Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Cessna 170B

  1. #1

    Default Cessna 170B

    Looking for a good 4 place tailwheel airplane $45k or under. Will be used to haul me, wife and small child to and from are cabin at the Skwentna strip. 3500ft. I also want something I can go hunting with. Seems to me if I go light and put big tires on it the 170B would be a good all around airplane to hunt with. I like the big flaps. Been looking around and 170s seem pretty fairly priced. I understand that they are underpower and can't get off short.

    Any people have experience with a 170, or sugest a similar plane in the same price range. I hate pacers.

  2. #2

    Default

    I have a 170B.

    What can I say? It isn't a Maule, a Cub, a 185, or a 180. It isn't a Super Stinson or a H Courier.

    What it will do is get you, your wife, your child with reasonable supplies and full fuel out of a 3500 strip near sea level with absolutely no worries on all but the hottest days of the year. Leave the kiddo at home and take out the back seat and you can put a lot of stuff in behind you. It won't break you with its insurance bills or its fuel burn. It won't ground loop without extreme pilot idiocy or very strong winds, and it usually requires both before that happens. You can slap up to 8.00x 6 tires on it without any further basis of approval, and there are folks up here who have gotten field approvals for 8.50's and 26 inch tires. You can usually repitch your prop to either 51 or 50 for better takeoff and climb performance and usually stay within the limits of the TCDS (thus negating the need for another basis of approval.) Even then you will still cruise better than 100 knots at 2500 rpm. You can put it on straight skis and land at your cabin in the winter, assuming you have someplace back wherever you live that accommodates straight skis (Lake Hood? Merrill Field?)

    And all that with the stock C-145/O-300 motor which is a pretty good motor all and all.

    I personally have the P-ponk landing gear box upgrade, a repitched prop, a v-brace, 8.50 tires, and I go all over the place. You can do off-airport stuff, sure, if you keep it light with 1/2 fuel and recognize it's limitations. It ain't a Maule. It will land much shorter than it will take off.

    A lot of people buy the 170 intending to get tailwheel experience in it and then buy up. A lot of people never bother to buy up once they've flown it

    You can look at the ones with the 220 Franklin and 180 lycoming conversions in them, they have their advantages (get off shorter and cruise faster) and disadvantages (more expensive, less useful load, higher maintenance bills.)

    In closing, you can buy other planes for almost the same money, an older Maule M5-210 or 220 comes to mind, a Stinson too. But all have their advantages and disadvantages.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Semi-retired in Florida
    Posts
    483

    Default Grizzly 1

    Quote Originally Posted by SkwentnaMan View Post
    Looking for a good 4 place tailwheel airplane $45k or under. Will be used to haul me, wife and small child to and from are cabin at the Skwentna strip. 3500ft. I also want something I can go hunting with. Seems to me if I go light and put big tires on it the 170B would be a good all around airplane to hunt with. I like the big flaps. Been looking around and 170s seem pretty fairly priced. I understand that they are underpower and can't get off short.

    Any people have experience with a 170, or sugest a similar plane in the same price range. I hate pacers.

    Flew a 170-A model (small flaps) all over Alaska. Had 8.50x6s on the ground, and a 165-heavy case Franklin under the cowling. Little devil took me a lot of out of the way places, including a few mountain ridges, beaches and bars. It was a very, VERY satisfactory airplane, and carried a comforable load -------- almost as much as the C-180 will carry. For my money, you won't go wrong with the C-170-B.

    And, no ----------- the Pacer really doesn't have any place in the outback.

  4. #4

    Question

    the Pacer really doesn't have any place in the outback.

    Yea, gets in as short as a 170, out shorter, hauls more faster, and any farmkid can patch it up if need be - sounds useless....

  5. #5

    Default

    Yeah, I wouldn't automatically crap on the tailwheel pacers, their performance is marginally better than the 170B in many aspects, they are cheaper to purchase. But I just don't like them either, and in the end you should buy something you like in addition to something you need.

  6. #6
    Member AK-HUNT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Valley
    Posts
    1,029

    Default agreed

    Yeah, the Pacer (assuming tailwheel pacer) comment is probably off, I'd agree. For all the reasons others said. If you like a 170a then a pacer should really blow up your skirt. Not a fan myself, but have a friend who's worked one hard for years. A heck of alot more for your money than a 170 in my opinion. The ONLY way I'd own a 170 over a pacer is if it has the 180 lycoming. Then again, you can hang a 180 lycoming on the pacer and still be cheaper and perform better and fix it with duct tape. Hmmmmm.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    176

    Default

    I agree. I've flown both and while I dont fit well in either (6'4"), I have seen that 180 pacer (on floats) perform remarkably.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •