172B's / O300-D

T

Todd82

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 19, 2017
Messages
984
Location
OH
Display Name
Display name:
Todd
I've been a low wing guy, but between my desire for two doors and the wife's disdain for climbing on a wing I've been giving the Cessnas a look lately.

First off, a 172 vs an equivalent Cherokee is a rip off but that's another story.

I came upon a 172B with the O300-D. I've searched all through here and came upon old threads about parts (mainly bottom end) availability, etc. but nothing really recent. Any big money AD's to be concerned about like the Piper spar thing (thanks Riddle) on the B's? How about that engine? I've seen posts everything from it's smoother than a 4 banger and better, to it makes ice better than their freezer.

Also, anyone willing to talk sense into me back into the Piper fold will be appreciated too lol
 
All the PA-24, PA-28 and PA-32 owners (not to mention Malibu and MANY others) get past the door thing.

What's it to you?

Not trying to bully. Simply curious.
 
all 0-300-A thru D do not have parts problem. The 0-300-A / C145 have a crank that has a shortage, but we can use a 0-300-D crank in them, the prop must to be changed to a 6 hole prop/crank, but there are plenty of them.
You wouldn't buy a 172 that needs a engine anyway.

Or get a C-177
1972 CESSNA 177RG
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
all 0-300-A thru D do not have parts problem. The 0-300-A / C145 have a crank that has a shortage, but we can use a 0-300-D crank in them, the prop must to be changed to a 6 hole prop/crank, but there are plenty of them.
You wouldn't buy a 172 that needs a engine anyway.

Or get a C-177
1972 CESSNA 177RG
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info, as for the RG Cardinal though I'm a low time guy and the insurance company would be more than happy to bend me over premiums.
 
Rgbeard said:
All the PA-24, PA-28 and PA-32 owners (not to mention Malibu and MANY others) get past the door thing.

What's it to you?

Not trying to bully. Simply curious.
Click to expand...
Irrational fear of being in a position where the singular door jams in an emergency egress, incapacitated passenger, etc.

And I figure as I get older the Piper slide won't get any easier.
 
Bonanzas have one crew door. Nobody seems to care about the single door on a Bonanza. :dunno: Just when it is on a Piper.
 
Todd82 said:
I've seen posts everything from it's smoother than a 4 banger and better, to it makes ice better than their freezer.
l
Click to expand...
There are no ADs on a 0-300- some of the older the carb and mufflers do. (real old ones)

They are smoother than a 4 banker for a reason, they have 2 more cylinders.
the 0-300- does not make anymore ice than the 0320 because they rout the air induct thru the oil pan just like the 0-320.
any engine that has a remote mounted air box will make ice. the 0-300- does not.
 
Last edited:
Todd82 said:
Thanks for the info, as for the RG Cardinal though I'm a low time guy and the insurance company would be more than happy to bend me over premiums.
Click to expand...

You should check with your insurance agent. Paying an extra few hundred or even a thousand bucks for a couple of years is pretty cheap compared to the cost of buying a first airplane, then upgrading to a second one.
 
kyleb said:
You should check with your insurance agent. Paying an extra few hundred or even a thousand bucks for a couple of years is pretty cheap compared to the cost of buying a first airplane, then upgrading to a second one.
Click to expand...
Truth .. :)
 
Todd82 said:
First off, a 172 vs an equivalent Cherokee is a rip off but that's another story.
Click to expand...

I always think it's funny when someone says something like that. There is a reason for the price differential. Not trying to cast stones, but you think it's a rip off and you're still considering a C172...

Todd82 said:
Also, anyone willing to talk sense into me back into the Piper fold will be appreciated too lol
Click to expand...

Based on my experience I think it's easier to ingress/egress a PA28 than a C172 so I think as you age the PA28 wins that criteria.

If your experience is in PA28's you will likely get the best insurance quotes for a PA28 until you build C172 time.

I have always preferred the handling/feel of the PA28 over the C172. It just feels like a more stable platform to me.
 
Todd82 said:
Irrational fear of being in a position where the singular door jams in an emergency egress, incapacitated passenger, etc.

And I figure as I get older the Piper slide won't get any easier.
Click to expand...

then you kick out a window?

I understand irrational fears. Choose yours that you wish to perpetuate carefully so that you don’t make overly silly decisions.
 
anyone thinking that it is easy to get out of a PA-28 isn't old :)
 
Morgan3820 said:
Bonanzas have one crew door. Nobody seems to care about the single door on a Bonanza. :dunno: Just when it is on a Piper.
Click to expand...

The middle windows in bonanzas are hinged/latched, and can act as emergency exits.

But to your point, I don't hear this complaint about Mooneys either. :D
 
schmookeeg said:
The middle windows in bonanzas are hinged/latched, and can act as emergency exits.

But to your point, I don't hear this complaint about Mooneys either. :D
Click to expand...
Mooneys-- Bonanza. same ***** different reason.
 
Todd82 said:
I've been a low wing guy, but between my desire for two doors and the wife's disdain for climbing on a wing I've been giving the Cessnas a look lately.

