Hi guys,
Just purchased a 1958 172 in SanJose, CA and had a fun time trailering it up to Hillsboro, OR through the storm currently hitting the west coast. The plane has 2900TT 900SMOH and last flew in the mid 90's. It was in a garage and dismantled with the intention of restoration which was never completed. It needs new paint and interior work and other unknowns. Is there a forum similar to this one for early 172's that might help with my restoration project?
Regards,
Matt Bailey
Just purchased a 1958 172 and looking for info.
Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher
-
Matthew_bailey
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:50 am
-
funseventy
- Posts: 230
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 11:46 pm
-
eichenberger
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 8:27 pm
I'll second the idea of converting it to tailwheel. I have a piece of a 1959 C-150 that was converted to tailwheel, using genuine C-140 gear, not the "texas taildragger" kit.
This airplane looks like a shrunken 180, and I wrote an article in Custom Planes about it a couple of years ago, called "The Baby 180".
It turns heads where ever we take it.
This airplane looks like a shrunken 180, and I wrote an article in Custom Planes about it a couple of years ago, called "The Baby 180".
It turns heads where ever we take it.
-
zero.one.victor
- Posts: 2271
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 12:11 am
Count me as another vote for tailwheel conversion! There's several around the Piget Sound area,& they look great. A couple are labeled "171"'s,but if I did it I'd call it a "170-C".
I don't know who has the STC &/or sells the conversion parts for the 172. The Bolen conversion is one I've heard about,a magazine article from 1986 sez Bob Williams/Avcon Conversions of Udall Kansas holds that STC now. Another old magazine article sez the Texas taildragger STC is held by ircraft Conversion Technologies of California.
The FAA could probably steer ya to the STC holder(s). There's a website for searches like this--http://av-info.faa.gov/stc/
Hope ya go for it!
Meanwhile,this 170 site is probably your best bet for info,your new airplane is just a late-model 170 with a square tail & a training wheel!
Eric
I don't know who has the STC &/or sells the conversion parts for the 172. The Bolen conversion is one I've heard about,a magazine article from 1986 sez Bob Williams/Avcon Conversions of Udall Kansas holds that STC now. Another old magazine article sez the Texas taildragger STC is held by ircraft Conversion Technologies of California.
The FAA could probably steer ya to the STC holder(s). There's a website for searches like this--http://av-info.faa.gov/stc/
Hope ya go for it!
Meanwhile,this 170 site is probably your best bet for info,your new airplane is just a late-model 170 with a square tail & a training wheel!
Eric
-
zero.one.victor
- Posts: 2271
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 12:11 am
Matt, I owned a '59 straight tail 172 while I was looking for my 170B. I was member of 172-182 type club and found more on 182's than anything. The Cessna Owners Group had alot on 210's, etc... Both groups were helpful if you asked for information on the random style Email-board, but it took a while and had to dig through alot of B.S. to get to info. But all in all, this site was the best for me. The straight tail has manual flaps and not too many "modern" folks know how to properly rigg the early controls. This site has tons of experts and good folks ready to share good and bad experiences. It seems that 170 owners take in their plane as a family member and get to know as much about it as possible and don't mind sharing (bragging) about it. Good luck with the new plane and Texas Tail dragger option is a good idea. JD
-
Harold Holiman
- Posts: 579
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:54 pm
Squar tail taildraggers
Matt,
Your 58 172 converted to a tail dragger would fit right in the 170 Club. I have a 52 180 that I call my "Overgrown 170 with a funny tail". Jerry has the 59 150 converted to tail dragger that is his "Little 180", so your 172 would fit right in. As to helpful forums, this one is by far the best in my opinion. I am also a member of the "180 Club" and their forum does not nearly equal this one for helpful information and advice as well as other flying forums I check on.
Harold H
Mbr# 893
Your 58 172 converted to a tail dragger would fit right in the 170 Club. I have a 52 180 that I call my "Overgrown 170 with a funny tail". Jerry has the 59 150 converted to tail dragger that is his "Little 180", so your 172 would fit right in. As to helpful forums, this one is by far the best in my opinion. I am also a member of the "180 Club" and their forum does not nearly equal this one for helpful information and advice as well as other flying forums I check on.
Harold H
Mbr# 893
-
eichenberger
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 8:27 pm
square taildraggers
When I mentioned that I have a piece of the C-150 converted to taildragger, I meant to say "a very small percentage". The airplane is really the pride and joy of a buddy of mine, who owns the greatest share of it.
For those interested, there's some lore about this airplane, that may be urban legend, as I don't really know if it's true, but here goes:
After building the C-140A, Cessna tried to build a B model with big flaps, like the 170B. But, the 140's tail wasn't big enough, and they found out in initial testing that the airplane wouldn't pass certification.
So, they developed the square tail to solve that problem, intending to call it the 140C. They built 39 fuselages, but never actually assembled any finished airplanes, as the market for 2 place trainers had evaporated. Those fuselages were put in storage.
In 1959, when the first 150s were made, Cessna used those 39 fuselages that had been intended to be 140Cs. Those 39 fuselages still had the gear saddle in them for conventional gear, even though the airplanes were built as trigear 150s.
