411 0n Cessna 177 Cardnial

Ventucky Red

Ventucky Red

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
2,179
Display Name
Display name:
Jon
Anyone here have experience/first hand information with the C177 other than what I am finding online?

Thanks
 
Ventucky Red said:
Anyone here have experience/first hand information with the C177 other than what I am finding online?

Thanks
Click to expand...

I used to own one. Lotta info online, I can’t think offhand anything I would know much more, but whaddaya wanna know?
 
Ventucky Red said:
Anyone here have experience/first hand information with the C177 other than what I am finding online?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Been flying and fixing a 150 and 180 horse 177/177B (180 with C/S prop) for about 10 years, what do you want to know?

My Cessna flying experiences include 150B, 152, 162, 172, 172D, 172G, 172P, 177, 177B, 182L, 205. Have done maintenance on many of those also.
 
Last edited:
It was the aircraft that should have replaced the 172. What else do you need to know? :)
 
I used to fly and instruct in a few a number of years back. I really, really enjoyed them. They were very coveted rental aircraft for people doing more than just some local flying. I only flew the 180HP ones, so don't have any experience with the more anemic performance of the earlier 150HP. I did a lot of transition training for folks moving up from the 172 to the 177. The big thing was the over controlling tendency due to the stabilator. They'd go to "normal" 172 flare pressure and then balloon, and want to push (never!) ... once you got through that, it was just a nice comfortable great plane IMHO. Big wide entry doors, the cantilevered wing. They kind of have a cult following and I can understand why. I love my T210, but have many happy memories flying those cardinals all over.
 
Immediately after my private pilot checkride in 1968, I got checked out in a brand-new 150-hp 177, so I have a long history with Cardinals. They have the nicest roll handling of any single-engine Cessna. Cabin entry access is better than any other light single, except maybe a Breezy, and the cabin is spacious and comfortable. Cockpit visibility is not perfect, but it's better than all the strut-braced Cessnas. Despite all the online hand-wringing, there's nothing wrong with pitch control in the flare; it's just more like a Cherokee than a Skyhawk (the Cardinal does have a stabilator, after all).

Downsides to the Cardinal:
More complex fuel system than a legacy 172, with engine-driven and electric auxiliary fuel pumps and a header tank.
Higher stall speeds than comparable 172.
Take published owners manual performance with a grain of salt, especially in the early models. The huge cabin and baggage area write checks that the takeoff and climb performance can't cash.
177 and 177A (1968-69) airfoil builds up drag at high angles of attack, so don't try to yank 'em off the ground too early.
Few components in common with other legacy Cessnas.
 
I fly a 150 hp Card and love it! The performance isn't spectacular, but she handles beautifully and is hard to beat for comfort.

More hp would be nice, but that's true of lots of aircraft.
 
bnt83 said:
Been flying and fixing a 150 and 180 horse 177/177B (180 with C/S prop) for about 10 years, what do you want to know?

My Cessna flying experiences include 150B, 152, 162, 172, 172D, 172G, 172P, 177, 177B, 182L, 205. Have done maintenance on many of those also.
Click to expand...

Any extensive maintenance issues that need to be dealt with for a mid 2K hour TTAF?
 
Ryan Klems said:
I used to fly and instruct in a few a number of years back. I really, really enjoyed them. They were very coveted rental aircraft for people doing more than just some local flying......
Click to expand...

Pilawt said:
Immediately after my private pilot checkride in 1968, I got checked out in a brand-new 150-hp 177, so I have a long history with Cardinals. ......
Click to expand...

Thanks Gents.. appreciate the feedback.
 
Ventucky Red said:
Any extensive maintenance issues that need to be dealt with for a mid 2K hour TTAF?
Click to expand...
The spar carrythrough needs to be checked for corrosion, but that's part of a good prebuy.

If you're looking to buy I would recommend checking out Cardinal Flyers Online. Some very good type specific knowledge there.
 
Plenty of 177RG time here. Would definitely buy again.

What are your questions?
 
The Cardinal is a great 4 seater. Most are 180 hp these days if not 200. The price to join the Cardinal Flyers Organization is a very good investment if you are thinking to acquire one. Lots of good technical information, a pre-buy inspection list, etc.
 
I have a 68, have owned for 28 years and have put about 1K hours on it. Over the years I have overhauled the 150 to a 160, added the powerflow exhaust and horton stol. I have flown her to KOSH and Sun-N-Fun a number of times. Lots of room in the wide comfortable cabin. a plus on the 9+ hour trips from Central Texas to KOSH. I have flown out of grass, gravel and short strips. 1300' gravel field elevation 600' msl. I keep her light partial fuel. Fuel tanks on the 68 have a capacity of 49 gal's, I will fill them to 34 when I want to fill up the cabin and that gives me 3 hour legs with reserves. I burn 8 gal per hour at 130mph with the speed mods added ( lower cowl and exhaust fairings). Maintenance is similar to a 172, except the nose strut and shimmy dampener. I flew a T-tail Tramahawk before flying the Cardinal so transition was easy for me. The Cardinal model's are as follows
68-177 150 Hp fixed pitch, 69 177A 180Hp fixed pitch, 70 and later 177B with 180Hp constant speed prop and the 177RG with a 200hp fuel injected constant speed prop.
the 68 and 69 had the thinner wing, in 70 they went with a high lift thicker wing.
 
