180 hp C172Classic?

[bjornhall]

As I understand, there are STC's that allow you to put a 180 hp engine in an older C172 (say a 172N), and lock the flaps at 30 degrees, gaining about 100 kg in max takeoff weight and almost as much in useful load.

Just wondering if anyone has any experience of aircraft such modified? Any problems or concerns (structural strength, engine installation, what would I know?), or is it actually the great idea it seems to be? :)

[B2N2]

Why would you want to lock the flaps at 30 degrees?
That was about the only thing I liked on the older models and with 180hp you shouldn't have any troubles in a go-around from a full flap approach.

Some reading for you:

Cessna Owner Organization :: General Discussion :: 180 hp upgrade (http://forums.cessnaowner.org/read/1/7180)
Cessna Owner Organization :: Modifications :: Air Plains conversion (http://forums.cessnaowner.org/read/5/12382)
CESSNA 172/180 CONVERSION, Used CESSNA 172/180 CONVERSION, CESSNA 172/180 CONVERSION For Sale At Controller.com (http://www.controller.com/list/list.aspx?ETID=1&setype=1&Manu=CESSNA&Mdltxt=172/180%20CONVERSION)
http://www.tc3361.com/3-C%20-172P%20Flight%20Manual%20Supplement(2).pdf
Cessna Aircraft Modifications (http://www.aeroprice.com/aerolibrary/cessnase_mods.htm)
and finally:
Penn Yan Aero (http://www.pennyanaero.com/pages/superhawk)

[bjornhall]

Thanks, that is really helpful! :)

I had no idea this mod was so common; nice to hear that those who have had it done seem pleased with it. Only problem seems to be to get performance figures, but using 172Q figures for a 180 hp 172N would seem to work ok-ish.

I was a bit surprised by the flaps 30 deal, but apparently it is a requirement for the gross weight increase. I would also have thought the extra hp would allow it to climb at flaps 40 even with the added weight. Wonder if maybe it was too much of a hassle to demonstrate that to FAA standards.

An added bonus for us is that it would be able to use unleaded 91/96UL fuel as well as 100LL, good for the wallet as well as the environment! :ok:

[jxk]

I flew one of the Penn Yan conversions in NZ and very good it was too. Rounded Mt.Cook at 13k, 3 POB and at least half fuel. I believe that some models of the 172 were lighter than others; can't tell you which though. The mod is only suitable for the Lycoming engine 172s.

[gasax]

I've flown a standard 160hp C172 on floats, an extended wingspan 150hp C172 on floats and a 180hp C172 on floats.

The best performer by far was the 180hp version - so, so much better you just would not believe it.

The 220hp franklin conversion is supposedly even better. But if you have the oppertunity do it - it really is a different aircraft so, so much better!

[overandout]

Not so.
I just exchanged my Continental 300-D in Cessna F172F (Reims built) with Air Plains 180hp kit.

First class service and accurate kit supplied. Speed increased,climb rate dramatically improved, ceiling unknown but I got bored (still climbing well as i passed 15,000 ft!) Fuel burn decreased surprisingly.

I kept the 40 deg flap and did not fit the strengtheners for GW increase.

Would recommend this kit for early 145 hp 172's

overandout

[trex450]

A simple cheap conversion that you can do is to add a tuned exhaust from Powerflow systems in the US. I added one to my 160hp 172 and gained 100RPM at a stationary full power run up instantly. There is no mod to the engine apart from taking off the existing exhaust and adding the new one. The fuel settings remain the same so you gain power, in the region of 15 HP for take off, and reduce your fuel burn in the cruise, or increase your speed for the same fuel burn. Unfortunately there is a slight weight penalty (a few kgs) instead of weight gain.

[10W]

Or get a Reims Rocket ... 210hp Cessna FR172

[B2N2]

...and get the electric MT propeller...:
MT-Propeller EASA STC Cessna (http://www.mt-propeller.com/en/entw/stceasa/cessna.htm) :ok:
I'll make a little shopping list for you:

180 HP Penn Yann
Powerflow exhaust
Electric MT

You'll be doing Mach.25 in no time...lol

[SkyHawk-N]

I'm considering the Airplains STC but won't be getting rid of the 40 degree flaps as they are far too useful.

[bjornhall]

We might have hit a snag here... Since ours is an F172N, not a C172N, it's apparently "not really a Cessna" as far as those STC's go... :ooh::ugh::ugh::ugh::{

Will see if we can find a way around that; hope so!

That MT thingie looks sweet! :ok: