• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Increasing the GW on 1960 C-180

Tom3holer

Tom3holer

MEMBER
Cape Cod
I posted this over on BCP and thought I'd post it here.

I am looking at a 1960 Cessna 180 to buy. The spec sheet says it only has a 850lb useful load. That seems to me to by rather limiting. Full fuel and maybe 2 lightweights in the cockpit and no baggage.

Does anyone know of a gross weight increase kit for a 1960 model without wing extensions?
If it makes any difference it does not have a float kit.

Thanks for any advice,

Tom
 
Sorry. Only GW increase for a pre 1964 is with WingX.
The G,H and J (1964 and up) qualify for the Kenmore STC up to 3190#.
Lou
 
Perhaps the best way to inrease it's useful load is to reduce it's empty weight. 1800# empty is pretty portly for a 1960 C-180.
 
If this really looks like a good airplane, I'd look carefully at what could be done to lighten it up. That seems like a pretty porky early 180. With judicious lightening, you might be able to gain a significant amount of payload.

MTV
 
My 56' was 1660 and I didn't do anything to really lighten it. In the real world of 180's , the way to increase the gross is load more stuff in it. Of course I never flew mine over gross but have heard they will fly just fine a little heavy.
 
How about losing the overhead speaker and items related to it, does anybody still use those?
 
It does seem overly porty and I should investigate the W/B paperwork with the owner; advertised on Skywagons.
 
I don't think any pilot would ever fly over gross!!!! They may pay a bit more attention to the CG.:wink: But never over gross!
DENNY
 
Tom3holer said:
It does seem overly porty and I should investigate the W/B paperwork with the owner; advertised on Skywagons.
Click to expand...

What battery is installed? Alternator and starter? Wheels and tires? Even the type and number of avionics boxes (ever pick up a KX 170B and then pick up a KX 155?) I know they're big dollar items but also can be very heavy.

Web
 
You are not suppose to weigh Cessnas, just recalculate. That came from a guy who does big mods to Cessnas.
 
I know that we never intentionally fly overweight but if one miscalculated my concern would be the insurance company if there were an incident.
 
If gross weight/useful load is a concern you might should look at '64 and later airplanes. They have 150# higher gross and also qualify for the Kenmore 390# gross weight increase. That'll easily provide useful loads in excess of 1400# for most airplanes. Perhaps include 185s in your search. No gross weight or power uprades required. And those two issues eventually will cross every 180 owners mind.
 
I had two 180s before I bought my 185 which I still have 40 years later. I should have just bought the 185 first. The only reason which I didn't was the initial purchase price. The difference in capabilities is far greater than the cost difference. There must be a reason why the 185s outsold the 180s. Tom3holer, I hope that you are including 185s in your search.
 
Actually I am not. Basically the reason is I don't need all the capabilities of a 185. I don't plan on floats, will most likely be flying with one passenger possibily two and the initial price and fuel burn.
 
Fuel burn is related to the amount of power that you are using. The fuel injection of the 185 is actually more efficient than the carburetor system of the 180 for equal horsepower used. Also just because you don't plan on using it on floats, you ought to consider resale for when the time comes. That is unless you are planning on letting your heirs worry about the sale. A float kit equipped 180/185 is easier to resell.
 
Another thing, a friend had a short one way strip in his backyard in Southboro. You would land uphill toward the trees and take off downhill. I have been in there with both of my 180s and the 185 on wheels, all of which had the seaplane kit including the seaplane prop. One day I was loaned a new 185 without the seaplane kit including the short land plane prop. Wow, what a difference. The short prop 185 was a dog when compared to the other three.
 
Tom3holer said:
Actually I am not. Basically the reason is I don't need all the capabilities of a 185. I don't plan on floats, will most likely be flying with one passenger possibily two and the initial price and fuel burn.
Click to expand...

Tom,

You might consider looking for a 185 with the IO-470. I was heading this way until we bought our flying project 206.

