During my search for the perfect C-170, I ran across something I have not seen before. That is a C-170A, with B model gear legs. I have heard of 180 gear legs being put on 170s, but never B to A. Has anyone else heard of this mod? Evidently, this plane was badly damaged, and was cobbled together with a lot of different parts during restoration in 1999. When I asked if the logs were complete, the response was, "As complete as you would expect. There might be some 337s missing from the early days."
Am I wrong to be suspicious of this plane? Am I expecting too much? I have not seen the plane or the logs. They are pretty far from where I live, and I don't want to waste a trip. I got the info during a phone conversation with the owner.
Thanks again for indulging my questions, I've already learned a lot from y'all.
The FAA should have a copy of all the 337's that were actually turned in for that airplane. You can buy a copy of all the FAA files on it,I don't know how much or what format (CD,microfiche,paper?).
I think the B model lady legs would be a good fit for an A model,or any 170. The lady legs are a bit stiffer than the ealier model 170 legs, but the same length & rake. I have later-model 180 legs,and I don't really care for the forward rake of them--they put the main gear wheels about 3-1/2" farther forward than the stock legs. IMHO the best 180 legs for the 170 would be the early 53-54,they only put the mains about 1/2" farther forward than stock.
Then there's the whole issue of the 180 legs being longer (about an inch?) & stiffer & heavier than stock 170 legs. Is this good,or bad?
I'd suggest you follow Erics lead and order microfiche copies for $4 (?) from the FAA website. Also, contact the mechanic who last annualed the airplane and ask him to re-search the aircraft logs and make sure all the paperwork is in order including all 337's because you intend to buy the airplane and will be discussing any deficiencies with the FAA.
Then hire your own qualified IA to perform an annual inspection as your pre-buy inspection, and if he doesn't find anything too far wrong, and you can get it for a price you like, go for it. Later B-model legs are a factory approved replacement part for early legs. 180/185 gear legs are not factory approved. (They are approved only by some other method.)
'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.
Records are available on CD for $5. Don't know if they still do microfiche. I got mine on fiche a few years ago and it cost somewhere between $3-$4. Go with the CD, it's a lot easier.
Eric, I'd say the only disadvantage of having the wheels too far forward is that it makes wheel landings more challenging. I find that when the wheels are far forward, as on a Pitts Special, you need to make three point landings. With the wheels further back wheel landings are nicer.
Rudy
Actually,mine is pretty easy to wheel on. Especially nice gettiing on the brakes for a short landing while still up on the mains, without having to worry as much about nosing it over. What I don't like is that the tail is too heavy when taxiing (or pushing it around) on soft ground. Also,I think the mains being farther ahead of the CG increases the tendency for the tail to want to overtake the nose. Ain't happened yet,but I think if the mains weren't so far forward it would be better. That also makes it harder for the tail to come up by itself on the takeoff roll with a load in back.
Yeah, I think Cessna knew what they were doing when they changed the gear legs on the later 170's--they went heavier but didn't change the rake. The 180 undoubtedly needed the additional rake on the gear legs due to the heavier engine/prop,which they discovered after only 2 years of production. I think they actually changed the rake on the gear legs after they switched from the O-470-A to the slightly heavier -J engine in mid-54.
I still think the best gear for a 170 are the mid-53 & later 170B lady legs (p/n 0541118-2 & -3) and the 53-54 180 legs (p/n 0741001-1 & -2).
Eric,
some months ago I switched from the later, raked 180 gear legs to the earlier, non-raked ones and promised to report back on the difference in handling. It aligned better this time and I was on skis before I flew it again, so not a direct back-to-back comparision...
It's noticably heavier in the front. I think the tail is lighter and easier to get up sooner. Easier to wheel land. Landing in deep, heavy snow it could easily nose over - this was never a possibility with the old gear. Not really sure which I like better. Either's preferable to that spindly stock gear <g>...
IMO that early non-raked gear on 180's was a mistake Cessna realized and corrected after 2 years of nose-over incidents. The two I've seen were both on that early gear.
Just a thought.... but the O470-A and J (which originally powered
the early C-180s) are lighter than the later models (K, R, L, etc.).
At least one source puts the J at weighing 30-35 lbs less than
a K or R.
Perhaps at least one reason for the gear design / axle centerline re-location was to allow for the heavier weight of the later engines....?
I agree the early ones are easy to get the tail *way* up there with
agressive braking....
I have not seen the plane or the logs. They are pretty far from where I live, and I don't want to waste a trip. I got the info during a phone conversation with the owner.
