![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() kontiki wrote: Yup. Besides... who needs STOL with a Cessna 150???? Any 150 would benefit from STOL. The 150s we used to run ate up so much runway on takeoff that a STOL kit would have been a good idea. Our airport is at 3000' ASL, and on a warm day the performance was dismal. That, added to the fact that they cost almost as much to run as a 172, made us finally get rid of them. They weren't the best deal for the student, as he would spend most of his time climbing: fewer circuits per hour, fewer spins or stalls. The really old straight-tail 150s were lighter, better streamlined, and had better performance. We used to joke that the 150 was a good taxi trainer. I briefly had the use of a 1967 Aircoupe (the final version of the Ercoupe), and with its 90-hp engine it outperformed the 150 in just about every way. Shorter takeoff, faster climb, faster cruise. Slips were lousy (it had rudder pedals but ineffective rudders) and it wasn't very comfortable, but it used that 90 hp much more efficiently than the 150 uses its 100 horses. The 150's Continental had more valve problems than our Lycs ever did. The engine has an optimistic 1800 hour TBO. It leaks oil more often. I often wonder if the 100-hp rating is honest. If it has a Marvel Schebler carb (most do), the carb spider has to be properly and flexibly and fussily mounted with the Lock-O-Seal washers that so few people know about, or it'll run like a toilet when vibration shakes fuel out of the bowl vent into the carb throat. The engine wouldn't tolerate agressive (or clumsy) leaning as well as the Lyc. Dan |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"DT" == Dan Thomas writes:
DT I briefly had the use of a 1967 Aircoupe (the final DT version of the Ercoupe), and with its 90-hp engine it DT outperformed the 150 in just about every way. Shorter takeoff, DT faster climb, faster cruise. Slips were lousy (it had rudder DT pedals but ineffective rudders) and it wasn't very DT comfortable, but it used that 90 hp much more efficiently than DT the 150 uses its 100 horses. This is very true. I have a '65 Alon Aircoupe, quite similar to the model you describe. It cruises just 3-5 kts slower than a C172 and climbout performance is not bad at all on a cool day with just the pilot. -- Programmers are in a race with the Universe to create bigger and better idiot-proof programs, while the Universe is trying to create bigger and better idiots. So far the Universe is winning. Anon |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cleaning Windows -- Acrylic Cleaners? | zatatime | Owning | 16 | September 8th 05 11:46 PM |