Question about Cessna 172E

[Snaggletooth]

Soon I'm going to be moving from a 1978 172N, to a 1963 172E. I have a few questions about the 172E.

1. When I flew the 172N I needed to have a pillow behind me to make me sit closer to the rudder pedals because my legs were to short.
Will I still need the pillow in the 172E?

2. Will the 172E have electric, or manual Flaps?

3. (most important one here guys) Do all 172E's have one of them ugly yokes like the one in the link below?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cockpit_of_cessna_172e_g-asss_of_1964_arp.jpg

 

[TangoWhiskey]

See this thread for lots of comments on the '64 C172E:

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5610&highlight=172E

Manual flaps, first with electric flaps was in '65. The Cessna flight test guy thought the '64 model was the best flying model 172 Cessna ever built. Where are you getting lucky enough to fly one?

 

[Snaggletooth]

See this thread for lots of comments on the '64 C172E:

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5610&highlight=172E

Manual flaps, first with electric flaps was in '65. The Cessna flight test guy thought the '64 model was the best flying model 172 Cessna ever built. Where are you getting lucky enough to fly one?

It's a '63 model 172E. Not '64.

I'm changing CFI's, and he has a 172E. my new home airport will now be BYY rather than LBX.

The one I'll be flying looks just like the one in that post, just red and blue paint.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Ah, yes... but still will have manual flaps. I prefer them, as I prefer manual trim. I think you'll learn to like the "feel" you get with them.

 

[Tom-D]

Soon I'm going to be moving from a 1978 172N, to a 1963 172E. I have a few questions about the 172E.

1. When I flew the 172N I needed to have a pillow behind me to make me sit closer to the rudder pedals because my legs were to short.
Will I still need the pillow in the 172E?

Yes, it is the same fuselage/instrument panel

2. Will the 172E have electric, or manual Flaps?

Manual.

3. (most important one here guys) Do all 172E's have one of them ugly yokes like the one in the link below?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cockpit_of_cessna_172e_g-asss_of_1964_arp.jpg

yes..

 

[roncachamp]

Soon I'm going to be moving from a 1978 172N, to a 1963 172E. I have a few questions about the 172E.

1. When I flew the 172N I needed to have a pillow behind me to make me sit closer to the rudder pedals because my legs were to short.
Will I still need the pillow in the 172E?

No idea.

2. Will the 172E have electric, or manual Flaps?

Manual, electric flaps were introduced with the 172F.

3. (most important one here guys) Do all 172E's have one of them ugly yokes like the one in the link below?

I believe that was standard, but I see nothing ugly about them.

 

[Trapper John]

3. (most important one here guys) Do all 172E's have one of them ugly yokes like the one in the link below?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cockpit_of_cessna_172e_g-asss_of_1964_arp.jpg

You'll have more of an adjustment getting used to the old mil-surplus DG and AI than the style of yoke (provided it still has them).


Trapper John

 

[Snaggletooth]

Thanks guys.

..... and for those that are interested here is a pic of the plane from AirportData.com.
http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/photo/165833L.html

 

[poadeleted20]

Many 172N's have or were converted to 30-degree-limit flaps. 172E's have 40 degrees of flap available. That last 10 degrees creates a bunch more drag, so if you've never flown a 172 with 40 flaps, be prepared for what happens when you pull that last notch on the J-bar.

 

[Tom-D]

Many 172N's have or were converted to 30-degree-limit flaps. 172E's have 40 degrees of flap available. That last 10 degrees creates a bunch more drag, so if you've never flown a 172 with 40 flaps, be prepared for what happens when you pull that last notch on the J-bar.

The conversion was for the electrical flaps only, not the manual 40 degree that started with the mid year 52 C-170-B thru the 172-E.


I agree be ready for a big increase in nose down attitude when the barn doors go out.

 

[Snaggletooth]

The 172N I used to fly had 40 Degree Flaps.

 

[Pilawt]

It's a '63 model 172E. Not '64.

172D was the 1963 year model; 172E the 1964 and 172F (electric flaps) the 1965. As with auto manufacturers, Cessna usually started a model year in the fall of the preceding calendar year, so many "1964" 172E's were built during CY 1963.

FAA registration records list calendar year of manufacture, not the mfr's "year model".

 

[Snaggletooth]

I see. So it's a 1964 Model, built in 63'.

 

[Snaggletooth]

So what will the main differences be, between the N and the E models?

 

[Arbiter419]

So what will the main differences be, between the N and the E models?

The 1980 N model that I fly has a 160hp motor, I think that became standard after the M's...don't quote me on that though...Also, the wheel base for the mains on the older ones is a bit narrower, so you're more likely to tip over if you taxi too fast around a turn.

Lets us know how it is!

 

[poadeleted20]

So what will the main differences be, between the N and the E models?

Different engine (Lyc O-320 vs Cont O-300), different flaps (electric 30 or 40 vs manual 40), different wingtips (so different aileron effectiveness at high alpha), different control yoke, possibly different MGW (depending on the flaps in the 172N).

 

[Tom-D]

Different engine (Lyc O-320 vs Cont O-300), different flaps (electric 30 or 40 vs manual 40), different wingtips (so different aileron effectiveness at high alpha), different control yoke, possibly different MGW (depending on the flaps in the 172N).

Plus lots of little stuff like seats, Instrument lay out, and the list goes on.

this is your grandfather's 172.

 

[Dan Thomas]

The 172N I used to fly had 40 Degree Flaps.

