whee wrote:I just saw a 180hp C175 for sale a couple days ago. $50ish K I think it was and it looks nice but pics only tell you how she looks in makeup.

akaviator, I agree with you I think. Just a difference of opinion and likely my opinion would change with more experience. The C180 I flew (only 3hrs for a BFR) was a very light ‘53 model with wingX and sportsman. The speed was awesome. All around performance was enjoyable. But the handling wasn’t what I expected. Every control was heavy and it required constant elevator trim adjustments. The C182, 1960 model, feels the same but it’s a little lighter on the aileron since it doesn’t have wingX. The C172 is light and pleasant.

Performance wise the C172 does surprisingly well. I can’t really quantify it very well but when I fly with my buddy I usually end up wondering why I spent 5 years building a BH.

lawdart, I’m not sure self insuring an EAB makes any more since than self insuring a certified plane. You wreck either one and your left with no money to fix it.

The Lycoming O360 can run mogas. STC are available for most applicable airframes. My buddies has his C172 setup for mogas.

That's interesting on the trim, mine needs just a touch of an adjustment on occasion, almost an afterthought. Could be just proving that my 180 is the best one out there lol.

Lots of good comments here and I’d just like to add my two cents:

• Talk to an insurance agent before you buy and it could help sway your decision. I did that and ended up with a straight tail 182 rather than the 180/185 that I was looking for. I still think a nice 185 would be the ultimate, but without a lot of tailwheel time, it just didn’t make sense for me and the insurance companies convinced me of that. Talk to an insurance agent sooner rather than later. I work with Bill White (agency) and can highly recommend them. Understand how aircraft insurance works too. Once an underwriter provides a quote for a specific N number to an agent, that same underwriter won't quote another agent. There are not a lot of underwriters and some won't insure in certain markets (e.g. floats or Alaska). Avemco is the only underwriter you deal directly with, rather than through an agent.
• If you could find a good flying club in your area, it might help you build experience while you figure out exactly what you want. Hopefully you could find one with good aircraft availability. I am in a 10 member flying club with a single 172 and we fly less than 100 hours per year, so the availability is close to sole ownership. A partnership may also be available, probably with a more capable aircraft. Partnerships are like marriage and you have to see eye to eye. From my experience, how you spend your money (either upgrades or just plain maintenance) as well as good agreement on aircraft availability are key items that make it or break it for a partnership.
• Buy the best aircraft you can, set up the way you want it. Upgrades, especially engines, are always cheaper if the prior owner does them for you. As Steve said, the cost of an engine upgrade will take your breath away. When I was shopping, I was always looking for a “great deal,” but there really is no such thing. A low priced aircraft is usually cheap for a reason. The first annual will probably break the bank.
• A 170/172 with a bigger engine will probably be priced like a 180/182. Go for the bigger airplane, pay for the higher fuel burn and enjoy the much better payload and speed.
• When you do buy, get a good pre-buy inspection. A low to mid time engine would be nice, but only if the overhaul and subsequent operation/maintenance are adequate so that you can reasonably expect to make TBO or beyond. It would really suck to think you have a low time engine and then end up needing an overhaul in the near term.
• Try to get your hands on good data for operating costs of similar aircraft. Aircraft ownership costs more than you might think and there can be local differences. For this reason, a flying club or partnership may be a good way to get your feet wet as you build time, learn about ownership and the associated costs and figure out what you want long term.
• Hopefully your bride shares your passion for flying and will be a willing and eager partner on your flights. Too many pilots I know have wives or girlfriends who won’t go with them and that takes a lot of the fun out of it.
• Congrats on the masters in mechanical engineering too. Good education for a pilot!
• Happy flying

pipeliner wrote:Lots of good comments here and I’d just like to add my two cents:

