• 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!

Early 180

T

Texas 12 driver

Registered User
College Station, TX and Uvalde, TX
Howdy Y'all,

I'm not gonna explicitly mention the "C" word, but I'm going to be looking at an early (55) 180 this weekend and I was wondering if anybody could give me some pointers. I've been reading everything I can up to this point and have always found this site to be informative.

This is an airplane owned by an A&P. It's fairly low time and looks well kept but my biggest concern is landing gear and airframe integrity.

Any thoughts?

Thanks for the help!
 
Texas 12 Driver,

I've owned 2 180's now....the first was a '55 model. To me the most important thing is sheetmetal, specifically around the gear boxes. The second being corrosion. To me anything related to engine, interior or avionics is negotiable and infinitely repairable. Corroded, poorly repaired airframe is a deal breaker. Also, a plane that flies hands off with the ball centered that performs book numbers is a pretty good indication of properly executed wing repairs.

Specifically, look for repairs in the gear boxes, a clean straight cowl, clean corrosion free tail cone and corrosion in the battery area. I recently passed on an extremely low time late model 180 due to belly corrosion from a simple leaking battery. Corrosion in the belly and tail if neglected long engough can be a $30K hit on value.

What helped me is comparing the plane I was looking at to some pictures of a friend's sheet metal around the gear boxes. I actually layed under the plane with the "known" pictures and compared contours and rivets around the gear boxes. Also, of course find a mechanic you trust and have him check it from stem to stern for corrosion and evidence of undocumented sheetmetal repairs.

P.S. I live in Spring.

Good Luck,
Bill
 
55 year-old airplanes are projects from tip to tail. Some more than others but all of them need something, and one thing leads to another. By the way, sheet metal is easy to change, too. There isn't a single part on an airplane that can't be replaced.

Be realistic about what you want, what you need, and what compromises you're willing to accept. Without question that 55 year-old airplane is full of somebody else's compromises.

Stewart
 
StewartB said:
... sheet metal is easy to change, too. There isn't a single part on an airplane that can't be replaced......
Stewart
Click to expand...

just watch for gear box repairs and the rivet sizes/edge distance issues, seen a few ruined from that... not much edge distance to start with original size rivets, then someone jumps up a size or two and they really technically fail that edge distance then....
 
CranelakeMN said:
while your on 180's, does anyone know ballpark empty weights for an old 180 (53-60')?
Click to expand...

exact numbers vary somewhat obviously......but I think 1650 lbs is a reasonable estimate.
 
I know a guy with a '53 that weighs in the very low 1500s. I don't know what was on the equipment list. My '75 goes back onto scales this afternoon for the third time in 5 years. My equipment list includes big motor, big prop, big mains, and a big tail wheel. It'll weigh in the mid 1800s as is, for a useful load of around 1350#. I could skinny up the big stuff and get another 100 pounds but big tires and props are useful enough to earn their keep. It left the factory at 1690#.

SB
 
CranelakeMN said:
while your on 180's, does anyone know ballpark empty weights for an old 180 (53-60')?
Click to expand...

I agree that 1650 is probably a pretty common number. Mine is a bit lighter than that, but I don't have a lot of "options" installed.
 
Better question yet... does anybody know of anyone with an old 180 with Edo 2425's on it? I understand they used to be fairly common, but rather underfloated. I'm sure they were screamers though.
 
CranelakeMN said:
Better question yet... does anybody know of anyone with an old 180 with Edo 2425's on it? I understand they used to be fairly common, but rather underfloated. I'm sure they were screamers though.
Click to expand...

There use to be one around here. I flew in it once. Float parts hard to find. Yes not enough float.
 
StewartB said:
... I could skinny up........
SB
Click to expand...

the doors With interior stuff on them on those things weigh a ton, always figured that would be a great place for a carbon fiber replacement
 
What model O-470 does it have? If it's a "J" the old saying is "walk away" or "J stands for Junk". Later models like the R are better engines.
 
When I took my '55 180 down to Pierces with stock prop and engine, it weighed around 1570 (Pierce can look this up if he wants). I will be interested to see what it weighs after the PPonk conversion and new prop. I just remember that my supercub on amphibs weighed more than the 180 empty.

Paul Fisher took all the extra crap out of this plane for me, including the entire interior (it is now just painted metal inside) the ancient Lear autopilot, 4000 feet of old wire, etc, etc. About 150lbs of stuff. New lightweight (and working) instruments from EI and super light jump seats in the back.

I have a ticket to Texas Friday morning to fly it home (and to test fly it), to say I am giddy with anticipation is an understatement!

sj
 
Goes on the scales today. I think his Super Cub is gonna be jelous and neglected after Friday. :wink:

100_5372.JPG


100_5358.JPG
 
steve said:
I have a ticket to Texas Friday morning to fly it home (and to test fly it), to say I am giddy with anticipation is an understatement!

sj
Click to expand...

