Anyone have the performance specs for Stinson 108 with an O-470?

Here's what I have so far and feel free to correct me if this looks wrong.

Max weight: 2400 lbs
Empty weight: ?
Useful load: 720 lbs
Rate of Climb: ?
Cruise: 135 kts
Horsepower: 230 hp
Fuel capacity: 40-50 gal
Fuel burn: 12 gph
Range: ?
Stall speed: ?
Min take-off: ?
Min landing: ?

Thanks again.

EDIT: I did find this for the performance specs of an O-470 Stinson on EDO 2425 floats. Go to the very last page of the article and click on the specs link.

http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/aircraf ... inson.html

Those look like pretty generic specs in that plane&pilot article. And 135kts is pretty optimistic without absolutely gulping fuel and really flogging it. On wheels in my -2 I get about 110kts at ~12.5gal/hr. Climb rate of course varies with T/O weight, but I can routinely sustain something over 1000'/min.

Stall speed in a converted 108 will have a lot to do with CG. Especially with the heavy O-470, unless some thought was put into the project the CG often ends up at the very forward edge of the envelope. Battery location behind the luggage compartment is critical in mitigating this.

Note some critical differences between -1&2s and the -3. The -1&2s have a GW of 2230 whereas the -3 is 2400 (2500 on floats). Also, -1&2s have 40 gal fuel, the -3 has 50 gals.

FWIW there's a 108-3 with a 210 Continental listed on barnstormers right now for $47K, located in the Seattle area.

I have been flying Stinsons for over 30 years and have a 108-2 with the 0470.
The Stinson plane is a great plane and a excellent preformer . Dose quite well in the back country.

I have a Stinson, 108-2 with the 0470.if you would like to talk let me no. I live just out of Fairbanks and North Pole .

Ken

Anyone have thoughts on a super stinson 108-3 with a lycoming O-540 (300hp)? Everyone seems to love the 470 - is more better?

soyAnarchisto wrote:Anyone have thoughts on a super stinson 108-3 with a lycoming O-540 (300hp)? Everyone seems to love the 470 - is more better?

Personally I think hanging a huge engine on the front or going metal makes a very light handling VFR plane into something it’s not.

I debated doing this to my Stinson, big engine swap, IFR panel, but I’d dump tons of cash and end up having a Stinson that didn’t handle as smooth and light, but still would be outrun by a maule or a 180

If you want a Stinson I’d keep it stock, or close to stock, if you want something different I’d buy something different.

Great aircraft BTW, I also have a fabric -1 for sale that would make a good platform for a engine swap

I spent quite a while talking to Ken Brock, years ago. He had a -3 with an O-540 at the same time I was doing a -3 with an O-470 for a friend. He absolutely LOVED it!!! The Lycoming is actually a bit lighter and they're pretty bullet proof. I've talked to Herk Strumpf, and he's working on an STC approval for the O-540. There are a few running around in Canada, from what I understand. I think it's a great combination! If you haven't, you should check out the International Stinson Club page on Facebook... do a search and you'll get quite a bit of first hand knowledge on it.
John

Does anybody know what are the structural differences between -2 and -3 for the raised gross weight?

I'm planning to start -2 experimental project. The plane would be on floats and wheel skis. Just thinking that if it anyway needs heavier engine for float flying is the gross weight going to be too low or has the gross weight increase only did for the paper and I could go with higher in an experimental?

I just found this project for sale and I'm very excited after seeing all these posts about how good float plane it is. I have been thinking of building Bearhawk or similar but It'd take long time to get all that money earned so this would be maybe easier way to get in to 4 seater world. Of course everything is more expensive (even project) in this side of the sea but it's also very difficult to find good and affordable ski and float flying capable plane here.

janme wrote:Does anybody know what are the structural differences between -2 and -3 for the raised gross weight?.

The main structural difference is in the wing spars. They went from a 2024 spar in the pre-dash 3 aircraft to a 7075 spar in the dash 3. This provided a much stronger spar, but the trade off is that the -3 spars are more disposed to corrosion. They need to be inspected very carefully. There are other minor differences in airframes, but primarily in mounting geometry. Obviously the empenage is different.
They're great airplanes and have a very strong structure!!
John