Hello all, new member here but long time lurker. I am soon to be working on my tail wheel rating with the ultimate eventual goal of owning a Cessna 170B or possibly a 180. We live along the Texas coast and I would like a TW so that we can fly to our family ranches (one on each side) in south and central Texas. My mission is mostly two-up flying with the misses and luggage/gear for a long weekend but at first I imagine a lot of my time will be solo. I would like the option to take longer flights for hunts in south Texas as well as the occasional annual waterfowl hunt in Louisiana and of course your simple weekend exploration flights/fly-in's and quick companion get aways. We don't have kids and likely never will given our ages so upsizing later on for "family needs" is a non-factor, but I'd like the option to bring a third along occasionally.

I know that the insurance costs for low hour TW pilots can be astronomical but it's something I am willing to incur for the trade-off of being able to easily land on soft fields and unprepared surfaces. I am 5'10"/185lbs and the misses is 5'4"/115lbs so I know that the 140 could work for our short flights in order to get my feet wet and our location at or near sea level won't make for much issue in regards to DA and climb rate. I want to see the 140 as a great training plane for TW time building at "hopefully" much lower costs in comparison to a 170B or 180 but I don't know if that's true beyond fuel burn. My fear with the 140 is that I'll end up with more money into it than I can get back out of it when it comes time to sell and I'd definitely like to sell it in order to get into a 170B/180. So are 140's a hard/slow sell? With their limited capabilities are they seen as a detractor to most buyers beyond a being a cheap trainer or weekend flyer? As I said previously, I ultimately want to end up in a 170B or 180 so I am contemplating just going straight to one of those planes from the very beginning regardless of the initial price difference and higher associated costs. Does "Buy once, cry once" apply here?

The 140 I am looking at is a '46 with the C-85, it has 5900 TTAF, 1750 TTSMOH, 60 STOH with new millennium cylinders, OEM pistons, spin on oil filter, fuselage paint in 2011, wings recovered in 2004 (look fantastic), new 6.00x6 tires in 2019, Cleveland wheels and brakes in 2016, and Cessna 150 exhaust. It has no ADSB, no GPS, it needs a new battery soon, the turn coordinator is INOP, the third cylinder is reading low on compression and it could use some new rear windows. Should I be worried about the TTSMOH? The A&P that has been maintaining the plane for the last two years thinks it could use the cylinder work on #3 and the gauge should be replaced if I were to purchase it along with a new battery. He's offered to do a reduced price annual if I help out and he will toss in the pre-purchase inspection at the same time for $100 more. I can get this plane for under $20K with the repairs we assume it'll need and it is local to me so that's a big plus.

Should I consider the 140 in order to immediately start building time and to get comfortable in a TW in hopes of that time lowering my insurance costs down the road? Will I be wasting my time with a small, underpowered plane that doesn't meet my mission and a plane that I could end up stuck with for longer than I like? These are my concerns with going this route. The thought of joining a flying club with the 140 has crossed my mind in order to further the enjoyment of owning it and prolonging ownership, but I don't know how many TW rated pilots are out there in flying clubs in my area?!

I haven't found a 170B I am interested in just yet and as much as I'd like to consider the 180 right away for all of it's benefits I am not sure it's in the budget at the moment. In all honesty, I think the 170B with the right upgrades and power could be the last plane I'll ever need and I am a sucker for the round tails, that's a big driver for me haha. So what does the collective think?

At $20K in the 140 there is not a lot of downside IF it is in good shape.

The 170 will save hassle, I would go with the 170 and never look back.

Why play trade-a-plane if you can afford the 170 now?

Fuel burn is dependent on how far the black knob is pushed! In general a 180 is cheaper to fly than a cub over long distance because it is faster. So take that fuel burn crap out of the picture. For the mission you describe I would look at a 172/182. A 172/182 with the right tires will do just fine on any sandbar, gravel runway, or grass field you can think of. Google GREAN BEAN. Now if you want to fly tailwheel because that is what the COOL pilots do, well then now we have to look hard at what you want to carry. Sooooo say it is two people and few days worth of camp and hunting gear. Is that a full old man camp of 100-200 lbs (wall tent, stove, cots, chairs, coolers, beer, ect ) or is it I am going to bring my gun and stay in the lodge/farm house. No right or wrong. But don't go cheap!! Buy a good 140 and knock out 200 hours for two years (not hard if you try). You can sell it for what you paid and now you will know what you really want. Same for a good 170 but a good one will be twice the price. Once you learn to fly it all comes down to runway/landing area distance!!! Can the plane or pilot get in and out of the place you want to go. Bottom line is even if you have you PPL expect to pay for 30 hours of tailwheel training. It will only take 10 at most to get the sign off then go find another instructor and do it again. Find that old hard ass crop duster and do it again! Go get spin training so you know how to slow down!!!! I know few tail wheel pilots that have not bent something myself included!!! So get a good 140/170 and learn to fly if you bend something it is not like bending a 150,000 180. In the end you will want a 180 or a hot 170. But learn to fly tailwheel before you throw out the big bucks for the nice plane. DENNY