The 172P went to 30° flaps and it continues thru to the present. The 172S we have floats forever; I miss that last 10° for slowing it down.

The 160 hp showed up with the N model, though it was the horrible H2AD engine. The P also had 160 hp but as the D2J engine; much better.

The whole lineup is available in the TCDS, here: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulator...4e90061c5bf3b1862576260063e599/$FILE/3A12.pdf

Dan

 

[Ghery]

The 172N I used to fly had 40 Degree Flaps.

Part of the Penn Yan 180 hp conversion is a limitation on the flaps to 30 degrees. Part of the package that bumps the max gross by 250 pounds (to 2550 pounds).

 

[Pilawt]

Different engine (Lyc O-320 vs Cont O-300), different flaps (electric 30 or 40 vs manual 40), different wingtips (so different aileron effectiveness at high alpha), different control yoke, possibly different MGW (depending on the flaps in the 172N).

Also recontoured wing leading edge for slightly better low-speed handling (1973 172M); larger dorsal fin (1972 172L); wider-track tubular main gear legs and landing light moved from wing leading edge to nose bowl (1971 172L); ground-adjustable rudder tab and larger rear passenger windows (1969 172K); shorter-stroke nose gear strut (1967 172H); restyled cowl air inlets (1966 172G)

 

[Pilawt]

Part of the Penn Yan 180 hp conversion is a limitation on the flaps to 30 degrees. Part of the package that bumps the max gross by 250 pounds (to 2550 pounds).

Dunno about how Penn Yan does it, but with Air Plains the 180-hp mod is one STC, and the flap limit/gross weight increase is another. Mine happens to have the 180-hp engine, and though we bought the flap/gross weight STC it has yet to be installed, so we still have all 40 degrees of flap and the original 2300 lb MGW. It's a great short-field airplane but useful load is limited.

That's OK; I don't have that many friends.

You can also do the flap limit STC on a 160-hp 172N and increase MGW by 100 lb to 2400.

 

[Ghery]

Dunno about how Penn Yan does it, but with Air Plains the 180-hp mod is one STC, and the flap limit/gross weight increase is another. Mine happens to have the 180-hp engine, and though we bought the flap/gross weight STC it has yet to be installed, so we still have all 40 degrees of flap and the original 2300 lb MGW. It's a great short-field airplane but useful load is limited.

That's OK; I don't have that many friends.

You can also do the flap limit STC on a 160-hp 172N and increase MGW by 100 lb to 2400.

All one mod as far as I know. I've only seen one STC in the book in the plane.

 

[t0r0nad0]

I don't know if they had switched to an alternator and vacuum pump by the time the E model rolled around, but the 1957 "A" model that we gave away as the raffle plane last year had a generator for the electronics and a venturi for the gyro instruments. That was a bit of an adjustment (more so than the manual flaps). With a generator, your electrical output varies with engine RPM, so you need to leave most electronics off until just before you take off or you'll drain the battery. With the venturi, your AI will be laying on its side until you start the takeoff roll, and your HI won't move until you start your takeoff roll. Therefore, it's very important to set your HI to the runway heading when you take the runway in these old birds.

 

[Snaggletooth]

Thanks for all the info guys!

 

[Pilawt]

I don't know if they had switched to an alternator and vacuum pump by the time the E model rolled around, but the 1957 "A" model that we gave away as the raffle plane last year had a generator for the electronics and a venturi for the gyro instruments.

For 1961 (172B ) a deluxe equipment package -- called "Skyhawk" -- was offered for 172 buyers for the first time. It offered, among other things, a distinctive all-over paint scheme, wheel fairings, and a Continental O-300-D engine with vacuum pump. If you bought the straight "172" without the "Skyhawk" package you got the O-300-C without provision for vacuum pump.

"172" and "Skyhawk" had these different engines until the switch to Lycoming power in 1968 (172I), but "Skyhawk" continued to be the upgraded option package through 1975 (172M). After that all 172's were "Skyhawks" and the option package became "Skyhawk II".

Generator was replaced by alternator for 1967 (172H). The first lightplane to be equipped with an alternator was the Piper Cherokee B 180 (late 1962).

 

[MrAviator180]

Soon I'm going to be moving from a 1978 172N, to a 1963 172E. I have a few questions about the 172E.

1. When I flew the 172N I needed to have a pillow behind me to make me sit closer to the rudder pedals because my legs were to short.
Will I still need the pillow in the 172E?

2. Will the 172E have electric, or manual Flaps?

3. (most important one here guys) Do all 172E's have one of them ugly yokes like the one in the link below?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cockpit_of_cessna_172e_g-asss_of_1964_arp.jpg

3. Mine has a nice yoke... Not all airplanes in GA have the same cockpit. Especially the older ones.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Prefer the older ones, forward visibility is a lot better.

 

[Henning]

Funny thing about those 'ugly yokes', they are more comfortable than the Rams Horn type yokes.

 

[tim61]

Does anyone know the useful payload of a 1964 cessna 172E

 

[RickG]

On the '64 172E I fly gross weight is 2300 and useful load 938

 

[Pilawt]

Does anyone know the useful payload of a 1964 cessna 172E

On the '64 172E I fly gross weight is 2300 and useful load 938

After 50 years you'd be hard-pressed to find any two 172Es equipped the same and weighing the same, but Rick's is probably representative. They had a gross weight of 2300 lb, and in 1964 Cessna advertised an average empty weight of 1260 lb - but you're not likely to find one that light now.