180HP 170B vs C180

A place to relax and discuss flying topics.

Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher

jeffpohl4
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2018 7:29 pm

180HP 170B vs C180

Post by jeffpohl4 »

I know this is likely to stir up quite the debate but that is not my intention. Here's what I'm looking to find out folks. I dont fly much cross country anymore so what i want is the best Cessna for STOL. I want to play around in the pattern, bee bop around hay fields and just dink around in general. I love getting in and out short so I have wanted a 170B w/ a lyc o360 conversion and a sportsman stol kit...these are tough to find so plan B would be a c180. I know its going to burn more fuel but will it outperform the modded out 170B in STOL? if anyone has any experience in both i would love to hear your thoughts. Thanks Guys!! Jeff
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 20967
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by GAHorn »

It was a 182/180 that I was looking for when I discovered that a normally aspirated 206 costs similarly, burns the same fuel (13 gph) and has the same mx costs and runs the same speeds (144 kts) with the IO-520-A and 2-blade McCauley....but carries a LOT MORE USEFUL LOAD. (It will carry as a useful load more than it's empty wt.... typically around 1500 lbs useful)
For an all-around great airplane for ANY work...and it's a rock-solid IFR platform.
I recommend a normally aspirated C-206(U). With full fuel and 2 persons it is off the ground in 4-500 ft and clears a 50' obstacle in 900'. With full fuel, 3 persons (2 of which wt is over 200 lbs and one is 350 lbs in a rear seat) with a Lazy-boy recliner carried as frieght and 8 water melons we left Ruidoso, NM (elev 6800+) and was airborne in 1400', climbed to 11K' and went to San Angelo, TX to land on a dirt strip to deliver the recliner as a gift. It's amazing what that airplane will carry. The ony downside is when it's light.... full flap landings are tricky because it wants to land on the nosewheel.... so use half-flaps instead or be prepared to use a lot of nose-up trim and fight that on a go-around. :wink:
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
User avatar
c170b53
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 8:01 pm

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by c170b53 »

Floats+skies+180 = MONEY I think a decent 180 is just too hard to find now
Jim McIntosh..
1953 C170B S/N 25656
02 K1200RS
bat443
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:41 am

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by bat443 »

No, the 180 with will not outperform the 180 hp 170B if they both have the same mods. The 170B will land shorter just because it will have an empty weight 150 or more pounds lighter. As for takeoff the pounds per horsepower are the same so again the lighter weight makes the difference.

I have a little 180 (1971) time, a little more 185 (1973) time, about the same amount of time, just under 100 hours, in a 180 hp 170B (1954) with the 80 inch Hartzell, without a STOL kit that I am currently flying, as in the 185. It is the fourth 170 I have had and I have around 600 hours of 170 time. The 180hp 170B is a rocket, it is a blast to just shoot landings at various grass strips. If that was all I wanted to do, on wheels only, it is the airplane I would keep, but I am only flying it until I get my 180H (1969) project finished and flying. I have landed it a few times behind my house, a rolling strip of mowed grass next to the woods, and with just me (250 pounds) and full fuel use around 400-450 with light braking, use less when leaving even with a tail wind. The problem with the converted 170B I have is that the empty weight is 1480 pounds which leaves little for useful, even less if I were to install wheel skis which I intend to have on the 180. I could shave some weight here and there but it is not worth it for an airplane I don't plan to keep. So for me even though the 180 hp 170B is a great performer it is just not a 180. It is also 30 mph slower than a 180 if you want to go somewhere, fuel burn per mile is about the same. I used to fly my 185 just out cruising around on nice evenings at 115 mph (170 speeds) on the same 7.5 gal per hour as a 170. As for George"s 206 recommendation, for a snob like me the little wheel is on the wrong end, like I told a friend, if I had to fly a nose wheel airplane I would buy a boat.