DENNY wrote:Fuel burn is dependent on how far the black knob is pushed! In general a 180 is cheaper to fly than a cub over long distance because it is faster. So take that fuel burn crap out of the picture. For the mission you describe I would look at a 172/182. A 172/182 with the right tires will do just fine on any sandbar, gravel runway, or grass field you can think of. Google GREAN BEAN. Now if you want to fly tailwheel because that is what the COOL pilots do, well then now we have to look hard at what you want to carry. Sooooo say it is two people and few days worth of camp and hunting gear. Is that a full old man camp of 100-200 lbs (wall tent, stove, cots, chairs, coolers, beer, ect ) or is it I am going to bring my gun and stay in the lodge/farm house. No right or wrong. But don't go cheap!! Buy a good 140 and knock out 200 hours for two years (not hard if you try). You can sell it for what you paid and now you will know what you really want. Same for a good 170 but a good one will be twice the price. Once you learn to fly it all comes down to runway/landing area distance!!! Can the plane or pilot get in and out of the place you want to go. Bottom line is even if you have you PPL expect to pay for 30 hours of tailwheel training. It will only take 10 at most to get the sign off then go find another instructor and do it again. Find that old hard ass crop duster and do it again! Go get spin training so you know how to slow down!!!! I know few tail wheel pilots that have not bent something myself included!!! So get a good 140/170 and learn to fly if you bend something it is not like bending a 150,000 180. In the end you will want a 180 or a hot 170. But learn to fly tailwheel before you throw out the big bucks for the nice plane. DENNY

Yes, I want a TW because they are cool, plain and simple. Tricycle gear bores me aesthetically and if the plane doesn't scream "fly me because I am cool" then I doubt that I will be as motivated to do so. TW's are cool, their off-field capabilities are amazing and I like what that offers me going forward.

You bring up a good point about doing TW time with multiple instructors, it can't hurt to learn from different pilots with different skill sets and styles. I'd be better off financially to train with them and pay for dual wet time in their personal planes instead of insuring and storing my own. I wonder what that break even number is?! After all, I'll have hangar rental costs ($225/mo), insurance on the plane and hangar ($$$???) as well as fuel ($4.17/gal) and maintenance costs on top of it and $55/hr to an instructor.

I am not talking a full on week long elk hunt load-out (wall tent, stove, 7 days worth of food, etc.), I meant more along the lines of a few long guns, a medium bag, a small to medium ice chest and other small needs for 2-3 nights accommodations in the lodge. These are south Texas upland hunts and winter time waterfowl hunting and most of the gear is already down there. I agree that ultimately I will want a loaded hotrod 170B or most likely a 180 but until then I think the 140 could be a good interim option to help me build TW time and confidence. Most grass strips in the area are 1800-2000ft which should be more than enough for even the hottest and heaviest of days, especially if for 90% of them up front I'll be by myself. Comparable 170's (no avionics) are sitting around $60-70K from what I am currently seeing on the market, that's not exactly double the price of entry lol.

Part of me thinks I should snag the 140 and fly the pants off of it for a year or two so that I can stack as many TW PIC hours/landings/TO's as possible and then I can start shopping for the "forever" legacy plane. But to play devils advocate to myself I can't help but consider going straight to a 170B and skipping the starter rig altogether. I don't think that a quality 180 would be in the budget for at least a few more years unless I were to finance a portion of it. Good stuff to consider for sure. I think the next step needs to be a pre-purchase inspection on the 140.

I'll admit bias but for what you've describe a 170 will fit the bill nicely. This picture was a two person, three day a camping trip last Summer. We carried full fuel, all required camping gear, dining tent, fishing gear and a PacBoat canoe carried in a float locker

Hi

I'm just an "outsider" reading and re-framing your question.

You aren't comparing individual airplanes because only the 140 "really" exists. So the "real" question is: "Does the 140 meet my mission requirements?" You said it does.

