Tell me about Cessna 175s...

U

UngaWunga

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Oct 27, 2014
Messages
2,037
Display Name
Display name:
UngaWunga
Tell me about Cessna 175s with 180hp. I know 172s, so how do they compare? Do they handle similarly? There are some nice ones out there, and prices seem reasonable.

Anyone have any good CS prop primers? That would be new for me as well.
Thanks
 
The i75 is a plane with wings. Basically an upgrade of the old 172 giving it a geared engine, the GO-300; many have been replaced with Lycomings O-360s.

CS Props are explained in most every pilot training text.
 
Henning said:
Primer is a now commonly accepted misspelling of primmer, which is a basic text on teaching a subject.
Click to expand...

Actually PRIMMER is a misspelling of PRIMER. The word PRIMER goes back to the 1300's to refer to a basic prayer book, this evolved into the elementary school book in about the 1500's.

This term evolved 1600-1700 into PRIMMER for both the prayer and school book uses. From that point forward both spellings are found. Mostly the use of primmer these days is designed to be indicative of colonial US usage.
 
flyingron said:
Actually PRIMMER is a misspelling of PRIMER. The word PRIMER goes back to the 1300's to refer to a basic prayer book, this evolved into the elementary school book in about the 1500's.

This term evolved 1600-1700 into PRIMMER for both the prayer and school book uses. From that point forward both spellings are found. Mostly the use of primmer these days is designed to be indicative of colonial US usage.
Click to expand...

It was likely introduced as a refinement to prevent this confusion. Textbooks in the US from the 50s (we were still using them in the 70s) still used primmer, we were taught the difference as a small children in school.:dunno:
 
UngaWunga said:
Tell me about Cessna 175s with 180hp. I know 172s, so how do they compare? Do they handle similarly? There are some nice ones out there, and prices seem reasonable.

Anyone have any good CS prop primers? That would be new for me as well.
Thanks
Click to expand...

I used to own 6555E ("Triple-Nickle Echo"....but I was younger and dumber then) back in the late 1960s. Sold it for no better reason than that I could no longer justify owning an airplane given my financial situation at the time. No engine problems or problems with the gear drive. The man I sold it to told me that at the next annual some corrosion was found in the wings...dunno what happened after that. I found it to be a typical Cessna single, when it comes to flying characteristics.

Bob Gardner
 
Compared to 172s, 175s are a little heavier with beefier structure in spots. 175s in the earlier years (1958-60) had larger instrument panels and more standard equipment than 172s of the same years. 175s had larger fuel tanks. Flown at comparable weights, inflight handling is the same.

Greg Bockelman said:
Just don't run it like a regular O-300.
Click to expand...

Sounds like OP is looking at one converted to a Lycoming O-360. Nice combination
 
I love the 175. It's just a little better than the 172 in every aspect of performance. Better climb, better cruise, carries more, and just a good little airplane. It's got the narrow cabin like all the old cessnas, johnson bar flaps (which is super nice), and I believe the same wing as a 180. With a 180hp non-geared engine, it's a great, fun little airplane capable of getting in and out of places I wouldn't take a 172.
 
OkieFlyer said:
With a 180hp non-geared engine, it's a great, fun little airplane capable of getting in and out of places I wouldn't take a 172.
Click to expand...

Oh, you could take a 172 there just fine! You'd just never take it back out. :goofy:
 
I did a flight review in one last week, have been flying a 0-300 C-172 recently as well. What I noticed...
1. a lot quieter than the 172
2. Seemed to accelerate a bit slower on TO, but made up for it in cruise. Had a fixed pitch prop, probably a bit of a cruise prop.

Owner is an A&P said basically never had any issues with it. His daughter just got here Private pilot license in it.. His recommendation was just watch the cylinder head temps and don't get it too hot. which is never a problem on his. He noted he did fly one with a CS prop that ran a lot hotter than his.
I have read lots of recommendations on how to run the GO-300. He basically said he doesn't do anything special about running his.


Brian
 
brcase said:
1. a lot quieter than the 172
Brian
Click to expand...

Think about this, with the gear reduction you set the RPM at 2800, the prop turns 2100.

pull a 172 back to 2100 turns, see how quite it gets.
 
brcase said:
I have read lots of recommendations on how to run the GO-300. He basically said he doesn't do anything special about running his.
Brian
Click to expand...

Stay with in book power settings you won't have any problems.
 
UngaWunga said:
Tell me about Cessna 175s with 180hp. I know 172s, so how do they compare? Do they handle similarly? There are some nice ones out there, and prices seem reasonable.
Click to expand...

The 175 shares the same TCDS as the 172RG (retract) and the R172K (Hawk XP). That should give you some idea of the similarity. Sounds like the STC might mean it shares the same engine/prop with the 172RG as well.

Anyone have any good CS prop primers? That would be new for me as well.
Click to expand...
When cramming the knobs, blue before black. When pulling the knobs, black before blue. Try to make power transitions part of a flow (i.e. "cruise/descent=move my hand this way; climb/go-around=move my hand that way"). Hopefully they put the blue knob to the right of the throttle when they applied the STC because that's the more standard location in Cessnas and it'd make your 182 transition a little easier.

It also helps to think of the prop governor as analogous to the transmission in a car if you drive stick shift. The engine is happier at low RPM in cruise and will complain if you lug it when accelerating or going uphill. The prop knob in will also help with descent just like low gear in a car going downhill.
 
asicer said:
The 175 shares the same TCDS as the 172RG (retract) and the R172K (Hawk XP). That should give you some idea of the similarity. Sounds like the STC might mean it shares the same engine/prop with the 172RG as well.

When cramming the knobs, blue before black. When pulling the knobs, black before blue. Try to make power transitions part of a flow (i.e. "cruise/descent=move my hand this way; climb/go-around=move my hand that way"). Hopefully they put the blue knob to the right of the throttle when they applied the STC because that's the more standard location in Cessnas and it'd make your 182 transition a little easier.

It also helps to think of the prop governor as analogous to the transmission in a car if you drive stick shift. The engine is happier at low RPM in cruise and will complain if you lug it when accelerating or going uphill. The prop knob in will also help with descent just like low gear in a car going downhill.
Click to expand...

OWT.. Fine for general use, but there are times when it is sub optimal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top