check out the interior on this 172

Nice clean older 172. I don't see anything spectacular about the interior other than just being clean.
 
Looks like any of the dozen or so well used airplanes I've flown. I like it even though I'm not much a high winger.
 
Looks pretty, not sure about those buttons on the interior, but not bad looking, bonus points for manual flaps, gotta loose those rear wheels pants though.


silver-eagle said:
Looks like any of the dozen or so well used airplanes I've flown. I like it even though I'm not much a high winger.
Click to expand...

Lol!

If that's a "well used" airplane you must be a rich man!
 
It's pretty. A friend bought a 150 like that. Found corrosion in the wings and under that pretty wall upholstery and carpet. Engine seemed good, was sh*t. Bearings were worn. Heat exchanger area was cracked. The "reputable" local shop that had been doing annuals wasn't doing a proper job, obviously. A year later, after overhaul and a lot of corrosion repair, the plane really is as good as it looks.
Be careful.
 
James331 said:
gotta loose those rear wheels pants though.
Click to expand...

Or better yet find a nosewheel pant. But I agree with you, main pants without a nosewheel pant is just wrong.

Equally wrong is a fast back swept tail. They're just wrong.
 
I think you are starting to come around BiRon. looking at high wings I see! You are gone ***** when you fly one and can actually see what is below and around you!
Interesting story, piper used to make nothing but real airplanes(high wing) but one day the accountant decided that if they mounted the wings lower they wouldn't need as many workers standing around waiting for a wing to hold up while it was bolted in place, the wings could be held up by a TV tray or a couple of milk crates for all he cared. They saved a few dollars by laying off those workers and were able to buy some six cylinder engines to bolt on the new low wing planes and the rest is history as they say.
 
Shepherd said:
It's probably marginally quieter than vinyl. !962, hmmmmm. I wonder if it had shag rugs and they just ran a trimmer over the interior to "update" it.
Click to expand...
You said "shag"! Maybe that is what happened to need the new interior. Too many "love" stains?
 
timwinters said:
Or better yet find a nosewheel pant. But I agree with you, main pants without a nosewheel pant is just wrong.

Equally wrong is a fast back swept tail. They're just wrong.
Click to expand...

It's a 172, ya ain't going to be a hot rod no matter what, personally for any of the fixed gear high wing cessnas, I'd go no pants or mud flaps.
 
Shepherd said:
It's probably marginally quieter than vinyl. !962, hmmmmm. I wonder if it had shag rugs and they just ran a trimmer over the interior to "update" it.
Click to expand...
Owner probably got tired of trying to groom the shag.

Nice looking bird that's been well cared for.
 
James331 said:
It's a 172, ya ain't going to be a hot rod no matter what, personally for any of the fixed gear high wing cessnas, I'd go no pants or mud flaps.
Click to expand...
Exactly. So, speaking from experience, if you're going to be going low and slow so everyone can see ya, might as well put yer pants on!
 
Those seats are interesting, the headrests got my attention. I see the owner got the anti-slip seat mod done. It looks like a well-cared for plane. Curious what that aluminum flap is just in front and below the battery box is for. I don't have that in my '65.
 
iflyvfr said:
Curious what that aluminum flap is just in front and below the battery box is for. I don't have that in my '65.
Click to expand...
i noticed that too. I suspect it has something to do with making the engine easier to start when it is hot.
 
This plane is based a few hrs from me. I thought the terrain looked like Idaho in the pics and an N number inquiry confirmed it. Looks like a nice plane well taken care of.
 
timwinters said:
Equally wrong is a fast back swept tail. They're just wrong.
Click to expand...

Ha. Beat me to it. If you're going back far enough to have the Johnson Bar, go far enough back to also get the straight tail, and it'll fly wonderfully.

Other than the misadjusted carb idle speed, the 172 Pre-A model in my logbook was the best flying Skyhawk of all of them in there.

But that's a gorgeous example of the early swept tails. And I wouldn't kick it out of bed if it said it wanted to snuggle. ;)
 
James331 said:
It's a 172, ya ain't going to be a hot rod no matter what, personally for any of the fixed gear high wing cessnas, I'd go no pants or mud flaps.
Click to expand...

I just think they look a lot better with their pants on. Then again, I'm not a big fan of the looks of the 60's and early 70's pants with the pointed fronts. I like mine better! (Of course!) :)

IMG_0001.JPG
 
Last edited:
I agree with the no-pants rule for the Cessna. Its a 95 knot plane at 6 gph, I'd rather have the ease of inspection and maintenance rather than a couple extra knots even though they do look pretty. I have a B model, same fastback and swept tail. People are never sure what it is, but it sure flies nice and I love manual flaps.
 
Someone went to some trouble redoing the interior but forgot the shoulder harnesses. Not good. I would not fly without them.
 
timwinters said:
Then again, I'm not a big fan of the looks of the 60's and early 70's pants with the pointed fronts. I like mine better! (Of course!) :)
Click to expand...
I agree, same with the Piper's. Rounded pants are the best pants.
 
PilotRPI said:
I agree with the no-pants rule for the Cessna. Its a 95 knot plane at 6 gph, I'd rather have the ease of inspection and maintenance rather than a couple extra knots even though they do look pretty. I have a B model, same fastback and swept tail. People are never sure what it is, but it sure flies nice and I love manual flaps.
Click to expand...

Some pics the pants are on and other pics show it without pants
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top