So, IMHO the question should be: "can the 140 be obtained at a cost in time and money that you will be able to recoup in terms of getting started sooner, and the likely amount you will be able to recoup should you find the 'legacy 170B' at some future date."

If you don't have the financial capacity to buy two perhaps you might also ask the question: "is a 'perfect' 170B likely to 'pop' a couple days after you pull the trigger on the 140, at such a low price you could not react before it was gone."

Best Wishes and gifts of 'Saint Arnold Oktoberfest' gladly accepted.

Lisa

Just find a good 170B and enjoy it. In a 140, you will be perpetually trying to avoid an over gross situation. Get a copy of that 140s weight and balance, add full fuel weight and see what you have left.

Buy a 170.

MTV

The 140 is only going to allow you to build hours. It won’t fit the mission.

Any new plane is going to have squawks and a learning curve, which may be expensive. Why do that twice?

On the other hand finding a nice 170 right now is a challenge, and prices have risen a lot, so that may take time. If you can afford it fly the 140 while you are looking.

Super 170, 180 are a different budget again.

It’s fun spending other people’s money:)

Denny and MTV make good points. Will your wife be with you quite a bit or just occasionally. The 140 question would be moot if she were going to be along most of the time, as MTV said. In 140 she will be up close and personal, as the seat will not go back. It will be tight. I flew everything with a small Continental engine and I was mostly with a student who didn't have much say or alone. My wife had no use for kites.

I like C140s, they make a great time builder or single person plane. Even 2 up with a small bag they work good. For your mission I'd bet you'd end up wanting at least a 180HP 170 or the 180 though. Both are not cheap. Personally I think if you buy a stock powered 170 you won't be happy with it in a few years and it will end up being a starter plane like the 140, you'll end up wanting more speed and power and want to mod it yourself or buy a 180. If you can afford a super 170, like the 90k one on barnstormers right now, that would be the way to go. Otherwise start with the 140 and in a few years re-evaluate your position and see what you can afford then.

A1Skinner wrote:I like C140s, they make a great time builder or single person plane. Even 2 up with a small bag they work good. For your mission I'd bet you'd end up wanting at least a 180HP 170 or the 180 though. Both are not cheap. Personally I think if you buy a stock powered 170 you won't be happy with it in a few years and it will end up being a starter plane like the 140, you'll end up wanting more speed and power and want to mod it yourself or buy a 180. If you can afford a super 170, like the 90k one on barnstormers right now, that would be the way to go. Otherwise start with the 140 and in a few years re-evaluate your position and see what you can afford then.

I agree that I will soon long for the room and power of the S170/180, the 140 is simply an option out of immediate and local convenience. Are you referring to the polished/red 'N8019A' 220HP Franklin converted model that's currently on BarnStormers/Trade-A-Plane?

Mapleflt wrote:

I'll admit bias but for what you've describe a 170 will fit the bill nicely. This picture was a two person, three day a camping trip last Summer. We carried full fuel, all required camping gear, dining tent, fishing gear and a PacBoat canoe carried in a float locker

I love it!

contactflying wrote:Denny and MTV make good points. Will your wife be with you quite a bit or just occasionally. The 140 question would be moot if she were going to be along most of the time, as MTV said. In 140 she will be up close and personal, as the seat will not go back. It will be tight. I flew everything with a small Continental engine and I was mostly with a student who didn't have much say or alone. My wife had no use for kites.

The wife will be with me nearly half of the time when we acquire a 170/180. The 140 would rarely see her in the right seat simply due to room and performance, that purchase would almost solely be time building and solo ranch/hunting trips as an interim to a 170/180 purchase.

daedaluscan wrote:The 140 is only going to allow you to build hours. It won’t fit the mission.

Any new plane is going to have squawks and a learning curve, which may be expensive. Why do that twice?

On the other hand finding a nice 170 right now is a challenge, and prices have risen a lot, so that may take time. If you can afford it fly the 140 while you are looking.

Super 170, 180 are a different budget again.

It’s fun spending other people’s money:)

It's becoming more apparent that most here aren't a fan of the 140 purchase and I agree that it makes less sense financially beyond killing and building time. Yes, the 170B market is extremely limited at the moment but I am in no hurry to find/buy the "right" plane.

mtv wrote:Just find a good 170B and enjoy it. In a 140, you will be perpetually trying to avoid an over gross situation. Get a copy of that 140s weight and balance, add full fuel weight and see what you have left.

Buy a 170.

