The International Cessna^® 170 Association

I was talking to a friend who owns a 180 and he said in 56 when they started building the 182 cessna built them with both gear boxes thinking if the nose dragger concept didn't catch on then they could be quickly converted back to the conventional gear. He said he had a friend with a 182 that had both boxes and he converted it to a tail bragger with little effort. Is this true? And, could they have done this with the first run of 172's.

Paul

I have heard the same. but, the reason was that the first 172s used fuselages that were originally built to be 170s. They added the rear gear boxes and left the forward boxes there. I'm sure others can bring more accuracy to this tale.

Bruce

I've heard the same tale. Wish I could remember where I read it. 1956 was the last year for the 170 and the first year for the 172. The fuselages were basically the same and they took 170 fuselages (with the 170 gear box already installed) and turned them into 172s. I imagine that, if true, this probably took place during a transition phase until all remaining 170s had been built and fuselage construction was switched over to 172 only.

It is false, I have heard this for years. I had a friend tell me that about his 182 I told him to go look at it again and he found out it werent there.

They could be added easy.

Yeah, I've been hearing this "urban legend" for years too. I don't believe it. Never talked to anyone who actually saw one set up that way from the factory.

Eric

One year at the Southwest EAA Flyin in Kerrville, TX and again later that year at another flyin, I don't remember which one, I saw a nice C-180 (or so I thought). I went over to look at it and saw a plaque hanging from the prop which stated that the airplane came from the factory as a C-182, but had been converted to conventional gear with a conversion kit (must have been an stc) from Cessna. It went on to say that Cessna offered this "kit" for a time. Obviously the aircraft was still a 182. I have never seen that plane except those two times and don't know how accurate the data was. Since then I have seen a few 182's (prior to 1964 models) that have been converted to conventional gear with stc's like or similiar to the Bolen stc that was used to convert my 172.

I've heard it too over the years. We need the mythbuster guys to check it out. My 181 was a '56 182 and trust me it had no front gearboxes. The conversion is pretty easy though unless you get carried away like I did.

My 1948 ragwing has two sets of gearboxes....one the "original" set where the main gear is...and another set still under the floor from the Met-Co-Aire nosewheel configuration. Nothing like carrying around spare parts!

Unfortunately the rear gear boxes block access to re-install the cabin entry steps, so it's a hike up to the cockpit...glad I got rid of the 8.00 tires!

Hey what's your name, orN4281V. You ever think of using the rear gearboxes for a step of some sort?

Dave, that's a good idea. Never thought of that. I'll set my engineering team onto that this winter and see where I get.

Thanks,
Ann

Our 56 172 S/N 28162 actually built in 1955 according to the log book( Witchita local test 1955) didn't come with both saddles. But it did come with the fwd bulkheads all set up for the 170 saddles. Meaning they were all drilled for the bolts etc. We installed the Bolen STC which added aditional doublers covering the original holes and then you drill holes to match their saddles. Brian