First off, a 172 vs an equivalent Cherokee is a rip off but that's another story.

I came upon a 172B with the O300-D. I've searched all through here and came upon old threads about parts (mainly bottom end) availability, etc. but nothing really recent. Any big money AD's to be concerned about like the Piper spar thing (thanks Riddle) on the B's? How about that engine? I've seen posts everything from it's smoother than a 4 banger and better, to it makes ice better than their freezer.

Also, anyone willing to talk sense into me back into the Piper fold will be appreciated too lol
Click to expand...
Buy the Cessna. Keep the wife happy. My wife did not like Cessnas, so I bought a Piper. For us married guys, it is all about what she wants, assuming that we want her involved with the hobby. All other considerations are subordinate.
 
Morgan3820 said:
Buy the Cessna. Keep the wife happy. My wife did not like Cessnas, so I bought a Piper. For us married guys, it is all about what she wants, assuming that we want her involved with the hobby. All other considerations are subordinate.
Click to expand...
Yes, considering we want to use it as a regional traveler for weekend trips, etc. getting something she will actually ride in is a key.
 
Todd82 said:
Yes, considering we want to use it as a regional traveler for weekend trips, etc. getting something she will actually ride in is a key.
Click to expand...
I can't imagine marrying a woman who would care.
 
Tom-D said:
I can't imagine marrying a woman who would care.
Click to expand...
:p I married this one long before we had enough money to even consider buying a plane for it to matter. But she even, long ago, logged a few hours of dual time.
 
Rgbeard said:
Anyone thinking it’s easy to get in/out of nearly any 172 is also deluded or a contortionist.
Click to expand...

The Luscombe is an excellent airplane for contortionists. But, with a bit of practice even we old guys with a Covid-12 belly can make it work.
 
Or you can go for NO doors and fly a Grumman...:) Getting in and out of a Grumman is no harder or easier than squeezing in a C-172.
 
My vote goes to a C-170/180/185, the step is forward of the gear, and you simply turn and stand up.
 
Tom-D said:
My vote goes to a C-170/180/185, the step is forward of the gear, and you simply turn and stand up.
Click to expand...
I'll pass on a taildragger. And 185's especially are well beyond the budget. I'm talking a 172B budget.
 
Make sure you fly one before you get too deep. I flew a 1964 172 with an o300 shortly after getting my license. It couldn't get out of its own way or climb to save its life. It was smooth and good for taking pictures, but i wouldn't want to travel far in it. I don't think it even broke 100knts except maybe in a dive.
 
Todd82 said:
Yes, considering we want to use it as a regional traveler for weekend trips, etc. getting something she will actually ride in is a key.
Click to expand...

In that case you dont want the early 172. Had a student with one and Im fairly certain the reason he sold before finishing up it was slower than _______ insert four letter term of choice here
 
EdFred said:
In that case you dont want the early 172. Had a student with one and Im fairly certain the reason he sold before finishing up it was slower than _______ insert four letter term of choice here
Click to expand...
The early 172 will show you 110 Miles all day long. (Normal pitch is 52")
 
The more I read posts here I think I'll go back to checking out Cherokee 140's, etc. Thanks for all the input folks.
 
Todd82 said:
I'll pass on a taildragger. And 185's especially are well beyond the budget. I'm talking a 172B budget.
Click to expand...

If you go get your TW endorsement, you may feel different. Honest- not snarky. I fly a 172m with 180hp and a Cessna 140, except if I need those other two seats I’ll take my TW any day... it’s just more fun :). Though I’m not advocating A 140 for you as they are not easy in and out- but there are other TW that may be great. The Stinson 108 is roomy and very benign in her handling...
 
Huckster79 said:
If you go get your TW endorsement, you may feel different. Honest- not snarky. I fly a 172m with 180hp and a Cessna 140, except if I need those other two seats I’ll take my TW any day... it’s just more fun :). Though I’m not advocating A 140 for you as they are not easy in and out- but there are other TW that may be great. The Stinson 108 is roomy and very benign in her handling...
Click to expand...

Does a tailwheel airplane fly differently once you are aloft?
 
Skyhawks are really popular trainers now that everyone is too fat to fit in 150s and 152s. That's been driving the prices up, I think. That, and everyone wants one because their wife/old relative/dog can get in.
 
EdFred said:
In that case you dont want the early 172. Had a student with one and Im fairly certain the reason he sold before finishing up it was slower than _______ insert four letter term of choice here
Click to expand...

Call me crazy but I swear my G model has better climb than an M I would rent. It felt like a pig when I switched back to it. I feel the difference between the O-300 and the 320 is greatly exaggerated online.

Yeah I would like a faster plane. But mine does it current job well.
 
This is the only place I've ever heard anyone say a Cessna is hard to get in and out of. I'm guessing the majority of guys who say it don't have and never had a Cessna. Clearly that qualifies them as experts. Internet 101.

I had a 172 until I bought my 180. Wheels and floats with wife, kid, and dog. The reason I went with the 180 was for skis. 172s are GREAT airplanes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top