Cessna Cardinal 177

[Katamarino]

Does anyone have experience of flying or owning these aircraft? They look fantastic, and I love the 172 and 182; I'd be very interested to hear how the 180hp 177 (or 200hp 177RG) compare. How tough is the RG; can it handle grass? The 172RG gear seems a little fragile, and the 177 doesn't look any better.

I'd love to have a go in one if anyone in Holland or the SE UK has access to one :ok:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3208/2700971389_ac08a04de6.jpg

[BackPacker]

I know a guy quite well who owns and operates one out of EHSE. Want me to get you in touch with him?

[mmgreve]

Make sure you try out an example that has been well looked after. I have flown a 177rg with a poor maintenance record only once and promised myself never to get in the thing again.

We had issues with the govenor at start up which almost made us bin the whole flight, and then repeading issues with the gear, so I was fairly happy to park it back at the ramp with no further dents after a short flight.

I was however impressed with the space inside and the convinience of two big doors. Cruise performance in pretty good for the rg, although I found it a little unstable in turbulence (first ever high wing experience).

They have a loyla folowing, which makes me thing that the example I flew was particulary taddy, so make sure you try one in good nick.

Lots of info here
Cardinal Flyers Online LLC Home Page (http://www.cardinalflyers.com/home/_home.php)

On planecheck, there are a few for sale in France. You might convince one of the owners to let you have a test flight if you are seriously considering to buy one (not sure if that is you mission)

[AfricanEagle]

Kat, next time you are in Italy let me know, I can organize a flight for you in a RG.

[Katamarino]

Backpacker; I'd really appreciate that if you could, yes; thanks!

mmgreve; thanks for the helpful info. I ave indeed located the American Cardinal Flyers group, and their website is quite informative; if I end up buying one I'll certainly join them. I'm leaning towards a fixed gear model as the RG comes with higher maintenance and is probably not so happy on non-tarmac strips.

AE; thanks, I'll certainly do that!

[BackPacker]

Kat, I have asked the owner to contact you.

[Katamarino]

You're a star. If I buy one, you can have a ride :ok:

[BackPacker]

Personally I find high-wing aircraft boring because my length means I'm sitting inside the wing root, which greatly restricts the view out. And if you can't turn the aircraft upside down, even more so.

But I'm willing to let myself be convinced otherwise...:ok:

[172driver]

You're a star. If I buy one, you can have a ride

I'd like one too ;) ! Always admired the looks of this one.

Cannot help with the 177, but have a couple hundred hours in the 172RG. IMHO one of the best all-round a/c you can get (although if I'm honest, I'd prefer a 182RG for the speed). With the long range tanks has an endurance of around 6 hours, flies reasonably fast for a Lycosaurus spamcan, i.e. 125-135kt (depending on model and prop) and only drinks about 8 USG in the cruise (leaned). I have always operated the ones I fly in and out of tarmac, so can't really comment on the sturdiness of the gear WRT grass/gravel. As you are about to move to the US, this shouldn't be an issue. It does get you in and out of pretty short strips, though.

What I have heard (rumour alert!) is that one should have the main fuselage attachment points (IOW where wing meets cabin) thoroughly inspected by someone who knows what he's looking for. This is a slightly weak point of all strut-less Cessnas. Probably more of an issue on the 210, as its used mainly for commercial flying, but still worth bearing in mind.

Let us know how you get on!

[Katamarino]

Backpacker; in English, when talking about this subject, it is better to talk about one's height rather than length. Discussion of ones length can, in some situations, be misunderstood :eek: Anyway, apparently one of the best points about the 177 is that the wing is moved considerably further back than in other high wing Cessnas for exactly the reason you mention; it enables a far better view out, as the pilot is now sitting in front of the wing, not under it.

172driver; I agree on the 172RG. I'm a big fan of it, it's a lovely stable IFR platform!

[horizon flyer]

Hi Katamarino best to join the Cardinal Club before buying as they have a good pre buy check guide. The fixed gear is best for grass fields, RG wheels are small, still have flash backs of a soft field takeoff in one, it rolled 1700feet
on a 2100ft runway before becoming unglued, normal roll under 1000.

With speed mods, VP prop and tuned exhaust nearly as fast as an RG.
The 177 was going to replace the 172 but buyers stepped over it to the 182.

Is the only Cessna with a stabilator like a PA28, so handles different not a big 172, will take a little training for the landing. Light handling, no big out of trim loads with all the flaps down on go around. Can lift nearly as much payload as a 182 without the fuel burn, with slightly longer ground run on takeoff. Good personel aircraft, the best are French built, as all corrosion proofed.

