Cessna 180 question

Hi,
I owned a 58 180 but sold it 15 years ago and have been sorry ever since.

I am currently looking for another 180 and have a question if I may.

In doing my research I see in 1973 Cessna adddd a "Camber Lift Wing"
Will this make it perform like a Stol Kit?
My 58 had a Horton Stol kit and it was amazing.

There is a friend at my local grass strip that has a 172 and I gave him a Flight Review last month and his A/C has that cuff. It really made 55-60 approaches very comfortable.

Another question; I have been looking at Barnstormers and TAP for the past several months at 180's and it seems the same planes that were there several months ago are still being advertised.
If the market soft right now?

Thanks in advance for any advice or suggestions.

Tom

Where to start.

My old 180 was a 57. Somewhere around 59 they changed the wing a slight bit... then again in the mid-late 60's. Then again in the 70's.

The newer the 180 is, the more metal she will have, which makes them stronger, but will cost in handling and weight.

The cuff wing of the late models is fine, but for full on performance the Sportsman's stol and wing-x is the way to go.

The early models are the true sports cars, nimble, quick when light, and light on the yoke. Later ones, well, like the 1/2 ton truck they are.

Pick your poison to meet your mission.

From my observation properly priced 180's like Cubs sell pretty quickly and for the last two years there appears to be many overpriced 180's on the market that just sit. Hard to get full boat retail with a run out engine or easily identified problems or just plain old stupid pricing.

I've flown a couple of sporty early models with minimal creature comforts and if I only had room for one plane I might be tempted that way but with a cub for sport I truly love my 77 180 which has the new wing and reasonable creature comfort for serious travel (I do 200-250 hours per year with many Midwest to Florida runs in an easy 6.5 hour day) while still being a challenging fun ride that attracts more attention at the gas pump than any 182 ever could!

Thanks for the thoughts.

I have not until 6 months or so began looking at 180's again. The prices were what they were. However after several months and the same planes still around I wonder if the market is a bit soft.

Your right most of them have nearly runout engines which is OK but that will add another $15,000 I guess for an overhaul. There is what looks like a nice 1980 with 188hrs SMOH. The logs were included in the posting on Pdf format and I went through them and discovered the last annual had two jugs were rather low; #3/58 and #4/62 and the most disturbing was that it had only 188 hours in 13 years.

It did have some of the things I wanted like 84gal wet wing and some I didn't like the Cessna rear jump seats and no extended baggage.

You interested in a C170 with 180 hp conversion? jrh

"I didn't like the Cessna rear jump seats "

I'll trade you a nice bench rear seat for those rear jump seats...!

My experience is the overhaul will cost more than 15,000.

You're not the only one looking for a 180. Month ago or so, a fellow sent out a mass mailing to registered 180 owners looking for any for sale.

Good Luck..!

Kem

Tom3holer said:

Thanks for the thoughts.

I have not until 6 months or so began looking at 180's again. The prices were what they were. However after several months and the same planes still around I wonder if the market is a bit soft.

Your right most of them have nearly runout engines which is OK but that will add another $15,000 I guess for an overhaul. There is what looks like a nice 1980 with 188hrs SMOH. The logs were included in the posting on Pdf format and I went through them and discovered the last annual had two jugs were rather low; #3/58 and #4/62 and the most disturbing was that it had only 188 hours in 13 years.

It did have some of the things I wanted like 84gal wet wing and some I didn't like the Cessna rear jump seats and no extended baggage.

Click to expand...

I would be more concerned with corrosion than compression but in a good climate I wouldn't run away. If you're interested in it pull a cylinder it two during the pre-by and remember that Contental Engines have a tolerance for lower compression and if you're looking at big engine 180's plan on a topping them at 800-1000 hrs. (With new cylinders and a little extra love to the valves mine with a IO520 was about $9K when all done.). As for the jumps they can be made more comfy., I've got the removable bench (neither are all that comfortable and the third seat makes a nice dog seat)... I don't have the open extended baggage but there is baggage space behind the plastic bulkhead that is huge which I use when family travel or a lot of bulk is on the manifest also that bulkhead really helps in the winter.

Good luck and good hunting!

The problem with this forum is it takes so long for a response when posting a question or two, 3 responses in 20 min, WOW.