Congratulations Steve....great to hear it's coming together. It goes without saying that a pilot report is in order.

Bill
 
Steve Pierce said:
Goes on the scales today. I think his Super Cub is gonna be jelous and neglected after Friday. :wink:
Click to expand...

Looks like a nice machine Steve. I'm sure you'll enjoy flying it.

It's not all that far away from mine. My airplane was originally N4665B, only about 50 airplanes later!
 
N3243A said:
What modelIf it's a "J" the old saying is "walk away" or "J stands for Junk". Later models like the R are better engines.
Click to expand...

Don't be bad-mouthin' the -J engine! There are lots of -J engines (including mine) flying along with no problems at all. There's nothing wrong with a -J. It will only give you problems if you mistreat it.

And by the way, the saying was "if it's an "A" walk away", and even that is a wife's tail. The A engines aren't as bad as the "stories" make them out to be.
 
J engine vs. K:

TJ, I think that there is a difference in cylender studs also, hence the J model would tend to either crack or seperate from the case. Been a while but that was part of the issue.

Correct on who flies them, but folks had to baby the j around here.

As said, look at the rivits around the bottom of the doors, all the way under the belly to the other side!!!!

Crawl under there with a GOOD flashlight and study them. Are the rivits sunk in, pulling the skin into a dimple?

Is the paint gone from the edge of the rivit

is the edge of the rivit dark in color?

Then while still looking, have someone grab the lift strut and realy rock the plane, and watch the rivits against the sheet metal- do they move??? (I mean rock it as hard as possible).

If you fly it, do a few landings, and look again for smoke after the flight.

The rivits on the belly right under the gear leg hold the gearbox in, thoes are common to fail.

All can be replaced, as SB said. Time and $

SJ, Now we know why the cub got a partner. I noticed that you hired a couple of Steve's cats to guard your 180! :p
 
aktango58 said:
SJ, Now we know why the cub got a partner. I noticed that you hired a couple of Steve's cats to guard your 180! :p
Click to expand...

You are right about that, except I really need two partners... :crazyeyes:

sj
 
And by the way, the saying was "if it's an "A" walk away", and even that is a wife's tail. The A engines aren't as bad as the "stories" make them out to be.
Click to expand...
I agree. I had an 'A' that was running fine---had topped it a few hundred hours earlier. One day I was going to replace the valve cover gasket and could see the rocker arm bushing is just about worn through. Oh no, this engine is junk, so take it apart and find that was the only problem. Find out that Granite City put valve springs that were too strong in and that was the problem. I already had the 'K' so put it on. My A had little through bolts holding the cylinders on and my friends J had the same Phase 1 crankcase bottom end as an R--just the cylinders were different. Only difference between my K and an R is I have two sets of counter weights on the crank.
 
jnorris said:
N3243A said:
What modelIf it's a "J" the old saying is "walk away" or "J stands for Junk". Later models like the R are better engines.
Click to expand...

Don't be bad-mouthin' the -J engine! There are lots of -J engines (including mine) flying along with no problems at all. There's nothing wrong with a -J. It will only give you problems if you mistreat it.

And by the way, the saying was "if it's an "A" walk away", and even that is a wife's tail. The A engines aren't as bad as the "stories" make them out to be.
Click to expand...

I don't mind sitting behind a J. In my honest / humble opinion, the only things "wrong"
with the O-470J are:

It has 2-bolt exhaust flanges at the cylinder heads instead of the 4-bolt flanges
found on later engines. This is easily rectified by having thicker (1/4 inch)flanges
welded onto the stacks... (I've done this on my O-470J). The 2-bolt flanges tend
to warp and you can get leakage at the port (bad thing if you let it go un-checked...).

The J has "lightweight" (parallel valve) cylinder heads when compared to the later
K, L, R etc. engines. This is "rectified" by being "nice" to your cylinders! (watch CHT /
EGT temps carefully, operate in "conservative" mode (run a bit more fuel through the
engine, don't operate lean of peak, etc.), Be mindful of shock-cooling, ensure the baffling
is in good condition, and never take off with your cowl flaps closed.... 8^)

If it still has the 3-ring pistons, oil consumption can be "elevated" when compared to
later engines. Maybe I'm lucky, and I don't know if I have 3-ring pistons or 4-ring pistons,
but mine goes 20+ hours before I have to add a quart of oil (I think it leaks more than
it burns!).

The good thing about an O-470J is, depending upon which piece of
documentation you believe, the J engine is between 25lbs and 35lbs
lighter than any of the later engines. Light = good (and fast). Lighter
is also better when you're trying to take off and land in short distances...
My '54 weighs 1580lbs with the back seat out (that's actually weighed,
with a decent paint job & "fluffy" interior) and it goes 142mph down low
(@ 22 squared) and 162mph up high (2200rpm @ max manifold
pressure). The only mod on the airframe is the Metco horner-style wing
tips.
 
