dwg #50-36 (see below).