N86250 Thanks for the offer but I really want a 180.
On the jugs I was surprised to see during the overhaul the used reconditioned cylinders not new. With the price of new jugs I find that to be an bad decision as shown by the compressions.
That plane has been in TX and Mo most of its life.

Long time 180 owner here. The high points for a 180 purchaser-

Early models had 2550 and 2650 gross. Not enough in my opinion. Wing X extensions can bump it to 2950 but the long wings may diminish the crosswind capability. Later models had 2800 gross and with the larger 185 dorsal fin a Kenmore 3190# STC is a simple addition. My own useful is 1400# plus depending on how it's equipped. The 180 wing is the same through the years except the Camberlift cuff. Mine has it and I like it. I've never wanted to increase it with a Sportsman. VGs are now available and are a worthwhile addition. I'm not the best driver in the world but I get in and out of 500' with average loads. More to my liking I can do it when crossing winds aren't favorable. Overall utility and STOL utility are a balancing act. Later models got an elevator up spring and that makes the control feel a little heavier. Some guys complain about it but with any load it's a moot point and we don't fly Skywagons to flit around empty. Later models have heavier gear and most early model owners seek to upgrade theirs. Always beware of the gear box when looking at planes. O-470s are durable engines and most of the longevity issues will be with top ends. Valve guide wear leads to leaky valves. Compressions can sag. Many of us have switched to carbureted 520s at overhaul time and that's the best money a 180 owner can spend. Power is king. Good planes always sell quickly and usually by word of mouth. Advertised planes? I don't pay much attention.

I like the looks of the earlier airplanes as well as the lighter feel. There are a couple early 180's for sale in the Puget Sound area for around $80K- one is a very nice 54 model, original paint scheme, winner of several fly-in awards. The other is a very nice 55, IFR equipped including autopilot. Both have J engines. There are several early 180's listed on Barnstormers for less money, probably not as nice but they look pretty good and some have pretty good mods. The market is soft these days, it's a good time to buy one!

FWIW I believe Cessna's "camber lift" wing came along in 1973.

Model changes: http://www.skywagons.com/modelchgsweb.html

I'm in the market as well. I agree the best ones never hit the open market. I've looked at a couple that were not as advertised and were expensive. Easy to see why they haven't sold.

I'm looking for a 57-early 60's but ideally would find a 59. I feel like I'm on a unicorn hunt.

It's fine to zero in on a specific year model, for whatever reason, but check out others too- you never know when the deal of a lifetime might come along.

I had a 56' and loved the plane. It was pure stock wings, 29's. And gar aero tail wheel. I used 45 mph on short final and it would t/o reasonably short, I flew it on and off a 7-800' gravel bar no problem. Now I have a 185f, 1973. The old plane was lighter on the controls and more fun to buzz around in. The big reason for the change was higher gross wt. and long range tanks as we live in a fly in/ boat in village and fly all our needs. The planes are so diferent I can't make a reasonable comparison between the two wings, the 300hp is great and the tankering fuel is a stress saver. If I was just rec. flying I'd like a 56' w/ flint tanks, sportsman kit, extended bags, Atlee jump seats, 185 gear and pponk beef up kit, IO-520, 10-10 wheels and 29's and glider tail wheel. Ah heck... While I'm at it, door Stewart's , BAS shoulder harness, bubble windows, reworked control columns and standard T Instrument planet, PS 4000 audio panel. Have fun it's a adventure looking for the perfect plane.

Find a good H model. Big tanks, center stack panel, stout gear, still fairly light, or at least they can be, R engine. Gross weight is as good as it gets without mods.

MTV

the wing actually changed on some 185s in 1972 model E's .... had one I worked on that was model E with some new F parts & designs, like wings.... made fun ordering parts, had to watch SN in parts book close....

I have a '53 with '57 wings ART X ext. I kind of like the wings like this. The plane has a stupid number of mods, but most '53 AK planes do. I kind of like simple and a 180 is.

Tom3holer said:

....It did have some of the things I wanted like 84gal wet wing and some I didn't like the Cessna rear jump seats and no extended baggage.

Click to expand...

Just for your info, all of the 180/185s starting at least as far back as 1973 had extended baggage. The external "stretcher door" was optional and not commonly ordered since they could not also install the float kit. A large percentage of these planes were ordered with the float kit. Also for some reason most of the dealers ordered the 6 place option which had the low middle seat back and the bench for the third seat. A lot of the 6 place seating had jump (milk stool) seats for the middle seats. OK perhaps for a bush working plane but otherwise not very functional or comfortable. The 4 place seating had a higher seat back.

