58Skylane wrote:Wasn't there more to this thread? There was some interesting post's this morning. Just asking.......

1SeventyZ wrote:

58Skylane wrote:Wasn't there more to this thread? There was some interesting post's this morning. Just asking.......

You've got thread confusion.

gbflyer wrote:I'm often times in the minority, but I don't think VG's do much for the 180/185 wing that Glidergeek is asking about. Not sure about the other Cessna's or Maule. Cub wing, been my experience that they work as advertised. I've tried both brands of VG. I'm not a very good pilot, so I've tried to take advantage of any "improvements" I could afford. If I had it to do over again, I'd take the $2K for the VG's/installation and put it towards Horton or Sportsman, or some more gas.

Have done before and after on 3 C180's and a C185.

The first C180 was a '55 with virgin wing. Put on the Horton. Was a low time pilot at the time, but it did certainly seem much more stable at slow speed.

The second C180 was a '57 with Sportsman. Flew for 50 hours and put on the BLR VG kit. No big difference, but it was a really light, excellent performing airplane to start with.

The last C180 was a '53 and had Sportsman plus MicroAero VG's. Flew it for 100 hours without VG's, then put them on. Only difference myself or my dad could tell was it became slightly heavy in cruise flight on the left wing after the VG installation.

The C185 had the factory cuff first, then the BLR VG's. No big change. Then we put on the Horton. Made a different airplane out of it.

By far the STOL kit, which ever one you choose, makes the most difference. Just remember to slow it down and fly it like it has a STOL kit, and you'll love it. Fly it like it still has the virgin wing, and you might float right on by the end of the strip. It has also been my experience that there is a bit of a speed penalty with all of the airfoil modifications. But there again, any aircraft I have owned has been at least 10kts. slower than what everyone else has.

Never tried the Wing X, but most reports I have gotten are positive, with the exception of possibly losing just a bit of aileron authority. But that is all hearsay as I have not flown one.

gb

once&futr_alaskaflyer wrote:

gbflyer wrote:I'm often times in the minority, but I don't think VG's do much for the 180/185 wing that Glidergeek is asking about. Not sure about the other Cessna's or Maule. Cub wing, been my experience that they work as advertised. I've tried both brands of VG. I'm not a very good pilot, so I've tried to take advantage of any "improvements" I could afford. If I had it to do over again, I'd take the $2K for the VG's/installation and put it towards Horton or Sportsman, or some more gas.

Have done before and after on 3 C180's and a C185.

The first C180 was a '55 with virgin wing. Put on the Horton. Was a low time pilot at the time, but it did certainly seem much more stable at slow speed.

The second C180 was a '57 with Sportsman. Flew for 50 hours and put on the BLR VG kit. No big difference, but it was a really light, excellent performing airplane to start with.

The last C180 was a '53 and had Sportsman plus MicroAero VG's. Flew it for 100 hours without VG's, then put them on. Only difference myself or my dad could tell was it became slightly heavy in cruise flight on the left wing after the VG installation.

The C185 had the factory cuff first, then the BLR VG's. No big change. Then we put on the Horton. Made a different airplane out of it.

By far the STOL kit, which ever one you choose, makes the most difference. Just remember to slow it down and fly it like it has a STOL kit, and you'll love it. Fly it like it still has the virgin wing, and you might float right on by the end of the strip. It has also been my experience that there is a bit of a speed penalty with all of the airfoil modifications. But there again, any aircraft I have owned has been at least 10kts. slower than what everyone else has.

Never tried the Wing X, but most reports I have gotten are positive, with the exception of possibly losing just a bit of aileron authority. But that is all hearsay as I have not flown one.

gb

That's very interesting. I've had a devil of a time working a left wing heavy characteristic out of my 170 ever since I bought her. You can compensate by various methods but by the time everything is tweaked she is out of rig and slower. Never in a million years would I have thought that the VG installation *might* have something to do with it.

My 182 always had a left wing heavy problem. I flew her for the last 7 years and everytime I told the mechanic doing the annuals that it had a heavy wing, they would just kinda muse out loud about it being 'out of rig', and never did attempt to address the problem. This year I helped my DM do the annual on the 182 and we just pulled the wing root flashing off and adjusted the attach point eccentric bushings. Problem solved. On another note, the 180 my cousin and I bought for the 135 cert. earlier this year has the Wing X extentions, Sportsman cuff, Vg's, and flap and aileron gap seals. That bird outperforms our PA-12 (which has VG's). Sure it's a PA-12 (not an -18), but we're talking about a C180 outperforming a Cub on gravel bars with a load (2 pax + gear). It's by far the most fun aircraft I've ever flown.

JamieG wrote:
I would be surprised if Flap Gap Seals enhanced your STOL performance?? Agree with all the rest however.

born2flyak wrote:

JamieG wrote:
I would be surprised if Flap Gap Seals enhanced your STOL performance?? Agree with all the rest however.

I don't know what it flies like with the gap seals off, but as it is I can land it in about 300ish feet empty, and takeoff is shorter. All the while on landing the nose is at this incredible angle and the tailwheel will want to touch first. It just won't stall, you have to burst the throttle and come in hot to make a 3 point landing. I've flown it backwards taking off into a 35 knot wind before.

born2flyak wrote:...
My 182 always had a left wing heavy problem. I flew her for the last 7 years and everytime I told the mechanic doing the annuals that it had a heavy wing, they would just kinda muse out loud about it being 'out of rig', and never did attempt to address the problem. This year I helped my DM do the annual on the 182 and we just pulled the wing root flashing off and adjusted the attach point eccentric bushings. Problem solved....

The wing attach eccentrics are the first thing to check with a heavy-winged Cessna. No offense, but I'm surprised it took you 7 years. My C150TD and my buddy's C180 both still had heavy wings even after taking both eccentrics to the (opposite) stops. His solution was to rig the flap down on the heavy side. My (better) solution was to tweak down the trailing edge of the aileron on the light side, and tweak it up on the heavy side. Worked great- just like adding an aileron trim tab. You don't have to tweak much- just put your thumbs in between the corrigations & lightly deflect the metal. If you can see what you did from more than about 12" away, you went too far.

porterjet wrote:Quite a few jets even have VGs. The bad news is that since they came with the airplane they are also on the MEL. One gone is normally OK, depending on the type airplane, but two and you are grounded.

once&futr_alaskaflyer wrote:

porterjet wrote:Quite a few jets even have VGs. The bad news is that since they came with the airplane they are also on the MEL. One gone is normally OK, depending on the type airplane, but two and you are grounded.

My installation came with an addendum sticker to the AFM indicating the airplane is unairworthy if four or more are missing.