Tim
User avatar
c170b53
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 8:01 pm

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by c170b53 »

Tim, what will you have (aprox $)in your 180 when it’s finished? What would it cost you to find a comparable 180 if you wanted to buy one now complete?
I think a few guys have beaten themselves up trying to get this decision right for their situation.
Jim McIntosh..
1953 C170B S/N 25656
02 K1200RS
hilltop170
Posts: 3481
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 6:05 pm

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by hilltop170 »

gahorn wrote:It was a 182/180 that I was looking for when I discovered that a normally aspirated 206 costs similarly, burns the same fuel (13 gph) and has the same mx costs and runs the same speeds (144 kts) with the IO-520-A and 2-blade McCauley....but carries a LOT MORE USEFUL LOAD. (It will carry as a useful load more than it's empty wt.... typically around 1500 lbs useful)
For an all-around great airplane for ANY work...and it's a rock-solid IFR platform.
I recommend a normally aspirated C-206(U). With full fuel and 2 persons it is off the ground in 4-500 ft and clears a 50' obstacle in 900'. With full fuel, 3 persons (2 of which wt is over 200 lbs and one is 350 lbs in a rear seat) with a Lazy-boy recliner carried as frieght and 8 water melons we left Ruidoso, NM (elev 6800+) and was airborne in 1400', climbed to 11K' and went to San Angelo, TX to land on a dirt strip to deliver the recliner as a gift. It's amazing what that airplane will carry. The ony downside is when it's light.... full flap landings are tricky because it wants to land on the nosewheel.... so use half-flaps instead or be prepared to use a lot of nose-up trim and fight that on a go-around. :wink:

George-
Everything you said is very true, but did you hit your head on something? He said he wants to bee-bop and dink around. The 206 is not a bee-bop dink around airplane!

And I bet $100 he wants a taildragger.

The 170/180hp would be much higher on the he fun-quotient scale than a 180. Lighter, more nimble, much better vis over the nose all add up to a great bee-bop dink around plane.
Richard Pulley
2014-2016 TIC170A Past President
1951 170A, N1715D, s/n 20158, O-300D
Owned from 1973 to 1984.
Bought again in 2006 after 22 years.
It's not for sale!
bagarre
Posts: 2615
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:35 pm

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by bagarre »

Why settle for a 180hp 170 when you can have a 210hp 170?
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 20967
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by GAHorn »

Yeah..Tim and Richard... we all know that a taildragger is the FUNNEST way to do things... but what he actually posted was :
jeffpohl4 wrote:...so what i want is the best Cessna for STOL.... i would love to hear your thoughts. Thanks Guys!! Jeff
My experience with my 206 was that as an UNMODIFIED airplane the airplane was a fantastic amount of fun AND capability...so I felt I had to suggest it...

When I hit the Lottery I"m puttin' in a TCM IO-360 w/constant speed and disregard the published wt limits and fly it! (By that time I'll be bluEldrs age and will have completely adopted his attitude!)

My second airplane will be a Boeing:
1024px-Boeing_314_Clipper-cropped.jpg
Then I'll get one of these for all my friends to travel in :
Chicago & Southern Connie.jpg
-- Walter Mitty
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
bat443
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:41 am

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by bat443 »

Jim I am hoping to stay below $100M but its not going to happen and I am an A&P IA so can do a lot of what needs to be done myself. I gave $42M and it came home on a trailer. The sheet metal work was done. Still needs interior (Airtex leather six seats and head liner last week $3600, order from Selkirk next week will be $3000 for interior panels and insulation, still need floor covering) paint ($3000 to $4000 and I do all the work) used prop (paid $4500) instrument overhaul (probably $1500) overhaul of O470R (23,000) and a biggy radios , not sure if I want minimal IFR or not but ADSB probably ($15,000-25,000), tires, battery, various required STC's ($4000-5000). You will notice there is no labor in here anywhere other than the engine overhaul. Probably would sell within a few months for $120M maybe a little more. I could buy a same model 180, if I could find one, for $80-90M but it would have a 1000 hour engine, old radios, a worn interior and I would still have to work on it every once in a while to keep things working.

For comparison the 180 hp 170B I am flying is kind of a beater, fair paint, peeling in places, fair interior, com radio, transponder, Garmin 296, a couple of repairs for damage, baggage door, 80 inch Hartzell. 6000 hour airframe, 1900 hour engine. I think I can sell it for mid $50's, I gave less but the seller needed a larger down payment for a construction loan on a new house that week. A same condition and vintage 180 would be $60-65M

The problem with trying to buy a 180 hp 170's is the number available is limited and when one does get sold it is to a friend or friend of a friend. I have people ask me to let them know when I am ready to sell and have received blind calls because the caller has heard that I may have a 180 hp 170 for sale.

The option that the original post did not mention and I have not had a chance to try but might work for what he and others want to do is the McCauley 8042 prop on the stock engine. I would like to try one sometime don't expect to get the chance though as the 180 will be my Cessna till I quit flying.