I had a couple of 180s before I bought my 185. Then I asked myself "why didn't I just buy a 185 first?". 40 years later, I feel the same way. You can always pull the throttle back for the same fuel burn. But who does that?

I wonder if the market is a bit soft.

Click to expand...

I think so. At least in Australia. My two line theory is that the world is a wash with debt which is slowing the economy. Second point is that I know of a lot of baby boomers selling their toys as that stage in life approaches. My generation (46 years) should be buying these great aircraft but every 40 something I know has a 500K mortgage on a bloody house. (at least in Oz) Not to mention younger kids at the equivalent age compaired to the generation above. So the demand is not there.

Sorry for the thread drift but Tom was asking about the market. As someone who wants a C180 one day I'm interested in anyones aircraft market theories. :smile:

Again thank you all for the great info and suggestions.

Basically what I want it for is to is be able to fly from my home base 2B1 2400 grass to a couple of spots in Maine for camping and fishing. they are unimproved strips in the outback with at least 1200 feet of usable runway and about 340sm miles away. I would have 2-3 people and a reasonably light weight load of camping equipment. It would be nice to do it without refueling so longrange tanks are on my list along with a stol kit. A factory seaplane kit, especially on the earlier models seems to be a big plus due to the zinc chromate application.
I looked at the P-Ponk gear mod and it seems reasonably priced but wonder how long the installation takes.
It does seem that extra fuel and stol kit are things that should be looked for already installed, pricewise. The flint Aero tanks look nice but the cost would be around 9K or more installed based on their figures.
I owned a 58 model years ago and indeed loved it. It had a Horton stol kit and seaplane kit with an 88" prop. Sold it and bought a very nice 63 Debonair for 5 years, sick Mom in Maine and daughter at University of Vermont so it served its purpose, sold that now have a 47 C90-8 powered J3. Flew to Maine 2 weeks ago for a few days of camping in the cub. I did pick a bad day I agree but my GS at points was 43mph. Cessna 180's have pretty much continued to increase in price but the Deb is actually worth a good deal less than what I sold it for. Investment wise the 180 seems to be the best around.
I'll keep looking...

I agree on my limited searching over the past several months that the market may be a bit soft. Called a broker yesterday on a newer model flown very little over the past 13 years. He said the owner was just getting too old and probably would not ever fly it again. This may be another demographic on the price.

A pirep. My '75 J model came with 6 seats including factory jump seats. I gave the aft bench seat to a friend 15 years ago and don't miss it. I absolutely love the jump seats for utility. Remove them and right front seat and I can carry 12' lumber inside. Cruise with 29" Bushwheels is 140-150 mph depending on how I arrange the CG. 75 gallons usable and 24/24 cruise fuel around 16gph determine range. I have friends with early 180s and others with later models. I favor H and J models and I think I have the perfect one for myself but it's morphed through the years. My J seaplane came with the big dorsal so the 3190# STC was a no brainier. 0-520, big 3-blade prop, paint, interior, new panel, radios and instruments... As with all airplane purchases you'll be money ahead finding the plane that has what you want versus buying any old plane and trying to make into what you want. But making one into what you want sure is satisfying.

Any 180 will do what you want. That length is NOT a factor to even a reasonably practiced pilot.

Fuel? Three or four bushwheel bags in the back will solve the distance problems for you real easy if you can not find the long range tanks.

Also, a pod on the bottom to carry the fuel bags and extra gear might be an option.

For that mission, the later models might be your best choice, but a 182 would probably do the job if your destination is not super soft or super rough.

Heck, just take the seats out and shove a bunch of 15s in there.

I like em all but for us the balancing act of weight , and performance seams to be the very best if your going to stay with standard O470 engine, I would want a D/E model with factory float kit, long prop,LR tanks. If your going to buy a post 64 you may want to investigate the 520 engine. One of the nicest performing ones I ever flew
Was an early 60's with IO470,???? Someone had just taken the front end of an early 185 and stuck it on the older lighter airplane........ Worked fantastic, felt like a 57 on the controls, climbed like a 185! :lol:

Thanks again for the info. I am putting it all together and narrowing it down to what I really want.
I do not like the idea of fuel in the cabin. I know its done all the time but for me I am uneasy with it.