Cessna 150/150

D

David_L_Wilson

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
181
Display Name
Display name:
David L Wilson
Does anybody own a Cessna 150/150. I would die to get my hands on one. I already have 400 hours in my 150J and would really enjoy the extra power. It would totally change the airplane.

Incidentally, I have wondered why there are not other STC'd engines to replace the venerable O-200. I know the 152 has the Sparrow Hawk conversion for its Lycoming. With all the 150's still flying around under powered I am wondering why other options have not come up.
 
David_L_Wilson said:
Incidentally, I have wondered why there are not other STC'd engines to replace the venerable O-200. I know the 152 has the Sparrow Hawk conversion for its Lycoming. With all the 150's still flying around under powered I am wondering why other options have not come up.
Click to expand...

For what you spent on "upgrading" a 150 you could probably buy a decent 172.

:dunno:
 
ive never flown one. they are often used for banner and glider towing (east of the rockies). i think that an IFR 150/150 with long range tanks would be a good airplane. I'm not sure if you get a gross weight increase with the STC which could be a deal breaker. heavier engine could cut into your already small useful load otherwise.

I bet that the cost of upgrade compared to value of the airplane is what keeps most people from upgrading the engines. If it is going to cost an extra 10K over just overhauling an O-200, just sell the 150, take the 10K, and buy a 172. With 150 hp in a 150 you still end up with a semi-slow 2 seater that climbs good, but runs through the puny fuel tanks without really going farther than the old engine.

I did fly a 180 HP 150 down in Marfa, TX, with a STOL Kit. That was fun, we were pulling gliders with it. Without a glider behind, it liked to climb! But we had to stop for gas pretty often. The official useful fuel went down to like 18 gallons with the 180 hp upgrade.
 
tonycondon said:
I did fly a 180 HP 150 down in Marfa, TX, with a STOL Kit. That was fun, we were pulling gliders with it. Without a glider behind, it liked to climb! But we had to stop for gas pretty often. The official useful fuel went down to like 18 gallons with the 180 hp upgrade.
Click to expand...


What were you burning? 8-9 gph?
 
There is one based at KUUV and it pretty much is a one person airplane. The extra fuel burn shortened the range so much the owner installed an extra fuel tank in the luggage area behind the seats. If you are planning on traveling, get a C-172, you will be much happier.
 
dmccormack said:
For what you spent on "upgrading" a 150 you could probably buy a decent 172.

:dunno:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I already know it is cost prohibited. However, it is 90% of the time I am flying around by myself. I know most 150/150 drivers dont pay too much attention to the gross weight restriction. They always carry 26 gallons of fuel. Many even have tip tanks added.
 
dmccormack said:
What were you burning? 8-9 gph?
Click to expand...

we didn't really keep track of time in hours, mostly just watched the number of tows. IIRC we could do about 12 2000' tows before refueling. OTOH the 182 we would climb 50-100% faster and with 50 gallon tanks it would do at least twice as many tows too.
 
David_L_Wilson said:
Yeah, I already know it is cost prohibited. However, it is 90% of the time I am flying around by myself. I know most 150/150 drivers dont pay too much attention to the gross weight restriction. They always carry 26 gallons of fuel. Many even have tip tanks added.
Click to expand...

Tip tanks on a 150?

I did not know that...

JohnnyCarson-McMahan.jpg
 
your 150/150 friends realize that upgrading the engine does not upgrade the structure, right?
 
Not even close tow worth the cost. The whole idea of flying a 150 is the inexpensiveness and simplicity. A stock 150 should have sufficient climb with one aboard, unless you're trying to overfly the Rockies.
 
In the '70s the Cessna affiliate factory in France built a version of the A150 Aerobat (FRA150L) with a 130 hp Rolls-Royce/Continental O-240-A engine. That sounds like a nice combination.

Unfortunately the O-240-A is out of production now and replacement parts are hard to get. The British CAA issued an Airworthiness Approval Note (similar to our STC's) to allow conversions of FRA150L's to the plentiful O-200-A, as in standard C-150's.

Cessna wasn't thrilled with the 150/150 conversions, because of reports that the heavier engine in the nose, and battery installed in the aft fuselage, affected spin recovery.
 
A CFI friend of mine has one on leaseback at BJC (in Colorado, elevation 5673 msl). It really is a kick to fly. For the high altitude of the west, it makes a huge difference. I flew a 152(std engine) for much of my private training, and there were days that I didn't quite make pattern altitude before mid field. With Littlebird (the 150/150) I am at pattern alt usually before turning downwind. With 40deg flaps and full throttle, you can still maintain altitude, and even climb very slowly.

His plane has the long range tanks. I can't remember exactly how much they hold, but I do know that if they are full, it becomes a one person airplane (if you don't want to exceed gross weight). The gross weight was never upped as part of the conversion. He does have the Air Force test data on the 150/150, and they upped the gross to something like 1750lbs, but I don't think they have to deal with the FAA.