• Talk to an insurance agent before you buy and it could help sway your decision. I did that and ended up with a straight tail 182 rather than the 180/185 that I was looking for. I still think a nice 185 would be the ultimate, but without a lot of tailwheel time, it just didn’t make sense for me and the insurance companies convinced me of that. Talk to an insurance agent sooner rather than later. I work with Bill White (agency) and can highly recommend them. Understand how aircraft insurance works too. Once an underwriter provides a quote for a specific N number to an agent, that same underwriter won't quote another agent. There are not a lot of underwriters and some won't insure in certain markets (e.g. floats or Alaska). Avemco is the only underwriter you deal directly with, rather than through an agent.
• If you could find a good flying club in your area, it might help you build experience while you figure out exactly what you want. Hopefully you could find one with good aircraft availability. I am in a 10 member flying club with a single 172 and we fly less than 100 hours per year, so the availability is close to sole ownership. A partnership may also be available, probably with a more capable aircraft. Partnerships are like marriage and you have to see eye to eye. From my experience, how you spend your money (either upgrades or just plain maintenance) as well as good agreement on aircraft availability are key items that make it or break it for a partnership.
• Buy the best aircraft you can, set up the way you want it. Upgrades, especially engines, are always cheaper if the prior owner does them for you. As Steve said, the cost of an engine upgrade will take your breath away. When I was shopping, I was always looking for a “great deal,” but there really is no such thing. A low priced aircraft is usually cheap for a reason. The first annual will probably break the bank.
• A 170/172 with a bigger engine will probably be priced like a 180/182. Go for the bigger airplane, pay for the higher fuel burn and enjoy the much better payload and speed.
• When you do buy, get a good pre-buy inspection. A low to mid time engine would be nice, but only if the overhaul and subsequent operation/maintenance are adequate so that you can reasonably expect to make TBO or beyond. It would really suck to think you have a low time engine and then end up needing an overhaul in the near term.
• Try to get your hands on good data for operating costs of similar aircraft. Aircraft ownership costs more than you might think and there can be local differences. For this reason, a flying club or partnership may be a good way to get your feet wet as you build time, learn about ownership and the associated costs and figure out what you want long term.
• Hopefully your bride shares your passion for flying and will be a willing and eager partner on your flights. Too many pilots I know have wives or girlfriends who won’t go with them and that takes a lot of the fun out of it.
• Congrats on the masters in mechanical engineering too. Good education for a pilot!
• Happy flying

This was excellent!

Yes it was.

Great thread here and in similar situation as lawndart.

Just curious... What do all of you guys think about a early model 172 (O-300 style) maybe even lucky enough to find one with a Sportsman or Horton STOL kit?

Two people with 20 gals of gas and two nights of light camping gear. I think its very doable but I happen to be incorrect on a very regular basis.

I live in Vermont and my club's C172k (O-320 {prob not making all 150hp like it should}) does a very good job getting out of a 2000' strip in July with two people and way more than half tanks and no STOL kit.

My take is... You take that same plane, toss a Sportsman kits on, tune the existing engine 300 or 320, and learn how to fly slow.... like slowwww very comfortably (AND SAFELY) you can visit a TON of strips in the New England.

That said, New England mountains aren't nearly as big as they are out west but man o' man they hurt just has bad... plan your "back country" trip accordingly.

Rickshaw84 wrote:Great thread here and in similar situation as lawndart.

Just curious... What do all of you guys think about a early model 172 (O-300 style) maybe even lucky enough to find one with a Sportsman or Horton STOL kit?

Two people with 20 gals of gas and two nights of light camping gear. I think its very doable but I happen to be incorrect on a very regular basis.

I live in Vermont and my club's C172k (O-320 {prob not making all 150hp like it should}) does a very good job getting out of a 2000' strip in July with two people and way more than half tanks and no STOL kit.

My take is... You take that same plane, toss a Sportsman kits on, tune the existing engine 300 or 320, and learn how to fly slow.... like slowwww very comfortably (AND SAFELY) you can visit a TON of strips in the New England.

That said, New England mountains aren't nearly as big as they are out west but man o' man they hurt just has bad... plan your "back country" trip accordingly.

I really like the 0-300 powered 172s. In lots of ways I prefer it to the 0-320. Go for it if you can find one.

I guess I'll give my usual advice...your first airplane is much more of a journey than a destination.

