Light Duty Commuter, Part 2: C172 Option

[onthebeach]

OK Gents, thanks for all the inputs so far on my original thread ("Light Duty Commuting Aircraft"). Taking into account what I've heard from the community, let's now begin investigating a Cessna 172 variant option (most airframes available on the market, simplest, easiest to maintain, most reliable).

I'm looking at the O-360 to get the speed I need for this 400 NM (max) range hypothetical commute. Want a carbureted version....a little less fuel efficiency than injected, but simpler, less maintenance, less expense at annual/overhaul time.

However, the dual mag issue (i.e., I want separate mag drives) is a showstopper due to the need for max reliability of the powerplant. Is there an O-360 that doesn't have dual mags? And if so, is it STC'ed for re-fit/installation into the Skyhawk?

Second consideration: is there an O-360 engine without dual mags that is STC'ed for auto gas? And is the airframe also STC'ed for autogas (I understand the STC must cover the specific engine & airframe combination)?

Looking forward to comments & info on this project from the community, thanks in advance, Happy New Year.

 

[eaglefly]

Most O-360's have seperate mags. Controller.com has several 180 H.P. modified 172's listed. Cessna built a factory 180 H.P. 172 (172Q) in the early 80's but the extra 20 horses didn't do much for performance, although ERAU bought some for their Prescott, AZ operations and found them suitable.

The extra 20 H.P. will give you only a few knots more cruise, a couple of hundred FPM better climb and will actually reduce your range, unless you've got the long range tanks.

You may want to consider a fixed-gear Cardinal (Cessna 177). The anemic 150 H.P. was upgraded to 180 H.P. in '69 and has a fixed pitch prop. In '70, the "B" model added a constant speed prop and in '73 they went to the dual mag version of that engine (O-360 A1B6D, the "D" signifying the dual mag). Many owners swap out for seperate mags at overhaul. Many Cardinals have long-range tanks (60 gallons) and with it's faster cruise speed, delightful handling and sexy looks, it might fit your bill, but you'd have to go with a C/S prop in most cases. The 1969 177A would give you 180 H.P. and fixed pitch prop but standard 50 gallon tanks (which are fine in most cases, if you want 400 mile ability).

The difference between a 160 H.P. Hawk and one with 180 H.P. isn't all that significant for this catagory of aircraft. Fly both and see what you think.

 

[JimNtexas]

I second the notion of a fixed gear 180hp Cardinal. It's a way better airplane than a 172. There is a strong owner support group for the Cardinal called the Cardinal Flyers Online. There is lots of information there on the single v. dual mag engines. The bottom line is that the dual mag motors can be operated safely, but only with frequent attention from a mechanic who knows how to inspect and maintain them. It is a fact that you are one nylon gear away from engine stoppage with the dual mag.

If you are going to operate with more than two people or at high density altitudes take another look at a C182. It has way better climb performance than any 180hp lightplane. If you have the discipline to pull the power back so as to cruise at 172 speeds the fuel burn isn't much more at all.

I'd stay away from mogas. Soon all mogas will have at least 10% ethanol and heaven knows what other additives, making it unsuitable for most airplanes.