banner graphic
Airport Webcams
Who's Online
20 registered (Buppy, Don Fenton, Pilawt, jnpjohnson, Barnett, multisync, Henry M., Aerodon, 172kevin, mallard, Rod Man, Seawings172, Bob2, magman, Joeman434, Dickc82, troppo, SeaProbe, Enlisted Pilot, 1 invisible), 456 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Ziutek, Mich, Vol76L, Engine Guy, Vamsi
12367 Registered Users
Top Posters
Bargain Bob 216468
Rusty Rudder 8363
vettdvr 7724
Joeman434 6780
Cessna Dude 6628
California Flyer 6199
Willie 4728
Clyde Cessna 4485
Don Tedrow 3659
Peedie Montgomery 3456
wrecksum 2704
ytodd 2582
Ward Holbrook 2436
XP Driver 2407
November X-ray 2303
Jim_1 2278
N5479R 2232
Viper_96 2044
Wayne R 2001
Henry M. 1988
Bigdoggh 1966
Challenger1 1947
oilwell1415 1906
Pilawt 1889
cadcap 1842
Nightowl 1826
Showboatsix 1817
Nintendo Pilot 1744
Glenn Darr 1708
KevinMcP 1665
Top Posters (30 Days)
Joeman434 90
DeputydogK9 79
Challenger1 76
Viper_96 65
cadcap 56
Jon H 43
N5479R 37
Rusty Rudder 29
Peedie Montgomery 20
CD. 16
multisync 15
magman 14
Wrench 14
mx757 12
Skydawg 12
wildduk 12
Gooneybird 12
C420sailor 11
CaptPenner 11
skyhawk3 11
OldGunbunny 10
Henry M. 9
Jim Faulks 9
Underdog 9
Sondavid 8
deltafox 7
SeaProbe 7
California Flyer 7
Opee 6
torquen 6
Topic Options
#211507 - 10/21/14 03:26 AM C172 180hp vs 172XP?
dls1981dustin Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 03/03/12
Posts: 54
Loc: Streator, IL
I've been kicking around purchasing a C172 in the future. I fly in and out of a lot of short strips on hot Midwest summer days and I am getting tired of struggling with my C150 on hot days. With that being said I defiantly want a C172 180hp minimum. But the Hawk XP looked very appealing of the extra Hp and CS prop. I have been hearing horror stories about the engine in the XP that is is weak, prone to case cracks, short lived, expensive parts, OH's ect and wondering if it's all talk or maybe something I should keep away from. The Avcon conversion 180hp w/ CS prop looks appealing too but I know support is pretty much non-existent. I would like w M or N model with low time. Less than 4k hours preferably. Thanks for you comments and opinions.

Top
#211526 - 10/21/14 07:40 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: dls1981dustin]
Pilot110 Offline
Gold Pilot

Registered: 03/15/11
Posts: 1659
Loc: Florida,USA
The Hawk XP and a 180 HP converted Skyhawk are entirely different aircraft, both excellent in their own way. There really is not much takeoff and climb performance difference between a 180 hp Hawk and an XP. However the XP will run away from a converted C-172 in cruise.

I have flown the IO-360 for years in CAP aircraft and never had any of the issues you mentioned. I have however heard dozens of horror stories from people about cam failures in the O-360 Lycoming from low use. Continental engines seem to fare better than Lycoming with infrequent use and a lot of aircraft on the market just don't fly much these days..

Top
#211532 - 10/21/14 09:01 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: Pilot110]
Desert Hawk Offline
Silver Pilot

Registered: 06/30/13
Posts: 919
Loc: Phoenix, Arizona
Originally Posted By: Pilot110
However the XP will run away from a converted C-172 in cruise.


Why do you say an XP is faster in cruise than an 180hp conversion? I suppose that a CS prop on the Xp could be an advantage. But it would depend upon what prop was on the 180hp conversion. Additionally, some conversions have the powerflow exhaust, which is an advantage in that direction.