Probably the most significant thing I can say is if I hadn't already had the 180 project, I wouldn't be looking for one, the 180 hp 170B is a blast. i know that lots of people will disagree with me but the 180 hp is the engine that the 170B should have come with. Just as a reminder I have had two other O300 170B's, a O300 170A, a different 180H and a A185F.

hope this helps, Tim
hilltop170
Posts: 3481
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 6:05 pm

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by hilltop170 »

jeffpohl4 wrote:........what I want is the best Cessna for STOL........ Thanks Guys!! Jeff
As George pointed out and I glossed-over, Jeff wanted "the best STOL Cessna". Although Jeff only mentioned the C-170/180hp and C-180, in my opinion, the L-19/C-305 is THE best STOL Cessna, hands down, to bee bop and dink around in, 213hp, stick, tandem seats, BIG windows, and a tailwheel.

And if you want to bee-bop in style, get a SM-1019 Turbine Birddog, 420hp turbine, extended fuselage, Beta prop (but with an ugly tail). Awesome airplane but not officially a Cessna.
Richard Pulley
2014-2016 TIC170A Past President
1951 170A, N1715D, s/n 20158, O-300D
Owned from 1973 to 1984.
Bought again in 2006 after 22 years.
It's not for sale!
User avatar
c170b53
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 8:01 pm

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by c170b53 »

Thanks Tim, I had to ask, as it seemed to me you would have a good answer for the original poster.
Jim McIntosh..
1953 C170B S/N 25656
02 K1200RS
bat443
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:41 am

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by bat443 »

You are welcome Jim, it is a hard decision so information helps.

Richard, I was talking to a buddy of mine from Idaho and a good friend of his has a SM-1019. He has flown with him quite a bit in the backcountry. His comment was that it has a great climb rate but has a longer ground run on takeoff than he expected.

George, my 185 had a useful of 1518 pounds, cruised the same speeds as your 206, lower empty weight, better takeoff and landing performance, and has a tail wheel. I never felt the need to move a recliner chair so don't know if I could have loaded one through a front door, but I do know guys who have hauled a refrigerator in 180's on floats to their cabins in Canada.

For pure fun, 180 (or 210) hp 170B

Tim
User avatar
n2582d
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 4:58 am

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by n2582d »

bat443 wrote:Jim I am hoping to stay below $100M ... .
8O Tim, you need to quit getting your parts directly from Cessna! I’m hoping my project will come in under $100K. :wink:
... in my opinion, the L-19/C-305 is THE best STOL Cessna, hands down, to bee bop and dink around in, 213hp, stick, tandem seats, BIG windows, and a tailwheel.

And if you want to bee-bop in style, get a SM-1019 Turbine Birddog, 420hp turbine, extended fuselage, Beta prop (but with an ugly tail). Awesome airplane but not officially a Cessna.
My first “real” job (after being a CFI) was flying and maintaining a Ector Super Mountaineer - an L-19 with a 250 hp O-540 - for the undercover guys at Riverside County Sheriff’s dept. 800+ hours of windows open fun with the government paying for gas! Amazing performance, especially after the Bush STOL kit was added. It could fly so slow that it could fly backwards through the Banning pass! :lol: But I guess technically, like the SM-1019, this L-19 wasn’t a Cessna either as I believe Ector had the type certificate.
Gary
hilltop170
Posts: 3481
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 6:05 pm

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by hilltop170 »

Tim-
That is correct, the SM-1019 is a fairly heavy version of the L-19, extended fuselage with a rear passenger door and four 21gal fuel tanks, etc. I have over 100 hours in one and it does take a little longer to take off than a stock Birddog but it will still get off shorter than a similar weight 180 or 185. And it will stop on a dime with the Beta. It is one of the most pleasant flying airplanes I have ever flown, silky smooth controls and it will climb from sea level right up to 12,500'. Awesome performer.

Gary-
Air Repair now has the Type Certificate for the L-19 and Pete Jones is still building new ones from NOS parts.
Richard Pulley
2014-2016 TIC170A Past President
1951 170A, N1715D, s/n 20158, O-300D
Owned from 1973 to 1984.
Bought again in 2006 after 22 years.
It's not for sale!
User avatar
n2582d
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 4:58 am

Re: 180HP 170B vs C180

Post by n2582d »

hilltop170 wrote:... Air Repair now has the Type Certificate for the L-19 and Pete Jones is still building new ones from NOS parts.
Was the O-540 an STC or was that part of Ector's T.C.?
Gary
Post Reply