The only down side is it uses a Lycoming 360 series engine, which has many built in design faults. A low usage machine WILL lose the camshaft, due to rust pitting, also exhust valve sticking due to poor oil flow to valve gear and cylinder 3 suffers cooling problems in a Cardinal down to Cessna. Lycoming state they can only make the 2000hr tbo if used 40hours a month. Avoid any duel mag version rather than 2 single mags very little support for this abomination of a a magnito.

We operated 2 RGs over nearly 20 years I think on paper the best all rounder
in the 180/200 HP class but you must have a maintenace organisation with the specialist knowlege of Cardinals repeat its not a big172 more a smaller 210 same wing.

The guys a Derby are the UK specialists with spares on hand I would suggest talking to them if you want to buy one as they know most of them in the UK.

[2high2fastagain]

Every Cardinal owner I know is tickled pink with their aircraft. The RGs go along at a stink -more than 130 knots I think. And that front undercarriage door is one hell of an airbrake!

However, I do disagree with the poster who talk about RG issues on grass. I fly a 182RG of a very short grass field and have had no problems whatsoever for a number of years.

I think the only issue with the Cardinal RG I know of is that if you thump it down heavily, you sometimes need to have misaligned downlock microswitches sorted out. I know of two who've needed to do that.

A super aircraft which in my view is the prettiest high wing single (he said, waiting for the inevitable catcalls from the Piper fraternity!)

[NazgulAir]

Hi Katamarino,

I've flown many types and IMHO the C177RG performs best of all the four-seat 200HP normally aspirated a/c in the rental fleets. Comparing it with the Piper Arrow, it's roomier, faster and has a bigger envelope in all directions. It's a very nice travelling aircraft with a good range.

Ergonomically, it's not like a C172 at all. Better view, better placement of the controls for people with shorter arms, more comfortable all round.

The one that I rented was the PH-AKJ, when it was operated by Wings over Holland. I think it's in Eindhoven now. JetPhotos.Net Photo » PH-AKJ Wings over Holland Cessna 177RG Cardinal RG by Connector (http://jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5810133&nseq=1)

[A and C]

You post about the aircraft is full of half truths that misinform people so as to make what you are trying to say of no use whatsoever.

The Lycoming O-360 is one of the most reliable engines in the world so your statement about reliability is totally untrue for most Lycoming O-360 engines, what I think you intended To say is that the aircraft as fitted with the Lycoming O- 360 H series engine. That engine has real issues !

I think you will find that the reason that Cessna stopped making the aircraft was due to the cost of manufacturing the un-strutted wing.

As with all these things the devil is in the detail and you can expect the next big issue on these forums to be the mis fueling of aircraft with 91UL as owners fail to understand that a Lycoming O-235 fitted to say a Robin is not the s ame as a O-235 fitted to a Cessna 152.

[papa oscar]

Ive flown one for the last 5 years and still enjoy flying it. It's a 1975 FG. Any question, feel free to ask.

[Barcli]

flew one in the Schneider trophy air race many moons ago and got disqualified for going too fast .......:8

[Katamarino]

papa oscar; fantastic, thanks! I am particularly interested in how the performance on short and grass fields compares with the C172? The 1975 is a 180hp model, right?

[BWBI]

Did my complex rating in one years ago which was a bit of a dog of thing! It had a bad mechanical record and had suffered two collapsed gear landings to my knowledge and a history of gear micro switch problems which were later found to apparently account for these mishaps! I can remember that winding the gear down manually was difficult as well, but again that may have been that particular aircraft!

I couldn't wait to get out of thing once I had got the rating! Having said all that I guess it would be a nice aircraft to own if you got a good one but certainly look out for those micro switch problems. I can also remember it was very difficult to start due to some electrical issue or the other which was not battery related.

The example I flew cost the owner and arm and a leg as he put it into a group and it just could not cope with the wear and tear and something seemed to break every time it was flown providing you could start it in the first place!! But again that was the owners fault really as it is not a group type aircraft IMHO and always struck me as a type which needed TLC by a sole owner.

[papa oscar]

Yep, it's a 180hp fixed gear. Short field performance is excellent. 4 adults and 4 hours fuel and I'm happy to take it in and out of 600m strips with plenty to spare. More than happy to use 450m strips if two up and 3 hours fuel.
All this on an eighteen year old engine with 2800 hours on it.
Currently having the engine rebuilt and the prop overhauled so it should perform even better once it's back.

Maintenance is no different cost wise to another VP single Cessna of similar size.
Our aircraft is a group shareoplane and don't experience any difficulties that BWBI talks about. Ours is certainly no dog, though I have seen a few that I would prefer not to fly.

Using a maintenance outfit that knows the aircraft type helps in keeping it in tip top condition.

