I have a pending sale on my J3 Cub. I was looking for an all metal airplane with equal qualities, and wondered if the Cessna 140 would be a good fit? Will a Cessna 140 with a C85 (all metal) perform on floats? I currently own a pair of Aqua 1500's and if I dont buy another similar plane they will go. The 170B is really what I want...

So, the question is, Will a Cessna 140 be a good floatplane? Or will I be disappointed?

Bravo Hotel wrote:The 170B is really what I want...So, the question is, Will a Cessna 140 be a good floatplane? Or will I be disappointed?

I think you answered it. If you really want a 170B, then you'll be disappointed with the 140.

and if the 170B is going to be floated, you're going to need one modified for the 180hp engine. You'll pay as much for that as a 180.

Bush Caddy is all metal, looks and specs are nice.





Always been high on my (short) list of alternatives, if I did not love the RR so much

Dont forget the CH-750

The C-140 is a good airplane, but I think youll be disapointed with the c85 in it. Get one with the O290-D2 135 hp and I think youll be real happy with that. I dont see why it woudnt work well with that engine on foats.

BH- Don't do a C85 in a C140 on floats, you can get a cheap 180 on floats at Surfside in the 50's. I can send you specs and pics.

CH 701

That 701 pilot knows his plane. That was great, like an actual bird settling on the water.

I know that guy is trying to get in short, but isn't that technique kinda hard on float fittings?

dirtstrip wrote:That 701 pilot knows his plane. That was great, like an actual bird settling on the water.

Not so sure about that. The water rudders were down for takeoff and landing.

Can someone tell me what a Cessna 140 with an 0-200 will cruise at? Faster or slower than my J3?

ZPilot wrote:

dirtstrip wrote:That 701 pilot knows his plane. That was great, like an actual bird settling on the water.

Not so sure about that. The water rudders were down for takeoff and landing.

You CAN be sure about me not knowing anything about floats or float flying. Never been around it but consistently saw the pilot control the approach to the edge of the 701 performance, even when he made one sinker drop from a what would be a little too high for flair. May be bad protocol for float rudders but for the 701 it was an excellent performance. I don't believe it could have/or should have been done steeper or slower. The logical question for me then is, if you are doing it that slow what are the implications for the float rudders?

dirtstrip wrote:

ZPilot wrote:

dirtstrip wrote:That 701 pilot knows his plane. That was great, like an actual bird settling on the water.

Not so sure about that. The water rudders were down for takeoff and landing.

You CAN be sure about me not knowing anything about floats or float flying. Never been around it but consistently saw the pilot control the approach to the edge of the 701 performance, even when he made one sinker drop from a what would be a little too high for flair. May be bad protocol for float rudders but for the 701 it was an excellent performance. I don't believe it could have/or should have been done steeper or slower. The logical question for me then is, if you are doing it that slow what are the implications for the float rudders?

I've always wondered about hooking up a trolling line to floats and trolling around the lake then taking off. Wouldn't that be fun?

Bravo Hotel Alot faster than your Cub ! Cruise in the C 140 will be around 115 MPH.