So maybe the answer about which is better is "it depends"...
_________________________
karl
1975 C172M-180

Top
#211548 - 10/21/14 10:26 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: Desert Hawk]
farnk Offline
Second in Command

Registered: 01/09/12
Posts: 120
Loc: Central PA
When our engine died before a trip to the midwest, we knew we'd rent a Hawk while there. We were told we'd love the performance and to get a feel for 180 horses (we decided to upgrade from 150HP). We were extremely disappointed. After discussing with my mechanic, speculation is the fuel injection in the IO360 Hawk. He stated fuel injection doesn't perform like carburated engine. We were pleased when the installation was done as the O360 performs like a champ. We're still thrilled 2 months and 44 hours later. Great on 1,000 mile treks as well.

Side note/For what it's worth: we were expecting 9.5 gallons per hour plus or minus 1.5. We're got 8.5 (mixed rich of peak) on a recent trip from PA to Scouth Carlolina and back. Since install we get between 6.25 & 9.6 and that's at 2,525 RPMs break-in cruide.
_________________________
The Bahamas are missing! - Frank

Top
#211554 - 10/21/14 01:22 PM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: farnk]
Kinhop Offline
Silver Pilot

Registered: 11/08/12
Posts: 821
Loc: Saskatchewan
Hey Frank,

Sorry, but I'm not following - the "Hawk" was what, 180 conversion or XP? Then you had a conversion done on your old plane, but based on your previous disappointment, why? I'm actually just really interested to know your story, but it seems abbreviated and I don't think I'm getting it all.
_________________________
Craig

Top
#211589 - 10/21/14 06:15 PM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: Kinhop]
Bluesky Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 02/26/14
Posts: 43
Loc: Durango, CO
My 172K has an Airplanes 180hp mod, Lyc O-360A1A (out of a Mooney with 2400 since new)' fixed pitch, PowerFlow short stack exhaust. I fly out of 00C (Colorado 4 Corners) 6,685 msl. Cruise at 132mph at 2475rpm, burn 7.2-8.5 at this rpm below 5000' in the central US flat lands.. I grew up and CFI'd out to Campbell Airport north of ORD. At 2200 lbs I can climb to at least 17,800' in my recent trip to Glacier National Park.

I use 10 degrees of flaps for normal take-offs to limit ground run and have no problems taking of with DA's above 11,000'.

My gross weight is 2300 lbs, empty 1425. I flew a PA28-180 years before to the CO front range and would never carry more than 2 people up for a mountain view....

I would assume you would be quite pleased with most 172's with a 180hp since you're used to a C150.

Top
#211595 - 10/21/14 06:37 PM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: Bluesky]
dls1981dustin Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 03/03/12
Posts: 54
Loc: Streator, IL
Thanks! I was just thinking maybe I would be better suited to consider a 182 over. Hawk XP. I can't seem to find much for info on Hawk XP's and don't know anyone that's ever had them and just heard about the Continental IO-360 being troublesome. I have heard that the Lycoming 0-360 was a pretty stout bullet proof motor though. I was just wondering if it was worth while to consider the XP which has a CS prop and two more cylinders which equals more money and maintenance over a 180hp converted Hawk and which I could consider a powerflow addition at a later point?


Edited by dls1981dustin (10/21/14 06:39 PM)

Top
#211649 - 10/21/14 08:54 PM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: dls1981dustin]
farnk Offline
Second in Command

Registered: 01/09/12
Posts: 120
Loc: Central PA
Sorry Craig. References (and a long story under topic "Air Plains 180HP Conversion STC SA4428SW Experience"). My 172M O-320 died one week ahead of a trip to Missouri. We were to fly but ended up driving. Rented an fuel-injected IO-360 once we got to Missouri and were severely disappointed. Our mechanic stated it was likely the fuel injection that made the rental a 'dog'. We hoped so as we didn't want our on-order new O-360 to perform so terribly. It was a fear (that it would). Turns out our O-360 performs as well as expected. I will suspect my mechanic is correct in stating the fuel-injected IO-360 was (minimally) the culprit. I hope that clears it up.
_________________________
The Bahamas are missing! - Frank

