C-170: Good, bad and ugly

[Crosscheck]

I currently own a PA-20 Pacer (taildragger). I have had an interest in a C-170 and now find myself looking in trade-a -plane in that section quite often. I like the Pacer, but it is sort of tight inside. Seems like the C-170 has a bit more room.
I have not heard anything good, or bad about the Continental that powers the C-170. I am more fond of Lycomings for personal reasons and I assume the C-145 is 6 cylinder, so I am sure overhaul costs are more. WHat is the TBO? What is the main difference between the A and B model. Is it like the C-120/140 with flaps or lack of being the main diffence? What about gear extensions?

Again, I love the Pacer I have...just curious about the 170

Thanks for any input.

Crosscheck, out.

 

[navigator72]

I know very little about C170's although I do know there is one for sale in Bar Harbor, Maine (KBHB). (207) 667-5534. You might need to ask someone at Columbia Air Service if they can provide you with the owners Tel #. I only know the plane is kept at the airport and it's for sale.

 

[Rally]

I got about 350-400 hours in C-170B. Continental is'nt bad, it ices up REAL quick though if your not careful. Yeap the 0-300 is a 6 cylinder, but on the bright side if you lose a cylinder you have 2 more than you would have had with lycoming (I know bad comparison) TBO is 1800 I believe and cost us about 11,000 last time we did it with NEW Millienium Cylinders. I take it your refering to A or B to the airframe? 'Cause there is 0-300 A,B,C,D if you have a A or B your gonna not a have a vacuum pump. C-D do, and D has a 90 degree starter drive. For the airframe. The C-170 (plain) had I believe fabric wings. no diedral (sp?) and small wing flaps. The 170A had metal wings and the same. The Cessna 170B is all metal, diedral and those big ole cessna flaps your used to. Basically if you've flown a OLD C-172 like a 56-59 then you've flown a C-170B with a nose gear. The first C-172 was orignally going to be called a C-170C. Don't quote me on this all of this, I know just enough to get myself in trouble. Your in for a treat if you have'nt flown one. Excellent visibility over the nose, in fact it will confuse you BIG time at first. Because of the way the cowling slopes a three point attitude is looks level. So thats right, when you flare you try to keep the nose level. Likewise when you climb it looks like your level in the climb, its bizarre. In my experience there are some aircraft that make a pilot look good with his landings, say a Tomahawk or a C-150, a C-170 will NOT give any landings to you. In fact I was just glad to not have run off the runway as far as a "greaser" was concerned. Never flown a 140 but I'm told the 170 is signifcantly harder. I hear its a easy bird then I here its a hard bird, I think its about a 7-8 not a 1 or a 10. As far as the gear, I know you can put C-180 legs on the C-170. Its a beefy gear, never flown anything like it, but it is a pongo stick. I had a buddy that had a -A and he hated it and was scared of it after 300 hours, and he does fine in Stearman and Cub. Probably personal preferance. I owned one for some time and would'nt get another one in a heartbeat, its a good bird once your used to it. PM if you have any more questions.

 

[NJA Capt]

What is the main difference between the A and B model. Is it like the C-120/140 with flaps or lack of being the main diffence? What about gear extensions?

Rally hit most of it right on.

There are 3 versions. The straight 170, 170A, and 170B.
We have owned a 170A for the last 18 years. The straight 170 has double struts and fabric wings. The A model was/is original, and all metal. With "0" degrees of dihedral, and little washout, with plain flaps (55 degrees). The B model included dihedral, another 1.5 degrees of washout in the wingtips and "barn door" flaps. The B model also changed the rear pax window from rounded to squared off.

Although it's not a Cub, the 170 is like a station wagon. 3 pointers and wheel landings are pretty straight forward. Unless you really want more ground clearnace, I don't see the need for the C180 legs.

Fun plane, Check out the C170 Assoc for more details

 

[Rally]

"I owned one for some time and would'nt get another one in a heartbeat, its a good bird once your used to it."

Thats a typo I WOULD get one in a heartbeat.

 

[Citationkid]

I've got about 40 hours in a 170B and about 15 in a Pacer. The 170 is a lot easier to fly then a Pacer. It took me a while to get used to the landings, but after about an hour of touch and goes I was able to get nices ones every once in a while and then after about five hours almost all of them would be smooth (on grass). Compared to the Pacer the 170 is very roomy, a lot easier to get into and out of, and the visibility over the nose isn't comparable. You never loose sight of the runway or taxiway on the ground. I recently ferried the 170 down to FL with it's owner and with a ground speed of only 65-70 knots it took about 10 hours which was all done in one day and I never really got sick of flying it. We did four hour legs and landed with plenty of fuel in the tanks.

 

[SATCFI]

Rally,

I believe that the C-170 (A and B) flies behind a C-145 not an O-300.

 

[Rally]

Its really the same engine, if not almost exactly the same. Most were STC'd. Our 170B had a 0-300 D with the 90 degree starter and the vacuum pump, which let us tear off the venturi's.

I don't proclaim to be a expert though, I just owned one!!!

 

[NJA Capt]

Rally,

I believe that the C-170 (A and B) flies behind a C-145 not an O-300.

I have seen both A and Bs with each engine.

Our 170A has an 0-300A.