He plans for 8gph in cruise and 6.5gph for pattern work.

If you would like, PM me and I will give you his phone number. He loves to talk about his plane (of course) and could give you a ton of information.
 
David_L_Wilson said:
Yeah, I already know it is cost prohibited. However, it is 90% of the time I am flying around by myself. I know most 150/150 drivers dont pay too much attention to the gross weight restriction. They always carry 26 gallons of fuel. Many even have tip tanks added.
Click to expand...

Quit screwing around and buy the 185.
 
If you still have TCM cylinders, there is an AD on them. Timing had to be retarded to 22 degrees. This made the fleet, already kind of doggy, into sleeping dogs.

When you overhaul, go with ECI. The timing can go back to 28 DBTDC and at least you will have the original 100 HP back.
 
Last edited:
kgruber said:
If you still have TCM cylinders, there is an AD on them. Timing had to be retarded to 22 degrees. This made the fleet, already kind of doggy, into sleeping dogs.

When you overhaul, go with ECI. The timing can go back to 28 DBTDC and at least you will have the original 100 P back.
Click to expand...

:yes: ECI Cylinders totally the way to go
 
dmccormack said:
For what you spent on "upgrading" a 150 you could probably buy a decent 172.

:dunno:
Click to expand...


Since 3 days I own one. I can tell you, it beats all the school Cessnas:, As I fly out of KLGU I must get over 14,000feet mountains to get anywhere. Schools C172 doesnt climb with two people on board above 8500ft, the 172 SP with new engine overheats in a climb, dangerous!,
The C152 has a ceiling of 12500ft, and the C182 uses 12g/h, so how far can you fly with that one.
Sure there are other two seater, low wing planes on the market with strong engines, but in a very different price range :mad2:
 
WHO HAS, OR KNOWS WHERE TO GET AN ACTUAL OR UPDATEABLE CHECKLIST FOR THE C150/150?
 
DOESN'T IT HAVE (sorry) the same checklist as the original model 150 that's been upgraded? The 150/150 I've flown is an upgraded "G" model.
 
A local doctor had a 150/150 on floats sometime back. He flew it a lot and liked it. I think he also flew it on wheels at times. It would be a lot of fun. Sort of like a cub, ( boring) then fly a 180 super cub, FUN!
 
kgruber said:
If you still have TCM cylinders, there is an AD on them. Timing had to be retarded to 22 degrees. This made the fleet, already kind of doggy, into sleeping dogs.

When you overhaul, go with ECI. The timing can go back to 28 DBTDC and at least you will have the original 100 HP back.
Click to expand...

It's been twenty years since I saw a cylinder that that AD effected.

ECI is no longer, Superior and ECI now belong to the Chinese as does TCM, So the only new cylinders all come from the same machine at TCM.
 
I've owned a Cessna 150

We have a Cessna 177 w/150 horse


The 22.5 gallons of usable fuel tanks in a Cessna 150 are NOT big enough for a 150 horse.

Unless you like stopping for gas every two hours.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
It's been twenty years since I saw a cylinder that that AD effected.

ECI is no longer, Superior and ECI now belong to the Chinese as does TCM, So the only new cylinders all come from the same machine at TCM.
Click to expand...

Old habits die hard, but it hasn't been TCM in many years. Just CM (actually Continental Motors Group, so CMG if you want to abbreviate it).

I still work at T
 
Eh? None of the tankage options for the 150 are tips. Either you put the long range (patroller) tanks in the wings or you put an aux in the baggage compartment.

We had a local instructor with a 150 conversion. The thing climbed like a bat out of hell, but it's sort of like souping up a VW. At the end of the day you still have a VW. Top end speed is not increased much.
 
bnt83 said:
I've owned a Cessna 150

We have a Cessna 177 w/150 horse


The 22.5 gallons of usable fuel tanks in a Cessna 150 are NOT big enough for a 150 horse.

Unless you like stopping for gas every two hours.
Click to expand...

Perfect leg time to take a leak, stretch the legs, and grab some coffee!
 
I fly in Colorado, mostly from Boulder KBDU or Broomfield KBJC.

Rocky Mountain Flight School has two great Sparrowhawk 152 planes. The increase to 125 hp makes a huge difference. Those particular planes are incredibly affordable at about $75 per hour, wet!

I did most of my private pilot training in them and still love them. They're not fast, but they work great. I consider it just a power equalization because KBJC is about 5,300 ASL. We learn density altitude and we learn to lean!

Tony B mentioned a 150/150 at KBJC. Don't know that one, but there is one on leaseback at Journeys Aviation in Boulder KBDU. Owned by a CFI with tons of experience and a really neat history. I haven't flown it, but friends love it. Fresh engine rebuild, too, and I think a climb prop.

At this altitude, the extra horsepower makes the plane much more useable.
 
A 150hp aerobat would be a fun little commuter.
 