Tim
 
and on the flip side, in the 20 years I've had my 180J I've had opportunities to buy very nice 185s from friends and opted not to. My plane has 1400# useful but I don't care for how Skywagons feel heavier than 3000#. I have a 520 and big prop for improved utility and that's the best mod any 180 driver can add. There are lots of good 180s out there. The good ones aren't going to make the classified ads. They sell by word of mouth. Go find a few Skywagon owner friends and get the word out that you have money in hand and want a plane. One will show up. Hopefully the right one. Find that and it won't be an airplane, it'll be a family member.
 
stewartb said:
and on the flip side, in the 20 years I've had my 180J I've had opportunities to buy very nice 185s from friends and opted not to. My plane has 1400# useful but I don't care for how Skywagons feel heavier than 3000#. I have a 520 and big prop for improved utility and that's the best mod any 180 driver can add.
Click to expand...
stewart, that is an interesting observation since there is very little difference between a 180J and an A185F other than the engine and a few pieces of aluminum for the higher gross weight and you have the 520 engine and 3-bladed prop.
 
Yes, for all intents and purposes my 180 is a low-grossing 185. At 3190 my plane flies like a pig so I never thought going to 3350 gross was a big priority. It is suitably sporty at 3000# so I use that as my gross limit when I can.
 
Some very good thoughts thank you all.

I am looking for only seaplane kitted one due to corrosion and resale value. I have seen several with the 0-520 and a couple with the IO-520.
Long range fuel and a stol kit are a must. I am looking at a 1981 model with a 0-520 and 3 bladed prop and a nice panel this weekend.
I have money in hand but have not found the right plane yet. I did miss the deal of the decade a couple of months back. It was in TAP and I overlooked it for several weeks as it was on new anfibs and the price was 185k. It had the absolute nicest glass panel I have ever seen in a light aircraft and all the high end mods including a 400hr IO-520 with new simitar 3 bladed prop. When I finally looked at the ad online he was willing to sell it on wheels minus the floats for 120k. I called immediately and talked with the owner. He had just sold it the day before 115k. It will take a while to get over that one.
 
Last edited:
stewartb said:
Yes, for all intents and purposes my 180 is a low-grossing 185. At 3190 my plane flies like a pig so I never thought going to 3350 gross was a big priority. It is suitably sporty at 3000# so I use that as my gross limit when I can.
Click to expand...
AMEN...I've flown my 180K (IO520) at the upped gross a few times and agree that's for takeoff (stock engine on a hot day is gonna take a pretty long run) and a long haul to burn some weight off before landing because it's not a sweet nimble flyer in that condition but it does haul it.... 4 adults, and 200# baggage and 88 gallons... Empty I carry 50# ballast in the aft baggage.
 
stewartb said:
Perhaps the best way to inrease it's useful load is to reduce it's empty weight. 1800# empty is pretty portly for a 1960 C-180.
Click to expand...

Exactly my thinking. I'm down to just over 1600. They put a LOT of extra stuff (heavy radios, AN range receivers, oxygen kits, etc) in there.

sj
 
My 180 (1650# empty, 1695 with oil & unusable fuel) has a fair number of mods, only two of them are weight-savers: firewall Odyssey battery & BAS jump-seats. Everything else added weight: J engine to K, 88" prop, 185 legs, 850's & double-pucks, steps & handles, v-brace, BAS harnesses, metal extended baggage, BAS pull handles, heavy stinger, 10" tailwheel. But I wouldn't change a thing if I had the chance for a do-over. I'm guessing stripping the paint would cut at least 40 pounds, but although a polished 180 looks great I wouldn't wanna have to deal with keeping it up.
 
The extra wing tanks probably add to much of the excess weight but I am gonna pass on that one due to the useful load which after talking to them further is actually 832 Lbs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tom3holer
Cessna 180 question
Replies
25
Views
13K
Tom3holer
Tom3holer
O
Pa-12 useful load
Replies
22
Views
12K
Paul Heinrich
P
G
Smith Cub Builders - Need Wt&Bal, CG, Weight limits, etc
Replies
14
Views
4K
GeneHerzog
G
CubCrafters
CUBCRAFTERS ANNOUNCES DETAILS OF 2300 LBS GROSS WEIGHT STC
Replies
0
Views
4K
CubCrafters
CubCrafters
R
PA-12 Engine Upgrade Options
Replies
8
Views
10K
Speedo
Speedo
Back
Top