[2high2fastagain]

Yep, I'm sure they will. I think Cessna fixed that early problem many decades ago according to the 177 owners I know.

[papa oscar]

The stabilator slots were added (and retrofitted for free) to counter a stong pitch down motion when side slipping with flaps down.
This allowed the stabilator to tolerate a steeper down flow of air without stalling the underside of the stabilator.

[XLC]

A friend of mine owns one in Thailand. He likes the plane but is at the same time aware of some of it's shortcomings - but then most planes have anyway. He mentioned to never buy a 'repaired' 177RG that had an accident for the fuselage can easily be out of alignment. On the positive side the fuel consumption is reasonable when flying long distances. And the look of course.

[Katamarino]

I think the RG would be a little rich for my tastes, with potentially higher maintenance and less rugged gear for visiting back-country strips. A 180hp fixed gear would do nicely. Backpacker has kindly put me in touch with an owner nearby, so I hope to go for a flight in one soon!

Interesting about the fuselage alignment; I shall give greater preference to aircraft with NDH...

[horizon flyer]

I my experience there are several design faults built into O360 & IO360 engines. Very poor valve cooling, causing seized closed exhaust valves or high valve guide wear. Also need to carry out the wobble valve test every 400 hours or fit the latest hardened valve guides. Best to set up for very high oil pressure 80/100psi to push oil into the rocker covers to cool them.
The Mooney 235 actual has 4 oil lines to the rocker boxes with an oil jet on each exhaust valve stems to cool them, also all 360s have Sodium filled exhaust valves to try move the heat into the rocker box.

On low usage engines, with the camshaft being set high up, all the oil drains off it and the cam lobes starts to rust, then wear at a high rate. Lycoming now produce a 360 with roller camfollowers to overcome this, also produces a bit more power.

The end caps at each end of the wristpin in the pistons have aliminium/bronze plugs to keep it in the centre, these can break up score the cylinder and rightoff the piston.

In the Cardinal cyl 3 runs the hottest this must be corrected or the oil control ring is cooked breaks and detonation will occur at high power
due to oil blow by plus oil consumtion becomes very high.

The cylinder head redline is stated as 475f but is should be 400f with 380 or below in cruise. Above 380 cooling changes must be slow or damage can occur over time.

I do not agree the 360 is reliable and have the invoices to prove it.
To many design faults that Lycoming have never fixed, even after many attempts.

I agree the Cardinal is great to fly, the wing has forward sweep for better view. On wieght & balance, difficult to load out of C of G but can be overloaded on later models with 60usg tanks early ones have 50usg.

The RG weights 200lbs more than the FG due to the under carriage,
both can pick up approx 950lbs with 300lbs (50usg) of fuel leaves 650lbs for pay load. So easy 4 hours range with reserves.

The slot in the stabilator was fitted to overcome it stalling during landing flair.
The Cardinal can be sidesliped with any flap setting.

The most important thing on landing is approach speed control.
On an RG 72 +-2.5 mph, over speed and they eat runway.

Loverly handling aircraft with space but must be maintained by Cardinal trained people.

[A and C]

Your view seems a little bleek and drags up old problems that have been fixed for years, the 400 hour valve check is only for engines without the hi-chrome valve guides, I cant remember when I last saw one of these.

I cant see how a roller would have any effect of the corrosion on the face of a cam, I think it has far more to do with ease of production, rather than having to produce solid cam follower with a slightly offset face to ensure that it rotates slowly & the PR department turning it into a selling point.

The piston pin problem has nothing to do with them being ali-bronze, it is due to a step being worn in the bore.......this is becoming a real issue with the O-235 were I have seen failure starting to happen at as little as 300 hours. If you had a piston pin plug break up it is due to very poor maintenance as basic examination of the oil filter will indicate piston pin plug problemd long before total failure.

[Katamarino]

I'm getting keener and keener on the FG Cardinal :ok: I wonder if one could fly it around the world...:E

[172driver]

I'm sure you could. However, a 182 would IMHO be the better ship for that kind of adventure. Or a 210 with the ultra long-range tanks (10 hours).

[Katamarino]

Agreed on the 182. I'd always planned to do it in a 182 with a diesel engine.

[Radar]

It's been 18 - 20 years ago now but I flew both the fixed gear and RG Cardinal from Beek in the mid-90s. Both were a joy to fly and the RG in particular remains the finest all round touring aircraft I've flown. Roomy, fast (for 200hp), comfortable. But I take the point regarding the gear retraction mechanism.

[papa oscar]

I'd be more than happy to fly around the world in my Cardinal FG.
Katamarino, if you are ever in the North of the UK, give me a shout and you can see two of the best FG's there are in Europe.