Nobody was ever happy about owning an airplane that they could just afford...but not quite. In gas alone you can fly a Cessna 120 three hours for every hour you can fly a Cessna 182, and that's not the half of it where your checkbook is concerned.

There's a lot that goes into actually learning to fly a wing, and more yet that goes into learning how to own an airplane without it turning into the worst financial decision you've made to date.

If I recall correctly your wife has two more years of med school, and then there's going to be two years of residency. Y'all aren't going to be going on a lot of backcountry flying vacations real soon...just guessing.

My advice: Get yourself an anemic two-seater tail-dragger for less than $30k and learn to actually fly the wing rather than just learning to push in the throttle on the engine of a more powerful plane. (As an aside, if you learn that engines make airplanes climb, you're going to crash in the mountains, eventually.)

Take your little put-put-no-load airplane out day after day and burn 4~6 gph rather than 10~16 gph to do the exact same flights. Fly three times a week rather than three times a month.

In a few years you can transition to the next airplane with a few hundred hours of tail-wheel time and some understanding of what you're actually getting yourself into with aircraft ownership, and with the performance of GA aircraft.

Owning an airplane can be a real joy, or a total assphucking every single day of the month, and every month of the year. Choose wisely. Both options are open to you.

My first airplane was a 1964 182G. 500 hours in 5 years. Highly recommended. There’s a reason they are so common. If I did it again I’d buy a straight tail. Manual flaps, and not so much plastic. I like utilitarian now.

Buy the 182.

Wow guys, thanks so much for all the great input!

I hear the advice to join a club or partnership before going solo. I may well do that. But I do want to make sure I know enough about aircraft that will fit my mission profile to be able to pull the trigger if a great deal pops up in what I think will be a rough market.

So far it sounds like a 182, up-engined 172, GlaStar, or a few others that were mentioned would work for both cruising and STOL.

What are y'alls thoughts on the PA-28-235 for backcountry use? I see a couple low-time ones that seem well equipped (AP, new radios, ADSB, etc.) in my price range. One has a freshly overhauled engine. The V-tail Bonanza is another that comes to mind that I've seen what I think are good deals for.

Thanks again guys!

Steve

Cheapest part of a Bonanza is buying it.
Great airplanes but I think a 182 would suit your needs better than a Bonanza.

Kurt

The Piper wing isn’t going to be satisfactory for backcountry use. Especially if you get into some higher altitudes. On paper, a Cherokee 235 and a Cessna 182 are very close to equal. In the wild, not so much, hence the price difference.

A real coup would be if you could find a Cessna 205 you liked at a price you could agree to. Adds fuel injection and a bit more room for gear. Sometimes at a similar price to a 182.

oops. Double post.

Rickshaw84 wrote:Great thread here and in similar situation as lawndart.

Just curious... What do all of you guys think about a early model 172 (O-300 style) maybe even lucky enough to find one with a Sportsman or Horton STOL kit?

Two people with 20 gals of gas and two nights of light camping gear. I think its very doable but I happen to be incorrect on a very regular basis.

I live in Vermont and my club's C172k (O-320 {prob not making all 150hp like it should}) does a very good job getting out of a 2000' strip in July with two people and way more than half tanks and no STOL kit.

My take is... You take that same plane, toss a Sportsman kits on, tune the existing engine 300 or 320, and learn how to fly slow.... like slowwww very comfortably (AND SAFELY) you can visit a TON of strips in the New England.

That said, New England mountains aren't nearly as big as they are out west but man o' man they hurt just has bad... plan your "back country" trip accordingly.

Fshaw who is on this forum has a '56 172 with a O-300 and Horton kit on it. With my wife & me in it with full tanks and a weekend bag it performs just fine for kicking around the Northeast. I think the shortest srtip the two of us have flown into with it was 2,100+-., but we have flown into a number of strips in the 2,200'-2,500' range in the summer with no issue...DA isn't really as much of a issue here though, even on a "hot" day.

