I too am looking for ampibs for my 180J.
I talked with PK and their 3000’s are not STC’d for the 180.

Ive been happy with my 2790s, but I’m not filling all the seats, they also seem to preform well in the air

If I was going to put on a different float I’d go aerocets

An old adage is appropriate here, "the definition of insanity is repeating the same process and expecting different results". Amphibious floats deteriorate the performance and load hauling capability of nearly every piston powered aircraft they are attached; to a level that one could argue it a safety issue. There, I said it. I can hear the sound of sucking chest wounds already. Instead of investing money in hungry amphibious floats (acquisition, maintenance and insurance), we went the route of having different aircraft for different specialty missions. This is a philosophy of having a special (and correct) tool for a specific task. Not appropriate for everyone but just another option which works great for us. Using this approach results in each aircraft maintaining its designed operating performance for which you most likely purchased it for in the first place.
I bought my first set of skis for our 180 from Airglas in Anchorage back in 1994. Landes 3000's. When they came out with the Hydraulic GLH, I revisited them to "upgrade" to be able to push back into the hangar vice winching and rollers to get the 180 back inside when on the 3000's which was over half the year in North Pole, AK. I believe it was Wes who told me, "Unless you absolutely require them, don't do it", here he is selling these skis and his honesty, character and reasons ring true today. The performance degradation of employing amphibs on the 180 is more severe in comparison to the hydraulic wheel ski.
I was fortunate and blessed to fly the F-16 among other aircraft during my USAF career and no matter how much power an aircraft has, hang enough weight and add enough drag and they ALL lose capability, even the F-16. Bolt on initiatives adding weight and drag in an attempt to make an aircraft into something it is not typically result in disappointment with regard to performance. A lesson even the DOD often forgets. Another cliche' comes to mind; there is no free lunch.

TR wrote:Instead of investing money in hungry amphibious floats (acquisition, maintenance and insurance), we went the route of having different aircraft for different specialty missions.

I decided it was much cheaper to buy a house in a part of the country with ample water for straight floats.

Zzz wrote:

TR wrote:Instead of investing money in hungry amphibious floats (acquisition, maintenance and insurance), we went the route of having different aircraft for different specialty missions.

I decided it was much cheaper to buy a house in a part of the country with ample water for straight floats.

That's ironic as we did the same. Another excellent option! There are usually many courses of action to solve a problem, another great reason for problem solving minded folks to contribute to the dialog on this site.

Having amphibs for years, and also flying a amphib for a living for a while, the mission profile for the work plane as well as my personal plane could not be accomplished with straight floats

Plus

Being able to have the plane live in a hangar

Being able to land at a airport for maintenance

Being able to land at a airport for fuel

Being able to shoot an approach and land if the weather sucks

Maintenance wise my amphibs haven’t had any more issues than normal wheel stuff like tires and brakes on occasion, the weight is a factor but any plane could always weigh less, for me the limitations of straight floats limit me more then the extra weight of the amphibs

Just depends on the mission