Last edited:
I did all my commercial license flying and many cross country flights in a 1976 200hp 177RG. It and the Grumman Tiger are my favorite tricycle gear airplanes.

I does everything better than a 172 and is more comfortable than Pipers or Mooneys.
 
Ventucky Red said:
Any extensive maintenance issues that need to be dealt with for a mid 2K hour TTAF?
Click to expand...

Fuel tank leaks could easily make you hate it. Then again you may never have one. As mentioned before, corrosion issues required a decent prebuy (educate yourself and take a $300 borescope and laptop)
 
Last edited:
Kansas Flyer said:
I fly a 150 hp Card and love it! The performance isn't spectacular, but she handles beautifully and is hard to beat for comfort.

More hp would be nice, but that's true of lots of aircraft.
Click to expand...

I've got serial #28 IIRC. I would pick it over a 172 any day of the week for performance.

Flying from 1200msl airports is fine.
 
Last edited:
c177tx said:
I flew a T-tail Tramahawk before flying the Cardinal so transition was easy for me.
Click to expand...

Thank and an interesting comparison... I am a 200 plus hour PA38 pilot... landing is pretty much the same? Never never never never never never never should have sold my Tomahawk.....
 
Ventucky Red said:
Thank and an interesting comparison... I am a 200 plus hour PA38 pilot... landing is pretty much the same? Never never never never never never never should have sold my Tomahawk.....
Click to expand...
I don't know how similar to a Tomahawk it is, but prior experience flying something with a stabilator does help. I did my private in a Cherokee 140 and the transition to the Cardinal was pretty easy. The stab on the Card is very effective and its easy to over control which has gotton more than a few in trouble.
 
Been flying in a friend's weekly. Nice plane. Handles nicely, a little trickier to land than a C172 if your used to that but easy to adjust to. Very big doors which is awesome. Seems a tad bit more roomy than a C172. My friends is a C177B. He likes to run it at 21" 2200 RPM. At about 3500-5500 that gives us about 115-120MPH at about 8.5-9GPH. I think his leaning method is strange though. He has a 4 cylinder EGT reading and leans until the hottest cylinder reaches 1400f at any given power setting.
 
Man your title scared me. I expected to see a picture of a twin Cessna on top of a Cardinal.

I guess some of "older" pilots aren't used to giving the "411". We just remember the airplane. LOL (I believe this means what I posted is funny)
 
Ventucky Red said:
Would you buy another one?
Click to expand...

Yes.

Before I bought mine, I paid Keith from Cardinal Flyers Online to come down and check the plane out and give me basic instruction on its components. He flew down in his own Cardinal from the Chicago area to Indianapolis to check it out for me-- travel expense and time included in the price. It was very reasonable and worth the expense. I would recommend him and his services. He's not an A&P, and can't annual it for you. But he knows the ins and outs, and the pit falls for would-be owners. He will bring a bore scope and check the spar carry through for corrosion.
 
Ventucky Red said:
Would you buy another one?
Click to expand...

For the right price sure. The 150 horse is awesome two-place traveler, huge fuel tanks, easy flying and just a pleasure to fly. Shorter flights (like under 3 hours) with reduced fuel load (still plenty of range) is fine with 3 and 4 on board. Holds 48 gallons, burns about 10-12 at full power, can easily burn 7-8 in cruise. In the summer I usually burn about 3-4 gallons to get to 5500-7500 feet then around 7 per hour after that. I flew 5 hours just over 500 miles nonstop and landed with about 13 gallons remaining. Its not fast but I don't care.

The 180 version with a CS prop is fine, but overly complex and lotta expensive parts comparatively, to me might as well buy a 182.
 
Last edited:
Sorry about that... have teenagers in the house... trying to be hip like when my parents used words like groovy, far out, and that's a drag.... didn't
matter, I still didn't listen to them... :D
 
Why not get a 210 instead?
 
A lot depends on the individual aircraft and who owned it last. We have 3 177RGs in our fleet. I like the plane, it's great for what we do - 1 aircraft that I fly I don't think the previous owner took care of it right and even though it's been an OK plane, it's had a lot of maintenance issues that the other one I fly hasn't had and most of those I attribute to it not having been taken care of as well in the past.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top