motoadve wrote:I will be happy to do that.
Something I really like about the 170 is the light feel on the controls and also how slow you can approach, I never look at the GPS or ASI to look at the speed, but downloaded the GPS from the GoPro and as you can see , it approaches slow, (calm winds on this approach).

Sounds good.
The 180 is a bit heavier on controls compared to the super cub and the pacer we sold to upgrade to the 180.
It was quite surprising though how slow the 180 flies. A lot closer to cub speeds on the low end than we expected for a big bird.

And I think for most of us budget comes in. A 170 is a little cheaper to own than a 180.

Though now I am looking for a cub project as well so that's out the window...

A "fairly light" 170 B is orders of magnitude "lighter feeling" than ANY 180 I've ever flown. By comparison, 180s feel almost "truck like", as does my current 175. Only part of that has to do with all up weight, but doubtless that's a big factor.

Motoadve is absolutely correct that landing a 170B with a Lycoming engine is just plain fun, as compared to other, heavier Cessnas.

Even at gross weight, the 170 has a very light feel to it. The down side is, you have to fly it ALL the time, so long cross country flight gets tiring.....one of the modern very light autopilots would be nice, but $$$$ and adding weight.

MTV

I think the early model 180s have the best combination of performance with a lighter feel - albeit not quite as light as a C170B. Seems like your C170 satisfies the mission perfectly which is really all that matters. Plus you are getting to fly a tailwheel aircraft which for me is what truly produces the "Fun Factor."


Josh

Sold my 170 and got a cub. Personally I think the cub is much more fun. Can't shoot coyotes out of a Cessna. Some say shooting coyotes out of a cub is more fun than sex, I might agree. So many more places to land with a cub. See my avitar never would have even thought about that in a 170.

Coyote wrote:Sold my 170 and got a cub. Personally I think the cub is much more fun. Can't shoot coyotes out of a Cessna. Some say shooting coyotes out of a cub is more fun than sex, I might agree. So many more places to land with a cub. See my avitar never would have even thought about that in a 170.

I agree, sorta. Mission is everything.

That said, I bought my old 180 hp 170 from an Alaskan old timer. He’d been an insurance adjuster for many years, and used the 170 to go look at wrecked planes. Think about that for a minute.

Many, many times, I had pilots come up to me and ask if that was Graham Mower’s 170. Then they’d tell me the places they’d seen that 170, parked next to a balled up Cub, and wondered where the hell Mower had landed. That included a couple of guys who were the “real deal” as to no joke off Airport stuff. They both said they’d seen Mower land that thing in places they wouldn’t go with a Cub. One told me went out of his way on the way home cause he didn’t believe That 170 would come out of there……but, Mower was gone.

All that was NO VGs, NO cuff, just a hell of a lot of skill and 8.50 x 6 tires.

Go figure.

But you’re right: Trying to shoot coyotes out of a 170 wouldn’t be much fun.

MTV

mtv wrote:.... They both said they’d seen Mower land that thing in places they wouldn’t go with a Cub.....
All that was NO VGs, NO cuff, just a hell of a lot of skill and 8.50 x 6 tires. ...

Something to think about when compiling a list of "must have" mods.

mtv wrote:A "fairly light" 170 B is orders of magnitude "lighter feeling" than ANY 180 I've ever flown. By comparison, 180s feel almost "truck like", as does my current 175. Only part of that has to do with all up weight, but doubtless that's a big factor.

Motoadve is absolutely correct that landing a 170B with a Lycoming engine is just plain fun, as compared to other, heavier Cessnas.

Even at gross weight, the 170 has a very light feel to it. The down side is, you have to fly it ALL the time, so long cross country flight gets tiring.....one of the modern very light autopilots would be nice, but $$$$ and adding weight.

MTV

One of the most boring flights I have ever done was flying my brother to Seldovia in his 170B to pick up his commercial boat. After I took off from his strip close to Kenai and trimmed out for cruise flight I flew arms crossed and didn't touch the yoke till it was time to land at Seldovia. Same on the return flight. First flight I ever had in a 170B. One of the most honest flying birds I have ever flown. A little rudder pressure here and there to pick up a low wing from the SLIGHT turbulence. Agree on it being much lighter on the controls than any 180 I have flown.

My 170B is like that as well. The pitch trim can be sensitive to dial-in exactly, but once it's there, it's on rails, especially in smooth air. Minor occasional inputs on the rudder is all that is needed. I also guess it depends how well-rigged the bird is.

The Holy Order of The Round Tail’s and Knights of The Round Tail’s is a honourable society to hold membership in.

I think a 180 hp 170 hits a real “sweet spot” for the average GA pilot

Low ground effect and then down drainage, the 0-300 did fine as well.

Actually, the 170 controls are far lighter than a 180s. I can't explain that, but it's a fact, and I've owned one of each and flown several examples of each. If you've never flown a 170, it's hard to imagine how light they are on the controls.

MTV

That would be less airspeed and less weight for lighter controls when structures are similar, right Mike. The Cub has flat controls. Cessnas don't have as much camber from ribs in elevator, rudder, and aileron as CallAir, but have more than Cub. CallAir, even with half full hopper, had the lightest controls of anything I ever flew. Curved ribs just like the wing in all controls.

contactflying wrote:Low ground effect and then down drainage, the 0-300 did fine as well.

I get the "low ground effect" but maybe you could explain "down drainage" departing off a lake surrounded by 50 to 100 foot trees in Northern Ontario

I was content with my Conti but when I was faced a full overhaul and a nice 0-360 was offered to me it seemed like the better route to go. It did turn into a bit of a rabbit hole but in the end I'll have ticked off most, if not all the "desirable" upgrade and be well set for the Summer 2022.

Good points.

I don't care for those rounded surfaces at all. Looks archaic to me. What I think would be cool is a C170C. Cessna only built one of them and it was later turned into the C172 prototype. So to recreate one, perhaps get a hold of a straight-tail 172 and turn it into a taildragger plus 180 hp Lyc.

Ying & Yang; too each his own, thankfully big brother let's me play along in the fun and games

C180_guy wrote:I don't care for those rounded surfaces at all. Looks archaic to me. What I think would be cool is a C170C. Cessna only built one of them and it was later turned into the C172 prototype. So to recreate one, perhaps get a hold of a straight-tail 172 and turn it into a taildragger plus 180 hp Lyc.

The term is “classic” and “I” dig it……

skyward II wrote:

C180_guy wrote:I don't care for those rounded surfaces at all. Looks archaic to me. What I think would be cool is a C170C. Cessna only built one of them and it was later turned into the C172 prototype. So to recreate one, perhaps get a hold of a straight-tail 172 and turn it into a taildragger plus 180 hp Lyc.

The term is “classic” and “I” dig it……

As do I but that's just me too each is own. Just get out and enjoy it what ever shape you prefer.

hotrod180 wrote:

mtv wrote:.... They both said they’d seen Mower land that thing in places they wouldn’t go with a Cub.....
All that was NO VGs, NO cuff, just a hell of a lot of skill and 8.50 x 6 tires. ...

Something to think about when compiling a list of "must have" mods.

Exactly. At the top of that must have mod list is a person who can do some of that pilot shit.