When our airplane was restored, it was done so because it was one of those first 39 150s, and the Feds approved the installation of 140 gear in the original saddles that had been hidden all of those years.
So, there is one example of what was to have been the 140C now flying. It won Custom Grand Champion at Sun 'n Fun in 2000 (maybe 1999, can't remember as I sit here).
For those interested, there's some lore about this airplane, that may be urban legend, as I don't really know if it's true, but here goes:
After building the C-140A, Cessna tried to build a B model with big flaps, like the 170B. But, the 140's tail wasn't big enough, and they found out in initial testing that the airplane wouldn't pass certification.
So, they developed the square tail to solve that problem, intending to call it the 140C. They built 39 fuselages, but never actually assembled any finished airplanes, as the market for 2 place trainers had evaporated. Those fuselages were put in storage.
In 1959, when the first 150s were made, Cessna used those 39 fuselages that had been intended to be 140Cs. Those 39 fuselages still had the gear saddle in them for conventional gear, even though the airplanes were built as trigear 150s.
When our airplane was restored, it was done so because it was one of those first 39 150s, and the Feds approved the installation of 140 gear in the original saddles that had been hidden all of those years.
So, there is one example of what was to have been the 140C now flying. It won Custom Grand Champion at Sun 'n Fun in 2000 (maybe 1999, can't remember as I sit here).
HIDDEN TREASURES
Some of the earliest 172s still had the conventional gear bulkheads, (but not the castings,) built in place. These are hard to find but are the quickest ones to convert to "proper" landing gear placement. The '57 to '59 172 conversion give the best look because of the straight tail. It looks like a (doggone 
) 180. Your '58 probably wont have those but the conversion is not too hard. Harry could be a valuable assistant if you decide to go that route. I have some old tailcone parts if you decide to do it. Also Frank Stephenson of the TX 170 group has one.
The "Littlest 150s" look so neat as a tail-draggesr but are rare and valuable in their own right. They are better candidates for keeping them stock than turning them into mini "mini" 180s.
Eric, (I got a bone to pick with you but it can wait
till another time! Look in the "Event" thread on the TX Christmas party!) The C171 designation was tagged for the "METCO" conversion of a conventional geared C170B to the dreaded "NOSE WHEEL CONFIGURATION! I have only seen two that I can remember but they looked terrible and had some nasty habits. Using the 170 gear legs and castings in newly installed bulkheads under the floorboard aft of the cabin door and bolting a nosewheel mount to the lower firewall made the thing look like an overgrown herron! They were taller than the later 172s so had a tendency to let gusty winds get under the tail do nasties to the pilot! The nose gear mount was not strong enough to take any side loads and caused some cracking of the lower area of the firewall. It was a bunch of bad ideas ahead of their time.
) 180. Your '58 probably wont have those but the conversion is not too hard. Harry could be a valuable assistant if you decide to go that route. I have some old tailcone parts if you decide to do it. Also Frank Stephenson of the TX 170 group has one.The "Littlest 150s" look so neat as a tail-draggesr but are rare and valuable in their own right. They are better candidates for keeping them stock than turning them into mini "mini" 180s.
Eric, (I got a bone to pick with you but it can wait
till another time! Look in the "Event" thread on the TX Christmas party!) The C171 designation was tagged for the "METCO" conversion of a conventional geared C170B to the dreaded "NOSE WHEEL CONFIGURATION! I have only seen two that I can remember but they looked terrible and had some nasty habits. Using the 170 gear legs and castings in newly installed bulkheads under the floorboard aft of the cabin door and bolting a nosewheel mount to the lower firewall made the thing look like an overgrown herron! They were taller than the later 172s so had a tendency to let gusty winds get under the tail do nasties to the pilot! The nose gear mount was not strong enough to take any side loads and caused some cracking of the lower area of the firewall. It was a bunch of bad ideas ahead of their time.-
eichenberger
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 8:27 pm
nose gear 170s
I saw one of the trigear converted 170Bs back in the late 1960s. It was kept at a small airport where I was instructing. It was UGLY. Never flew in it, but it did sit high on the gear.
-
Dave Clark
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 6:25 pm
-
Harold Holiman
- Posts: 579
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:54 pm
Tri gear conversion
I don't know why anybody would do it, but my 53 180 was converted to tri-gear in the late 50's and converted back to a real 180 , conventional gear, in the mid 60's. I've never seen one of these conversions on either a 170 or 180 but I imagine they looked like a Cessna version of a Tri-Pacer flying milk stool.
Harold H
Mbr# 893
Harold H
Mbr# 893
-
Bruce Fenstermacher
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:24 am
-
zero.one.victor
- Posts: 2271
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 12:11 am
Dave Clark used to own a "181",if I'm correct he's the one who converted it to tailwheel gear. A real pretty airplane,it's still in the Puget Sound area.
Dave,if you're not too busy hopping up and cherrying out your 170,maybe you could fill us in on the 182 TW conversion details: STC holder,etc. Maybe they also have an STC for the 172?
Eric
Dave,if you're not too busy hopping up and cherrying out your 170,maybe you could fill us in on the 182 TW conversion details: STC holder,etc. Maybe they also have an STC for the 172?
Eric