I learned to fly in 100, 150 and 160hp C-150s. I think the airplane is better with 100hp. Better balance and handling. If you need better rate of climb or the ability to lift more weight you need a different airplane.
 
Dean said:
There is one based at KUUV and it pretty much is a one person airplane. The extra fuel burn shortened the range so much the owner installed an extra fuel tank in the luggage area behind the seats. If you are planning on traveling, get a C-172, you will be much happier.
Click to expand...

I sold it. (Disagree that it was a single person airplane) With the power and range, my wife and I flew to key West, death valley, devils tower, page arizona, oceanside California, first flight, all over the place. The fuel burn at 75% power gave it good fuel burn and cruise was about 120 mph. It had a 14 gal aux tank that I normally filled only to the 45 minute reserve amount.

In one year alone we put 225 hours on the plane.

The conversion has a paper stc to 1750 max gross. But planes can't read so ...

Sold it to go to LSA. I am partner with Ercoupe and sole owner of Fly Baby. In the last year I've put 115 hours on the Fly Baby and landed in airports in10 states.
 
In the early 1970s Cessna's affiliate in France built a model called the FRA150L, an Aerobat with a 130 hp Rolls Royce/Continental O-240 engine. That might have been a nice combination. That engine has become an orphan, though, and many FRA150L owners in Europe are converting their airplanes to O-200 engines.
 
clemi said:
Since 3 days I own one. I can tell you, it beats all the school Cessnas:, As I fly out of KLGU I must get over 14,000feet mountains to get anywhere. Schools C172 doesnt climb with two people on board above 8500ft, the 172 SP with new engine overheats in a climb, dangerous!,

The C152 has a ceiling of 12500ft, and the C182 uses 12g/h, so how far can you fly with that one.

Sure there are other two seater, low wing planes on the market with strong engines, but in a very different price range :mad2:
Click to expand...





I have flown out of KLGU (Logan, UT lots of times, never got anywhere near 14,00 feet to leave.



And, a 182 with 78 gallon tanks, at 12gph is over 6 hours of flight time, at 120-140 kts, you can get a lot farther down the road than a 150.







Could you point out the 14,000 mountains?

dc86bbc401162a8d4aa915f1906ff5b4.jpg
 
They towed gliders out of Telluride with a 150/180. I think they have a motor glider now.
 
It's an age old formula that's been done on lots of airplanes (Supercub, Citabria) but in those cases the GW was increased as well to accommodate the weight of the bigger engine and larger fuel tanks it required. The 150/150 is like the 150 hp Luscombe (of which there are also many examples) an entertaining novelty but hamstrung when it comes to practicality and daily use.
 
Silvaire said:
It's an age old formula that's been done on lots of airplanes (Supercub, Citabria) but in those cases the GW was increased as well to accommodate the weight of the bigger engine and larger fuel tanks it required. The 150/150 is like the 150 hp Luscombe (of which there are also many examples) an entertaining novelty but hamstrung when it comes to practicality and daily use.
Click to expand...

Bill Tinkler , former airline pilot, had a beautiful 150 Luscombe, yellow, blue trim, that he flew all over the place. He passed away and I'm pretty sure his wife still flys it to flyins , and airshows. Great flying airplane, lots of performance, lots of fun which is what it's all about.
 
It is I've seen it and have flown another 150 horse Luscombe - they are fun with 90, 85 or even 65 horses too but the 150 was a popular mod, there are quite a few out there actually.
 
Own a 1959 model 150 with O-320e2d and Sensenich 74x58 prop. Flown the plane with both o-200, then modified to del-air stc myself. I am also a&p. Over 3500 hours on the plane, owned it for 34 years.
If you plan on keeping your 150, forget what all the 'experts' on here say and take a look at this:
Climb performance= still climbing at 400fpm though 16,000' density altitude
Speed = normally see 135mph TAS at 10,000' (i Live in the Sierra Nevada mountains)
Fuel burn = plan 8gph
Can a stock 150 do that? No (performance)
Can a stock 172 do that? No (performance)
Can a stock 185 do that? No (economy)
So take that all you negative experts- this is a worthwhile mod if you plan to keep the plane.
If not, sell your 150 and buy something else that costs more and might perform better
 
Last edited:
tinerj said:
I sold it. (Disagree that it was a single person airplane) With the power and range, my wife and I flew to key West, death valley, devils tower, page arizona, oceanside California, first flight, all over the place. The fuel burn at 75% power gave it good fuel burn and cruise was about 120 mph. It had a 14 gal aux tank that I normally filled only to the 45 minute reserve amount.

In one year alone we put 225 hours on the plane.
Click to expand...
It does take awhile to get anywhere in a Cessna 150.
 
The 150/150 I flew had a climb prop for towing gliders. Great for climbs, but being stuck in first gear when you wanted to get anywhere took some of the fun out of it.
 
a worthy necropost.
I converted one years ago, I thought it was a really cool airplane.
I also flew a 150 with a 180hp airplane halfway across the US.
Up (quickly), fly a little, down & fuel!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top