Bela, have you run early Cessna tips or later Cessna tips as a comparison to the Metco tips? I am curious if the Metco claims are valid, but I have never tested them.

I have run the O-470A, O-470R, and an R with a K induction.

I was not aware that the K was very similar to the J.

The A and J are very similar. Careful operation will help them stay alive. They have less cooling fin area than the later ones.

To the original question about early 180s:
1. there is alot to look for.
2. anything can be fixed with time and money.
3. if it has to be fixed by purchasing new Cessna parts, the cost goes up quickly.
4. a pre-purchase by the local expert on early 180's is worth it's weight in Cessna parts.

To me, bolt on replacement items like engines, wheels, older radios, aren't as important as, say, how the gearbox area, aft-fuselage sheet metal, wing spars and carry through's for corrosion, control surfaces needing full refurb (spars, ribs, complete disassembly vs. patching), or poor condition of subassemblies like rudder bars or seats that are expensive if you don't have an extra laying around.

Early 180, a true "all-around" airplane. A good 180 driver in a good 180 will go a lot of off-airport places. (I'll refrain from comparison to a PA-18)
 
I was not aware that the K was very similar to the J.
Click to expand...
Dave, not sure if that was aimed at me or not. My K has the same crankcase as my friend's J had. Main bearing set was the same with that big,one piece front one. My A had little bolts holding the gear on the end of the crank making it different than my friend's J crank. Pretty sure his J crank would work in and R. Also, think my K crank with two sets of counter weights would fit my old A crankcase. I was going to make my K into an R if the crank that came out of my A had the right bolts holding the gear on the crank(it didn't) since my K crank was cracked from the wind blown accident it was in. Ended up buying a rebuilt K crank. Hope I didn't lose everyone.
 
George, Pokie and Dozer are not gonna be happy they were mistaken for cats. :lol:

N4617B left the factory at 1514.5 lbs.
Paul weighed her in 2007 and she was 1581.7 no fuel or oil.
I weighed her this morning and she came out at 1611 lbs.
 
Steve Pierce said:
George, Pokie and Dozer are not gonna be happy they were mistaken for cats. :lol:

N4617B left the factory at 1514.5 lbs.
Paul weighed her in 2007 and she was 1581.7 no fuel or oil.
I weighed her this morning and she came out at 1611 lbs.
Click to expand...

That means that the difference in the stock J engine and stock 2 blade prop, and the PPonk'd 520E, monster prop, and new jump seats was only 30lbs. That's amazing!

sj
 
Dave Calkins said:
Bela, have you run early Cessna tips or later Cessna tips as a comparison to the Metco tips? I am curious if the Metco claims are valid, but I have never tested them.
Click to expand...

No. My C-170B had Metco tips when I bought it and so did my
'54 180. I think a good rule of thumb is to take whatever speed
(or performance) gains any manufacturer claims and divide it
by 2 (that should get you close to the actual / real-world performance
gains...).
 
Steve Pierce said:
N4617B left the factory at 1514.5 lbs.
Paul weighed her in 2007 and she was 1581.7 no fuel or oil.
I weighed her this morning and she came out at 1611 lbs.
Click to expand...

How was it weighed? Just curious. Your reported weight gain should all be in the prop. it would be interesting to compare before and after CG. I'll have my report back in a couple of days and can post mine.

My W&B guy is fun to help. I had a bubble window open yesterday and he had me close it. That simple thing changed the gross weight by 2#. At first one of the Bushwheels was barely kissing the ramp to the scale pad. It altered the gross by 200#. It was too good to be true and I told him so. We had to rustle the plane dangerously close to falling forward off the scales and into the hangar door to get an accurate reading. Bushwheels aren't always beneficial. He uses Ridge Runner scales in flight attitude. My J weighed 1838 with the Bushwheels and XP tailwheel. That was 2# less than my estimate, and I wasn't too confident in that! Useful load 1352# with big tires on. I'm pleased to see that number go up for once.

Stewart
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
PA-12 on floats, real world questions.
2
Replies
30
Views
19K
THE Super Cruiser
T
flyby
New Member/Trip Planning Advice
Replies
9
Views
3K
cubdriver2
cubdriver2
W
N2894P Rebuild (PA-18A-150) - Final Stretch
Replies
20
Views
2K
BC12D-4-85
BC12D-4-85
SpainCub
Oh Boy... this could be trouble... I heading to ALASKA!!!
Replies
16
Views
6K
Bob Breeden
Bob Breeden
sj
My Date with the XCub
Replies
5
Views
5K
aktango58
aktango58
Back
Top