MTV

The 140 has a useful load of 517.40lbs. In theory the misses and I could carry full fuel and still have enough useful load left over for a few small overnight bags and still come in under total gross but that's pushing it and the performance would be laughable at best.

Lisas7ECA wrote:Hi

I'm just an "outsider" reading and re-framing your question.

You aren't comparing individual airplanes because only the 140 "really" exists. So the "real" question is: "Does the 140 meet my mission requirements?" You said it does.

So, IMHO the question should be: "can the 140 be obtained at a cost in time and money that you will be able to recoup in terms of getting started sooner, and the likely amount you will be able to recoup should you find the 'legacy 170B' at some future date."

If you don't have the financial capacity to buy two perhaps you might also ask the question: "is a 'perfect' 170B likely to 'pop' a couple days after you pull the trigger on the 140, at such a low price you could not react before it was gone."

Best Wishes and gifts of 'Saint Arnold Oktoberfest' gladly accepted.

Lisa

That's a nice way to look at it and to answer that honestly, yes, I would be a bit disappointed if the "right" S170B came along shortly after pulling the trigger on the 140. That puts it plainly and answers it for me, the 140 isn't the right choice for me now or ever.

I have a different take.

Almost 15 years ago I purchased a C85 powered 1946 Cessna 140 with limited funds and 0 hours. That plane was the springboard to accruing thousands of hours and multiple ratings. It took my wife and I on long cross country flights from California to Colorado and modest backcountry strips for overnite camping. We still have it but use the Bonanza for family travel. The 140 is still flown regularly around and across Colorado. Maintenance and insurance costs have always remained low. Fuel burn is 5gph with cruise speeds up to 105 knots. It has docile, predictable while also responsive flight characteristics.

I understand why some would feel the 140 is the wrong plane for much of the flying portrayed on this site. Regardless, there are those who still derive utility and joy from the 140 as it fulfills their missions when flown within its capability. Many prospective airplane owners never get off the ground waiting for the right plane while ignoring what they have available right now. I've seen the same with aspiring cruising sailors never leaving the dock because they can never get a boat big enough to do everything they feel it needs to do. Others make the most of the boat they have available and enjoy wonderful journeys.

A 170B with a 180hp upgrade is absolutely the perfect plane for you. It is not the plane available to you right now. Don't let perfection be the enemy of good enough if you want to own and fly your own plane sooner rather than later.

Regards,
Ernie

Ernie wrote:I have a different take.

Almost 15 years ago I purchased a C85 powered 1946 Cessna 140 with limited funds and 0 hours. That plane was the springboard to accruing thousands of hours and multiple ratings. It took my wife and I on long cross country flights from California to Colorado and modest backcountry strips for overnite camping. We still have it but use the Bonanza for family travel. The 140 is still flown regularly around and across Colorado. Maintenance and insurance costs have always remained low. Fuel burn is 5gph with cruise speeds up to 105 knots. It has docile, predictable while also responsive flight characteristics.

I understand why some would feel the 140 is the wrong plane for much of the flying portrayed on this site. Regardless, there are those who still derive utility and joy from the 140 as it fulfills their missions when flown within its capability. Many prospective airplane owners never get off the ground waiting for the right plane while ignoring what they have available right now. I've seen the same with aspiring cruising sailors never leaving the dock because they can never get a boat big enough to do everything they feel it needs to do. Others make the most of the boat they have available and enjoy wonderful journeys.

A 170B with a 180hp upgrade is absolutely the perfect plane for you. It is not the plane available to you right now. Don't let perfection be the enemy of good enough if you want to own and fly your own plane sooner rather than later.

Regards,
Ernie

That's fair and a good counter argument. The 140 is here now and short of a few repairs would be ready to go in a matter of weeks. Lots to consider, but I agree that the general consensus is that a S170B is probably the right plane for me.

Yes the polished one with the franklin is the one I was referring to.

SoTexFlyer wrote:

Ernie wrote:I have a different take.

Almost 15 years ago I purchased a C85 powered 1946 Cessna 140 with limited funds and 0 hours. That plane was the springboard to accruing thousands of hours and multiple ratings. It took my wife and I on long cross country flights from California to Colorado and modest backcountry strips for overnite camping. We still have it but use the Bonanza for family travel. The 140 is still flown regularly around and across Colorado. Maintenance and insurance costs have always remained low. Fuel burn is 5gph with cruise speeds up to 105 knots. It has docile, predictable while also responsive flight characteristics.

