Looking for the first plane

Of course there is always the venerable grin 172 but it would have to be
at least an N model.

Hmmm... as the owner of a very clean, stable, dependable "M" model,
I'm curious as to why your index of approval starts with "N"?

Best Regards,
Todd

On Jul 30, 12:25 pm, three-eight-hotel
wrote:
Of course there is always the venerable grin 172 but it would have to be
at least an N model.

Hmmm... as the owner of a very clean, stable, dependable "M" model,
I'm curious as to why your index of approval starts with "N"?

Best Regards,
Todd

Dohh! Just saw your post! Never-mind... :-))

Mine, however, doesn't have the notched flap switch, and has the 160
hp conversion... It's not a screamer, and not incredibly sexy, but it
sure is a great first plane!

Of course there is always the venerable grin 172 but it would have to be
at least an N model.


In my opinion that would be a mistake.
The 0-300D is a far superior engine to the earlier 172 Lycomings.
Smoother, more reliable - a good engine that will always bring you home
if you look after it.

FWIW

Tony

--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

On Jul 30, 11:01 pm, tony roberts
wrote:
Of course there is always the venerable grin 172 but it would have to be
at least an N model.

In my opinion that would be a mistake.
The 0-300D is a far superior engine to the earlier 172 Lycomings.
Smoother, more reliable - a good engine that will always bring you home
if you look after it.

The 172 never used the earlier narrow-deck Lycomings. Those were
found in other airplanes. Cessna went to the Lyc O-320-E2D from the
O-300 in about 1969 and never looked back. The Continental had a
shorter TBO and the cylinders used on small Continentals often don't
make it that far. They're the same cylinders used on O-200s and often
need valve work about halfway through the engine life. We had 150's
with those engines and spent nearly as much money overall on the 150
as we do on the 172. Our Lycomings run nicely all the way to TBO, and
that's in a more abusive flight training environment. Any engine that
sits without flying frquently, or that is flown on very short flights
so that the oil never gets hot, will tend to rust out long before TBO.
We run three 172Ms. We won't touch the N model, because that
model had the O-320H2AD, a disastrous engine that has a long AD
history. The folks around here that run them say that they seldom
reach TBO. It has little relation to the E2D. The 172P corrected that
hassle with yet another engine model, the D2J. If we were rich we
would buy some new S models.
Any airplane you are considering should be checked against
possible ADs. You can find them on the FAA website. Check the engine
models, too; they have their own section. Propellers are also
separate, and there's an accessories section that can take a long time
to wade through. See http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...e?OpenFrameSet
You don't want any nasty surprises after you buy an airplane.
There are plenty out there that have outstanding ADs.

Dan

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 30, 11:01 pm, tony roberts
wrote:
Of course there is always the venerable grin 172 but it would have to
be
at least an N model.

In my opinion that would be a mistake.
The 0-300D is a far superior engine to the earlier 172 Lycomings.
Smoother, more reliable - a good engine that will always bring you home
if you look after it.

The 172 never used the earlier narrow-deck Lycomings. Those were
found in other airplanes. Cessna went to the Lyc O-320-E2D from the
O-300 in about 1969 and never looked back. The Continental had a
shorter TBO and the cylinders used on small Continentals often don't
make it that far. They're the same cylinders used on O-200s and often
need valve work about halfway through the engine life. We had 150's
with those engines and spent nearly as much money overall on the 150
as we do on the 172. Our Lycomings run nicely all the way to TBO, and
that's in a more abusive flight training environment. Any engine that
sits without flying frquently, or that is flown on very short flights
so that the oil never gets hot, will tend to rust out long before TBO.
We run three 172Ms. We won't touch the N model, because that
model had the O-320H2AD, a disastrous engine that has a long AD
history. The folks around here that run them say that they seldom
reach TBO. It has little relation to the E2D. The 172P corrected that
hassle with yet another engine model, the D2J. If we were rich we
would buy some new S models.


RAM Aircraft has an STC to replace the H2AD with a D2G. Find a 172N with a
run-out H2AD and get the STC. $23,950 exchange for a new D2G engine,
McCauley prop and the paperwork.

On Aug 3, 10:05 am, "Allen" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...





On Jul 30, 11:01 pm, tony roberts
wrote:
Of course there is always the venerable grin 172 but it would have to
be
at least an N model.

In my opinion that would be a mistake.
The 0-300D is a far superior engine to the earlier 172 Lycomings.
Smoother, more reliable - a good engine that will always bring you home
if you look after it.

The 172 never used the earlier narrow-deck Lycomings. Those were
found in other airplanes. Cessna went to the Lyc O-320-E2D from the
O-300 in about 1969 and never looked back. The Continental had a
shorter TBO and the cylinders used on small Continentals often don't
make it that far. They're the same cylinders used on O-200s and often
need valve work about halfway through the engine life. We had 150's
with those engines and spent nearly as much money overall on the 150
as we do on the 172. Our Lycomings run nicely all the way to TBO, and
that's in a more abusive flight training environment. Any engine that
sits without flying frquently, or that is flown on very short flights
so that the oil never gets hot, will tend to rust out long before TBO.
We run three 172Ms. We won't touch the N model, because that
model had the O-320H2AD, a disastrous engine that has a long AD
history. The folks around here that run them say that they seldom
reach TBO. It has little relation to the E2D. The 172P corrected that
hassle with yet another engine model, the D2J. If we were rich we
would buy some new S models.

