Ardent wrote:

Fraser Farmer wrote:So is the aft bulkhead a little further back in a 185 versus a two window 180 to allow for that 3rd row? I was looking in the baggage compartment of my 180 and boy that'd be tight.

Saw that avatar and thought, “I know that plane!” Good to see familiar faces (And planes). I think you’re probably on the right track with your 206, but it basically won’t fit in my hangar at Pitt. Fair 185 fair from working with them outfitting too, seems easy to sell a good one if I change my mind too and go 206 in the end like you.

Good to see you here Angus. It's a great place for info on planes and flying. I think MTV here has flown every bush plane with every type of float.
I'm asking about the back seat because now I'm wondering if I should be considering 185s as well as 206s.

Angus,
I was just reading through the posts and noticed you mentioned looking at a 185 with the TSIO 540 in it. I can't remember what all the reasoning was but when I was looking around for my 180 I looked at a 185 like that and was warned against it by my AME. I do remember him saying it was very thirsty, like as much fuel burn as a Beaver.
Matt

.

glacier wrote:Gail operated a turbo Lycoming 185 out of Cordova years ago. From what I remember they could not legally use the prop that they wanted to and were stuck with something too short. I chartered it a couple times on wheel skis, it got going pretty good and was super smooth running.
Aside from the prop selection, I think they can be really hard to keep cool, just not much space in the cowling.

There is, or was one based in Fairbanks, floats in summer, wheel skis in winter. Same gent owns a Turbo Beaver on amphibs there.

First, Lycoming uses a different descriptor protocol for their engines. That engine is a TIO-540, not a TSIO-540, which would indicate it's a Continental.....another aviation mystery.

Second, that 185 had a VERY busy engine room. Pull the top cowl, and you could not see any part of the engine.....requires a plenum for cooling. Turbo, intercooler, etc, all stuffed into an engine compartment that's not all that roomy in the first place.
And, yes, the owner told me he ran anywhere from 18 to 21 or 22 gph to keep the engine happy.

That engine is basically off a Navajo, and they are indeed bomb proof, but Lycomings are heavier than Continentals, then add all the other stuff......

He sank it one day, turning around, but managed to use full power to beach it and keep that megabuck engine from getting wet.....

But, that thing did make power. Frankly, a turbine would make more sense.

MTV

Ardent wrote:Basic things like raised fuel caps, or lighter seats, I’d have killed for in the Wilga.

Please tell me more about raised fuel caps. Why is that an advantage? I'm not sure what the wilga has, but I'm assuming they are flush?

akschu wrote:

Ardent wrote:Basic things like raised fuel caps, or lighter seats, I’d have killed for in the Wilga.

Please tell me more about raised fuel caps. Why is that an advantage? I'm not sure what the wilga has, but I'm assuming they are flush?

Fueling in the rain. Parking the plane outside in the rain Or, several other scenarios......I flew early 185s with those "killer caps" and hated them immensely. That was Kodiak, where it does rain occasionally.

MTV

MTV’s lived it, flush caps kill.

I’ve picked up 1/2 gallon of water between both sides in a particularly wet night through the flush caps. We’re on the north coast of BC a hundred south of Ketchikan, where it rains a tad as well.

Then you’re spending an hour rocking the plane thanks to all the places for water to hide in Wilga tanks, trying to get it all out at the dock. Had to make bungee corded covers for the caps, and either spin the plane at the dock nightly, or crawl down the wet wing to put both on. Then do it again to remove them before heading out in the morning. Enough to make a guy consider paying for his own STC or trying to explain it as a minor mod. Or look forward to future 185s.

Well, that helps a lot. I'm building an experimental so I can do whatever I want, and wanted to know why one works better than the other. Makes sense, though I love in a very dry place and have a hangar so it's not nearly the concern for me, though I have been to Ketch and POW so I know that it is a tad wetter there....

schu

Schu,

Yes, hangars are nice, but most of us fly places and not all places have hangars. It doesn’t take huge amounts of rain to cause problems. Besides, Dry Landers tend to be a bit more casual about checking for water in fuel.....I’m sure you’re not one of those.

I parked an amphibious 185 with the old style cam lock caps.....two on each tank. We had a particularly wet month...like thirty inches......amphib wing is fairly level, and the o rings on those tank access plates and the killer caps together just sucked huge amounts of water into the tanks.

I tried for a couple days to get all the water out, but every time I’d move the plane and leave it for a minute, the sumps would be all water.

I finally called our new maintenance chief, and he told me to fly it up to the shop....in Anchorage. Over 40 mile of open ocean, and a lot of forest. I politely declined....mostly polite anyway. He said he’d send someone down the next day.

Met “the guy” next day at the jet......it was our check airman...... he asked where the plane was, and took a headset out of his bag. .

I asked if he knew why he was asked to come pick up this plane. “Said it needed some maintenance.”. It him pre flight......lots of water He drained it, then shook the plane....more water, etc. I finally told him why he’d actually been sent down there

His follow on phone call with the new chief of maintenance. was sorta terse, to put it mildly.......he left on the afternoon Wein jet. Mechanic came next day.

MTV

Yep, and then just when you think you’ve got it all after rocking the plane for an hour or more and drawing samples over and over, you pull the samples before the next flight and get water again. Even in the gascolator. Shudder... That’s when I made the cap covers, out of an old rubber boat, raised caps are a must on the coast.

Just access to any mod I can dream up, at least in comparison to operating a Wilga 2000, is one of my major attractions to the 185.

We got tha 185 into a warm hangar for a couple days ($$$$), and drained fuel, then swapped out both bladders with Cotten rags, three times, then replaced all gaskets. Purged all lines, etc, ad nauseum. What a PITA. Cessna came out with a kit not long after to install new caps.

MTV

I don't think you will go wrong acquiring the 185. After 35 years flying mostly cubs and M7's, about 5 years ago I added a 185 to the collection. After a few seasons it became the preferred airplane. For performance, useful load, utility on floats and skis and being comfortable to fly it is hard to get mad at it. As most people will say that use them for utility bush flying the downside is loading and lack of room. It is a simple fact that there are certain cargo items that will fit into a 206, Beaver, Found or even a Maule that just wont fit inside the 185 or through the door.

IMHO for utility bush flying the principal mods and configuration to aim for are:
- Edo 3430 or Aerocets ; either of these floats are gold standard for hauling weight and performance. Aerocets of course bit spendy but have big hatches , are slippery and I think have more positive steering on the water..
- 3 blade prop (Big Macauley may have marginal advantage pulling out of the hole on floats but are noisy, the Hartzells seem to perform pretty well too and should have less erosion on floats).
- WingX. This is a mod that I have never heard anyone complain of (unless you have a narrow hanger). Performance wise it makes a difference especially at altitude. Moreover it will increase legal gross to 3525 lb.; good to have on floats especially.
- If it is pre~1975 one would want to install one of the several STOL cuff kits available. The merits/shortcoming of the different kits have been discussed in several forums on the BCP site. I have a 79 F model with Cessna cuff and In my bias opinion would put up against any other 185 with the STOL add-ons.
- Keep it light.
- As for other things such as VG's, wing fences, I wouldn't offer an opinion. All In know is VG's are a pain when using wing covers and having flown planes with and without them I cant say it is noticeable enough.

Good luck in your search.

Appreciated that “lived with” post BJM, this forum is a fantastic resource and it’s appreciated.