The International Cessna^® 170 Association

I'm a new member (just joined yesterday).
I Just bought a B model out of Canada and will
be going through a conformity inspection shortly.

Can anyone point me to where I can find the
STC/paperwork to put 850-6 tires on a '54 C-170B?

Thanks,

Bela P. Havasreti
'54 C-170B N170BP (N number reserved, FAA certification
pending)

If you have trouble getting the FAA to buy off on the 850's,keep in mind that 800's are legal per type certificate.Might turn out to be less trouble just to put new tires on--a set of 800 tires & tubes cost me around $205 last winter--at least til the inspection's done!
When ya get 'er flying,come on up to the Jefferson County Airport & look me up. Our Spruce Goose Cafe's the best around!

Eric Taylor
N4401V

Thanks Eric. I saw that (on the type certificate sheet)
that 800s were OK. I'll be boppin' around all over
the NW with it as soon as it's flying so I'll stop by
and sample the Cafe.

Bela P. Havasreti
'54 C-170B N170BP

Hi Bela
I've got a pair of 800s with tube that I will let go of at a reasonable price. I went back to the 600s. I'm at Crest Airpark.
Larry

Thanks Larry.

Guess I gotta come clean....
The airplane has 600-6s on it now. I want to
put 850s on it.

It's at Crest as well (in a hangar on the west side).

Bela P. Havasreti
'54 C-170B N170BP

None of my business,but I gotta say this.
I think "personalized" tail numbers are fine for a homebuilt that you constructed yourself,but I feel that it's more appropriate for a 48 year old classic airplane to wear the original tail number. If your airplane was originally US registered,I would check if that number is available. Not only is having the original tail number classier in my opinion,but it's good mojo too!
Be careful if you get those tires from Larry,I think he taught them how to bounce!

Eric

I agree with you Eric, but this airplane
went straight to Canada in 1954 and
has been there the whole time (she spent
some time in Manitoba and the rest in
the B.C. area).

Bela P. Havasreti
'54 C-170B N170BP

Why get those large heavy tires ? Unless you operate from really rough fields, the 600x6's are smaller, lighter, and the braking action is better due to the shorter moment arm from the surface to the disc.
My airplane had 800x6's when I bought it. I got rid of those tires and got 600x6's and like them much better.
Rudy

Rudy Mantel wrote:Why get those large heavy tires ? Unless you operate from really rough fields, the 600x6's are smaller, lighter, and the braking action is better due to the shorter moment arm from the surface to the disc.
My airplane had 800x6's when I bought it. I got rid of those tires and got 600x6's and like them much better.
Rudy

Well, here are several reasons why I went with 8.50x6s

1. I intend to operate from "un-improved" airstrips
(Pacific Northwest, Washington, Idaho, Montana, etc).

2. The airplane sits higher and you get less injuries
banging your head on the flaps/trailing edge of
the wing while walking around the airplane.

3. 850s look cool.

This is just my personal opinion, but I think 170s (and
especially C-180s and 185s) look a bit silly with "naked"
600x6s on them. Different story if you hide the 600x6s
with original wheel pants.... I'd actually like to get
another set of Cleveland wheels (with 600x6s mounted)
and original wheel pants and mount those when I'm
not out boon-doggin.

As far as braking goes, I have double-puck brakes on
mine and there is far more braking action available than
I dare use....

For what it's worth, we got the local FSDO to approve the
8.50x6s via a 337.

Bela P. Havasreti
'54 C-170B N170BP

The 7.00 X 6 tires are a nice compromise. Great braking, look good naked, and can even bounce over a Texas gopher hole. A neat trick to keep from leaving the Cessna logo ( corrugated trailing edge ) on a forehead, been there, done that, is to place water pipe foam insulation from the hardware store on the trailing edges when parked for any length of hangar flying. These are the 6' long round foam things with the split in them to fit over a water pipe. I have only walked into the trailing edge without the foam on there, but anytime I have the foam on the plane it looks like it would be a whole lot more fun to walk into it.

I got 8.50's approved with a 337. With the 8.50's on I don't much care for the minimal clearance between the tire and the brake caliper so my machinist son made a set of quarter inch spacers which go between the wheel and the brake disc to give more clearance. That's covered in the 337 as well.

I can just imagine bouncing over the rocks at Stehekin or one of those Idaho strips and having the tire rub on the caliper.

With a spacer between the wheel and the brake rotor, make sure your torque pins cannot come out if the linings wear out. That can be catastropic1

Bela, I accept your reasons.
Do you have a copy of the STC for your double puck brakes ? I'd like to put those on my plane-
Rudy

Rudy Mantel wrote:Bela, I accept your reasons.
Do you have a copy of the STC for your double puck brakes ? I'd like to put those on my plane-
Rudy

Rudy,

My double-puck brakes were approved via a 337 (field
approval). I'm not certain, but I think the "approved"
conversion/STC (for the C-170B) only allows for Cleveland
wheels with single-puck brakes....?

I ordered a bunch of copies of 337s and STCs when I
first joined this association and one of them was a copy
of a field approval for "Brakes, McCauley dual piston (170B)".
Check with the assocation to get a copy.

Since my 170 had to go through an FAA Conformity Inspection
(I imported it from Canada), the majority of the 337s my IA
obtained approval for simply stated "Verified previous installation
of...." and the listed the modifications/equipment as found on the
aircraft.

Bela P. Havasreti
'54 C-170B N170BP