The International Cessna 170 Association

DaveF wrote:

pdb wrote:"original main gear wheels of the Cessna 170."

Meaning Goodyear, not Cleveland?

Yes.. Goodyear.

I'll bet the Feds don't realize the Cleveland wheels they are use to seeing are not the wheels they are talking about with this letter. Wonder if the '61 letter specified Cleveland or Goodyear wheels?

COME ON GUYS!!!!

We finally get an approval letter from the FAA and you start picking it apart. Let it lie! "Original wheel" obviously refers to size, not make and model, otherwise there would have been an AML. Just note what wheel is used on the 337 and that's it. Don't make easy hard!!!!!

I agree Richard, in '61 they didn't care what wheel was used. But now the Feds do and they don't have the knowledge or are not allowed to decide it that it shouldn't make any difference what wheel is used.

The feds have given us an approval, don't argure about it, just use it! If Goodyear wheels were good enough for the original approval, Clevelands are better today whether anyone in the FAA knows it or not. Its just a shame there is always a point of contention in those letters. Why couldn't they just write "8.50-6 tires are ok". It's still up to the owner to make sure any wheel used on their airplane is legal.

If there is any doubt if Clevelands are ok for 8.50-6 tires, there is 40+ years of evidence in Alaska alone that they are. That letter would not have been written if Clevelands fell apart with 8.50 tires on them. In fact, there are a couple of 30+ year old STCs for 8.50-10 tires and 29x11-10 tires mounted on 10"wheel adapters to be either bolted or glued onto 6" Cleveland wheels. There are thousands of trouble-free hours on those wheel adapter modified Clevelands on planes with gross weights up to 3600lb. So our measley 2200lb gross cannot be a problem. So we shouldn't word-smith the letter to find some hidden meaning that isn't there. Just accept the letter as approval, who cares what wheel is used as long as that wheel is legal for that airplane?

This is the kind of stuff that will drive me to build a Vans RV-14 someday.

I agree that Double pucks are over kill 90% of the time. Where is the approval for 8:50's on single puck Cleveland's?

I guess I didn't read to the end of the thread But yes,,,,, the FAA is being that particular and so are some IA's that have their lively hoods on the line and their asses!

Sorry, I didn't mean to throw cold water on this. I would not sweat this level of paperwork, but my IA may care. We're friends in part because I appreciate his concerns.

Only Bruce can use this letter for larger tires!

gahorn wrote:Only Bruce can use this letter for larger tires!

Yes I laugh at the masses that so short sightedly switched from Goodyear to Cleveland wheels. And I'm not the only one. Corresponding with member Bob Blevins of MD recently I found out he is still running Goodyear crosswind gear as well.

I spoke to Mr. August Asay of the Anchorage FAA ACO today regarding his letter regarding his 3/26/13 letter to Atlee Dodge on the use of 8:50s. This is what he said:

1) His letter was only meant to address the substitution of tires, not wheels or brakes.
2) If you have the original Goodyear wheels with 6:00x6, 7:00x6 or 8:00x6 tires (already approved on the TCDS) and want to put on 8:50s, just do so as a minor alteration.
3) if you have 6" Cleveland wheel and brakes installed with an STC or field approval, are currently using 6:00x6, 7:00x6 or 8:00x6 tires, and want to put on 8:50x6s, just do so as a minor alteration.

I got the distinct impression that he considers the matter to be administrivia and not worth much more of the FAA's time as he regards 8:50s as a basic operating requirement here in Alaska with a time proven record. He sounded pretty reasonable. ( Is he related to BlueLdr?)

BTW, he is a 170 owner.

Will he sign your message post?

bigrenna wrote: Tell the real truth Tony... You just dont like spending the crazy dough on the good stuff. You and I both know what you would put on the 185 if you could have anything you wanted. The key word in your post was "compromise"

Are you really busting my chops about not spending "crazy dough on the good stuff"? Why didn't you spend the crazy dough to get a 185???

Lopez wrote:

bigrenna wrote: Tell the real truth Tony... You just dont like spending the crazy dough on the good stuff. You and I both know what you would put on the 185 if you could have anything you wanted. The key word in your post was "compromise"

Are you really busting my chops about not spending "crazy dough on the good stuff"? Why didn't you spend the crazy dough to get a 185???

I didn't spend the money for a 180 or 185 because I hate the look of that ugly tail. (Sorry, Frank.)

I had owned a 206 previously. If it weren't for the beauty of round tail feathers....I'd probably still have it....it was a lot better airplane than any 180/185 despite the big wheel up front.

gahorn wrote:I didn't spend the money for a 180 or 185 because I hate the look of that ugly tail. (Sorry, Frank.)

I had owned a 206 previously. If it weren't for the beauty of round tail feathers....I'd probably still have it....it was a lot better airplane than any 180/185 despite the big wheel up front.

I'll take 300HP and just keep the good looking tail on my girlfriend.