Pete

it also depends on what you want to do with your plane do you want a really good stol plane or a plane that can haul @#%! a load of stuff or just a nice four-seater airplane with decent stol capablilities and hauls a decent amount of stuff

washington backcountry wrote:it also depends on what you want to do with your plane do you want a really good stol plane or a plane that can haul @#%! a load of stuff or just a nice four-seater airplane with decent stol capablilities and hauls a decent amount of stuff

I want a plane that I can grow in as a pilot but won't outgrow too quickly. I won't be hauling very much, since my better half and I weight 300 lbs combined. I'm not sure what a night's worth of summer hiking and camping gear weighs, but I figure it wouldn't be more than 100 lbs; probably significantly less. Add fuel to that value. I don't think I need a crazy STOL aircraft, but I do want to have the ability to fly into unpaved strips, cool camping spots, and maybe some beaches once I get the proper training for that kind of flying.

From what I can see, PA28-180s and PA28-235s seem to be priced well below similar HP and TSMO Cessnas. Most of my (limited) hours are in a PA28-140/160, and I enjoyed it much more than the 160HP 172s I got my training in. But I've never tried to land either on a gravel or grass strip, so my opinion is might be irrelevant.

I've been reading the threads on this forum about PA28s, and it seems like they can be flown into some challenging fields if flown right. Seems like all that is also true for just about any other aircraft, including the 152s and 172s that are in my price range.

Steve

Thanks to pburns and Rickshaw84 for chiming in. Where can I find other New England back country pilots to speak with? I'd be very interested to get some more thoughts as to whether a 152, 172 (O300 or O320), or PA-28 (140, 160 or 180) would be enough for most of the flying we have. I'll be around here for at least 3 more years, and I guess I could always upgrade if I end up moving somewhere with higher DA.

Steve

That's a normal training progression. As soon as I got my PPL I got checked out in the clubs piper warrior. Seemed sportier, lay'd back more while cruising, wing on the bottom like a mustang, cool levers instead of push pull knobs...lol Never went back to the 172 till I did my commercial licence. After the commercial, all rental flying back to the warrior for time building and the 172rg for cool factor. For my purchases I started with a 172 then my probably last plane a 182. Why? Passengers don't need to climb up and over a wing to get in. Pilot can be last to board. You have a "roof" if loading/unloading in the rain. You can actually go sightseeing without just looking at the top of a wing. In a flip over you have a nice "rollbar" over your head and a "sidewalk" to crawl out on and no fuel running down the wings. The list goes on....

lawndart wrote:Thanks to pburns and Rickshaw84 for chiming in. Where can I find other New England back country pilots to speak with? I'd be very interested to get some more thoughts as to whether a 152, 172 (O300 or O320), or PA-28 (140, 160 or 180) would be enough for most of the flying we have. I'll be around here for at least 3 more years, and I guess I could always upgrade if I end up moving somewhere with higher DA.

Steve

Hey Steve, I’m based in VT on a grass strip with hills around it and fly an 0-300 powered 170. Our little field is somewhat challenging compared to paved airports. The performance is descent. Of course more power would be great, but not needed for any public airport in New England.

For me, my mission for the airplane was flying for fun, so buying a fun airplane that could afford easily add the most sense for me. For me, the Cherokees are not that inspiring to fly. The tailwheel thing makes flying fun...

lawndart wrote:.....From what I can see, PA28-180s and PA28-235s seem to be priced well below similar HP and TSMO Cessnas. Most of my (limited) hours are in a PA28-140/160, and I enjoyed it much more than the 160HP 172s I got my training in. But I've never tried to land either on a gravel or grass strip, so my opinion is might be irrelevant. ...

If you like flying a cherokee, maybe you should just buy a Cherokee.
As you say, they tend to be priced somewhat lower than Cessnas.
You're already familiar with them, it'd be a good starter airplane if nothing else.
I think that it would be just as adequate for the average grass or dirt strip as a similarly-powered Cessna.
I believe that the older cherokees with the hershey bar style wings use the same fat airfoil as a Cub.
I know a guy who used to own an early model Cherokee 6, he was a commercial fisherman
and hauled lots & lots of fish off of alaska beaches, no problem.

The best airplane for you is the airplane you can afford to fly often and enjoy to fly often.