I understand why some would feel the 140 is the wrong plane for much of the flying portrayed on this site. Regardless, there are those who still derive utility and joy from the 140 as it fulfills their missions when flown within its capability. Many prospective airplane owners never get off the ground waiting for the right plane while ignoring what they have available right now. I've seen the same with aspiring cruising sailors never leaving the dock because they can never get a boat big enough to do everything they feel it needs to do. Others make the most of the boat they have available and enjoy wonderful journeys.

A 170B with a 180hp upgrade is absolutely the perfect plane for you. It is not the plane available to you right now. Don't let perfection be the enemy of good enough if you want to own and fly your own plane sooner rather than later.

Regards,
Ernie

That's fair and a good counter argument. The 140 is here now and short of a few repairs would be ready to go in a matter of weeks. Lots to consider, but I agree that the general consensus is that a S170B is probably the right plane for me.

The problem with that is, those "few repairs" MAY be indicative of other, more expensive and more extensive repairs down the road. If you're actually serious about that plane, hire a good mechanic to do a thorough pre-buy. Tell the mechanic to look for any major gotchas.....

That 140 MIGHT be a "good deal" and a great time builder. Or it MIGHT be a money pit. Just because it's "here" doesn't mean it'd fill your needs. It might just drain your bank account.

Which, of course is true of almost any airplane.

MTV

If a 140 will fit the bill, you might consider buying the nicest one you can afford. A run out engine that has sad cylinders sounds like it has potential to cost real money. 30K can buy you a damn nice 120/140.

I have a 170B with the O-300 and, based on your mission, I think you'll find the 170 to fit the bill perfectly. My 170 is the first and only airplane I've owned and I barely had any tailwheel time when I bought it a couple years ago. Insurance required 10 hrs dual and I pay approx $1,400 a year.

A super 170 would be the ticket, but you're looking at a lot more acquisition cost as well. I know of a good one for sale now, but most of them - including the one I know of - are over 100K. Additionally, you won't save much in fuel burn or expense, marginal increase in cruise speed, but the climb performance is where the supers really shine.

That said, don't rule out a 170 with the O-300. Mine has a useful load of ~875 lbs which leaves a full fuel payload of almost 650 lbs. Take the rear seat out and there's tons of room and weight savings of nearly 30 lbs to boot. For your location, you'd do just fine with a 170 with a standard 7653 (climb/cruise combo) prop. If you want some more climb, repitch to a 7651 or throw a seaplane 8042 prop on it. But you won't regret getting a 170.

120/140s are awesome, but for your mission, I think you'll find yourself wanting a 170 in pretty short order.

Lots of good advice here -- not surprising for BCP.

I'll agree with others who point out that you don't presently have a choice between a 140 and a 170; you have a choice to buy a 140 or not. How badly do you want to fly a taildragger this summer?

You might spend a couple of hundred hours in a 140 and say, "that's been fun, but I no longer have anything to prove, tailwheel-wise. . . " and realize that the mission you describe would be well met by a 172, 182, Cherokee, Dakota, Bonanza, or Navion. Or you might realize that you absolutely MUST have floats. Or you may look at the costs (time, money, hassle, etc -- especially hassle) of even the "cheap" 140 and decide flying isn't worth the delay it causes to your retirement.

ironcondor wrote:I have a 170B with the O-300 and, based on your mission, I think you'll find the 170 to fit the bill perfectly. My 170 is the first and only airplane I've owned and I barely had any tailwheel time when I bought it a couple years ago. Insurance required 10 hrs dual and I pay approx $1,400 a year.

A super 170 would be the ticket, but you're looking at a lot more acquisition cost as well. I know of a good one for sale now, but most of them - including the one I know of - are over 100K. Additionally, you won't save much in fuel burn or expense, marginal increase in cruise speed, but the climb performance is where the supers really shine.

That said, don't rule out a 170 with the O-300. Mine has a useful load of ~875 lbs which leaves a full fuel payload of almost 650 lbs. Take the rear seat out and there's tons of room and weight savings of nearly 30 lbs to boot. For your location, you'd do just fine with a 170 with a standard 7653 (climb/cruise combo) prop. If you want some more climb, repitch to a 7651 or throw a seaplane 8042 prop on it. But you won't regret getting a 170.

120/140s are awesome, but for your mission, I think you'll find yourself wanting a 170 in pretty short order.

That insurance quote is promising, but I am sure there are many factors in that number, hours as PIC being the most significant. I'm going to shoot you a PM about the S170.

A 170B with an 0-300 is a very capable float plane and will turn you into a very capable float pilot