Squash wrote:

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.

My ride is definetely not the weakist link in the "performance" equation.

In a perfect world, I'd have a 180 and a super cub. I'm half way there. I've flown several 170s and have tried to buy one but even though they are lighter they are nowhere near a supercub and everybody tries to modify the 170 to make it into a baby 180. I couldn't live with a stock 170, it needs a bigger engine like the O-360. I'm perfectly happy with a much closer to stock 180. I don't want a newer 180 or a 185. A 54-59 skywagon is the perfect do-it-all plane, when bone stock. If you need to do cross country, land and take off fairly short it'll do it all. When I get to the point where I don't need to get there relatively fast, I dream of a cub cause they are just so, so much more fun to fly around.

Why would you prefer that vintage 180 over a newer 180 or 185?

I’m new to this type of airplane (kind of) and I flew a 50 something 180 on floats with 2 people and thought it was a dog.

Ended up getting a 185 and its a beast.

soyAnarchisto wrote:... I'm perfectly happy with a much closer to stock 180. I don't want a newer 180 or a 185. A 54-59 skywagon is the perfect do-it-all plane, when bone stock. If you need to do cross country, land and take off fairly short it'll do it all. When I get to the point where I don't need to get there relatively fast, I dream of a cub cause they are just so, so much more fun to fly around.

x2.
My airplane collection is limited to one, so far anyways, & my 53 180 meets my needs perfectly.
A 182 & a souped-up 170 seem pretty close in performance.
I know a number of people who own a 180/185 & some version of a cub, that makes morse sense to me.
But an airplane choice only has to make sense to the owner.

Ross4289 wrote:Why would you prefer that vintage 180 over a newer 180 or 185?

I’m new to this type of airplane (kind of) and I flew a 50 something 180 on floats with 2 people and thought it was a dog.

Ended up getting a 185 and its a beast.

Again, a lot has to do with the feel of the plane. And other things. There was a time when I owned a 66 H model 180, and at the same time flew a 1985 185 at work. My 180 had 5 pounds more useful load than that 185 (both on floats) and burned 5 gallons an hour less fuel. And it was more “fun” to fly.
The 185 is a great airplane, but for a personal plane, I’d take the 180 every day.

But, that’s ME, and it’s fine with me if others differ in their preferences. With $7 a gallon gas, that 185 would lose a lot of its luster for ME.

Good on you for preferring the 185, though, it is a great plane. To each his own.

MTV