PA22 vs. C-170

[virtualy]

I don't wish to start a discussion of Piper vs. Cessna products. I do seek input on the real capacities of these two planes. I note from the database on this site that the following parameters are listed:

Tri-Pacer 160-
Take-off (50') 1480'
Landing (50') 1280'
Cruise 117 knots
Stall 42 knots
Useful load (full fuel) 674#

C-170-
Take-off 1820'
Landing 1145'
Cruise 104 knots
Stall 50 knots
Useful load 743#

What these numbers *don't* tell me is how easy the plane is to fly, how wide is the cg envelope, what mods are available to improve these numbers (and how effective they are), how hard it is to find parts, how easy is the plane to maintain, etc.

Feedback?

[Max Tahir]

This is what I know about the Cessna. There are three 170 models; 170, 170A & 170B, they all use the same 145 hp cont. engine. I've heard they are one of the easiest tail draggers to land. The B & A models have larger flaps. Corrosion is the major problem. One more thing, for the average adult male hight, S turns may not be necessary while taxiing.

[Dave K]

I had my taildragger check out in a Stinson 108 by a FAA Designated Examiner who owns a very nice Cessna 170B. We discussed the handling of the Cessna 170 as I had heard at Oshkosh that the Christen Eagle was about as easy as the Cessna 170 in ground handling. The DE's comment was that with the leaf spring landing gear on the C-170, ground handling could be a handful, as compared to the "kiddie car" Stinson. As with any aircraft, your best bet would be to get a thorough check out in it with someone who knows the airplane. For what its worth, I'd probably choose the Cessna. Good luck.

[skid]

One of my favorite quotes is that you don't really teach someone to fly a tailwheel airplane; you just protect the airplane until he figures it out. A 170 is a great airplane, as docile as any tw airplane. There are a lot of people that should not fly tailwheel airplanes because they never quite figure it out. As for Dave K, an Eagle is entirely different than a 170. The 170 is long, slow to react, great visibility, hard to overcontrol. An eagle is a great aerobatic airplane; short, quick, powerful sensitive controls, poor landing visibility, much higher approach speeds. Everything is relative; an eagle is much easier to land than a single seat Pitts, but night and day different than a 170. Spring gear being hard to land is a mental picture people make. Spring gear is much softer than bungie gear on Pitts. Softer gear reduces 'bounces' as no air plane bounces, the angle of attack increases in an abrupt arrival makes the aiplane fly off again. The stiffer the gear the bigger the change in angle of attack or 'bounce'. There are no sqirrely airplanes, only squirrely pilots. Some airplanes just demand better technique than others.

[This message has been edited by skid (edited 05-05-99).]

[Glenn Simonds]

I learned to fly in a 140 Cessna. I have flown the Cessna 170B for about 200 hours and have flown both 135 and 150 Tripacers about 200 hours. The Cessna is probobly a little better flying airplane but for the un-intiated a lot harder airplane to land. The Cessna has a larger cabin than the Tripacer. If you look at a Cessna be sure to look for corrosion in all of the skin laps and be sure to open up all of the inspection plates on the wings and look for corrosion. The interior of the Cessna fuselage and wings were not painted unless it was ordered with a seaplane kit. On the Tripacer be sure to have the fabric punch tested be sure that all of the wing strut AD notes have been complied with. Have fun with what ever you buy.

Glenn