RAM Aircraft has an STC to replace the H2AD with a D2G. Find a 172N with a
run-out H2AD and get the STC. $23,950 exchange for a new D2G engine,
McCauley prop and the paperwork.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's not a bad deal, considering the engine exchange, new
prop and the R & D that went into the STC. Likely would pay for itself
the first time through TBO.

Dan

Good, informative post.

The 1968 model was the first to have the Lyc O-320. It was the C-172I.
One easy way to distinguish the models on the ground is to look for
the dual exhausts on the O-300's. They stick out a bit like fangs. The
O-320 has only one pipe breaking through the cowling.

The story I've read is that Cessna ordered a bunch of O-320's for the
new Cardinal and then discovered, oops, 150 hp was not quite enough for
that bird. They had to do something with engines, so they stuck them in
the C-172. Or maybe that was their backup plan all along. I never have
heard what Cessna did with the O-300's they must have had on order.

-John T.

wrote:
On Jul 30, 11:01 pm, tony roberts
wrote:
Of course there is always the venerable grin 172 but it would have to be
at least an N model.
In my opinion that would be a mistake.
The 0-300D is a far superior engine to the earlier 172 Lycomings.
Smoother, more reliable - a good engine that will always bring you home
if you look after it.

The 172 never used the earlier narrow-deck Lycomings. Those were
found in other airplanes. Cessna went to the Lyc O-320-E2D from the
O-300 in about 1969 and never looked back. The Continental had a
shorter TBO and the cylinders used on small Continentals often don't
make it that far. They're the same cylinders used on O-200s and often
need valve work about halfway through the engine life. We had 150's
with those engines and spent nearly as much money overall on the 150
as we do on the 172. Our Lycomings run nicely all the way to TBO, and
that's in a more abusive flight training environment. Any engine that
sits without flying frquently, or that is flown on very short flights
so that the oil never gets hot, will tend to rust out long before TBO.
We run three 172Ms. We won't touch the N model, because that
model had the O-320H2AD, a disastrous engine that has a long AD
history. The folks around here that run them say that they seldom
reach TBO. It has little relation to the E2D. The 172P corrected that
hassle with yet another engine model, the D2J. If we were rich we
would buy some new S models.
Any airplane you are considering should be checked against
possible ADs. You can find them on the FAA website. Check the engine
models, too; they have their own section. Propellers are also
separate, and there's an accessories section that can take a long time
to wade through. See http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...e?OpenFrameSet
You don't want any nasty surprises after you buy an airplane.
There are plenty out there that have outstanding ADs.

Dan

On Aug 3, 11:38 am, "John T." wrote:
Good, informative post.

The 1968 model was the first to have the Lyc O-320. It was the C-172I.
One easy way to distinguish the models on the ground is to look for
the dual exhausts on the O-300's. They stick out a bit like fangs. The
O-320 has only one pipe breaking through the cowling.

The story I've read is that Cessna ordered a bunch of O-320's for the
new Cardinal and then discovered, oops, 150 hp was not quite enough for
that bird. They had to do something with engines, so they stuck them in
the C-172. Or maybe that was their backup plan all along. I never have
heard what Cessna did with the O-300's they must have had on order.

That's the story I've heard, too, but the Cardinal came out
in '68 with the E2D and they didn't change that 'til mid or late '69.
I think Cessna just decided to reduce parts inventory at the factory
by using the same engine, and I bet Lycoming gave them a deal they
couldn't refuse. The 172 was a huge market and a chance to boost
engine parts sales immensely. I don't suppose Continental was
impressed, but they were still selling a lot of engines for the
150/180/182/185/ 205/206/207/210 and many of the twins.

Dan

On Jul 29, 8:08 am, "Cecil E. Chapman"
wrote:
I won't be getting it for a couple of years and whatever I picked would be
an older plane. It will be for (or slightly before) my 50th birthday.

I wanted to ask what the group thought about a Cherokee 140 as a first
plane? In talking with my fellow CFI's most of them think I would find the
climb performance too much of a dog to be useful for even pleasure flying.
Some have suggested a Warrior, instead.

I'm not sure what they are talking about. The P-140 is a great 2 place
plane as a first airplane. Its got better handling than the C-172 and
handles much more like a high performance airplane (not as sloppy in
the air as a Cessna).

-Robert, CFII

Thanks! A couple of my pilot friends have owned theirs for many years and
simply love it.

--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil E. Chapman

Certificated Flight Instructor
Commercial Pilot, ASEL - Instrument Rated
Reid-Hillview Airport, San Jose, California

Member of:
National Association of Flight Instructors (NAFI)
Airplane Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA)
Experimental Pilots Association (EAA)

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 29, 8:08 am, "Cecil E. Chapman"
wrote:
I won't be getting it for a couple of years and whatever I picked would
be
an older plane. It will be for (or slightly before) my 50th birthday.

I wanted to ask what the group thought about a Cherokee 140 as a first
plane? In talking with my fellow CFI's most of them think I would find
the
climb performance too much of a dog to be useful for even pleasure
flying.
Some have suggested a Warrior, instead.

I'm not sure what they are talking about. The P-140 is a great 2 place
plane as a first airplane. Its got better handling than the C-172 and
handles much more like a high performance airplane (not as sloppy in
the air as a Cessna).

-Robert, CFII