Top
#211650 - 10/21/14 08:57 PM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: farnk]
dls1981dustin Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 03/03/12
Posts: 54
Loc: Streator, IL
Originally Posted By: farnk
Sorry Craig. References (and a long story under topic "Air Plains 180HP Conversion STC SA4428SW Experience"). My 172M O-320 died one week ahead of a trip to Missouri. We were to fly but ended up driving. Rented an fuel-injected IO-360 once we got to Missouri and were severely disappointed. Our mechanic stated it was likely the fuel injection that made the rental a 'dog'. We hoped so as we didn't want our on-order new O-360 to perform so terribly. It was a fear (that it would). Turns out our O-360 performs as well as expected. I will suspect my mechanic is correct in stating the fuel-injected IO-360 was (minimally) the culprit. I hope that clears it up.


So you think a 180hp converted Hawk outperforms a Hark XP? Hmmmm. I'm mainly looking for good climb out rates as I'm in and out of short strips on hot days.

Top
#211819 - 10/21/14 09:25 PM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: dls1981dustin]
cadcap Offline
Gold Pilot

Registered: 11/17/11
Posts: 1842
Loc: NW Indiana
I flew quite a few hrs. in a couple Civil Air Patrol 172/180hp "N" models with loads of extra radio & security equip. on board...the performance was more than adequate for dropping into and jumping out of the short soft fields of Indiana on Homeland Security Reconnaissance & Counter Narcotics Trafficing Observation Flights. Never had a power problem even with a copilot and a back seat observer on board. Prop was fixed and I'm not sure if it was a climb prop or cruise prop. If I had to guess I'd bet it was a climb prop as a fast cruise didn't ever suite the missions.
_________________________
1967 172H "Bronze Lindy" OshKosh '13


Top
#211976 - 10/22/14 12:32 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: cadcap]
Nintendo Pilot Offline
Gold Pilot

Registered: 05/22/11
Posts: 1744
Loc: Utah
I've flown both in my area where 4500 ft is considered the starting norm for airfield elevation. The XP had a bit better climb performance but was no faster. The XP is not a 172 with a big engine. It is a different airframe all together, a 175 with an IO-360 but still a draggy Cessna.
_________________________
Prior C172 owner, now 1963 Beechcraft Bonanza P35, (N9673Y)
Alan C.
PP-ASEL

Blog http://ontarget-spionen.blogspot.com/
Youtube Channel http://www.youtube.com/user/spionen007?feature=mhee

Top
#212076 - 10/22/14 03:17 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: Nintendo Pilot]
dls1981dustin Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 03/03/12
Posts: 54
Loc: Streator, IL
Wasn't aware XP is totally different airframe? Thought it was 172 airframe with bigger engine, CS prop, ect.

Top
#212093 - 10/22/14 07:30 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: dls1981dustin]
Pilot110 Offline
Gold Pilot

Registered: 03/15/11
Posts: 1659
Loc: Florida,USA
Originally Posted By: dls1981dustin
Wasn't aware XP is totally different airframe? Thought it was 172 airframe with bigger engine, CS prop, ect.


The Hawk XP and T-41B are built on the C-175 type certificate but are very different from each other. The T-41B has a huge open (nose),high drag cowling with no cowl flaps, Cessna 206 nose gear (6.00x6), C-182 main gear and reinforced firewall. IO-360D 210 HP not derated like the XP with 195 hp.

The XP is faster having a more streamlined cowling and smaller nose gear.The T-41B is a brute designed for the Army by the Army for their short field, rough field mission/trainer.

I have owned a C-170B, Cardinal 177B, T-41B, C-180 and also flown a CAP Hawk XP. The C-180 is very much faster than the C-172 series no matter what engine you put in them. The 180/182 series have flush riveting, and are more streamlined thruout the air frame. My 180 cruised at 155 MPH, my C-177B at 142 mph, my T-41B at 137 mph, my C-170B cruised at 118 mph. The Hawk XP I flew had the same cruise speed of a Cessna 177B. My C-180 had 230 HP only 20 more than the T-41b but is almost 20 mph faster.

I have never owned a 180 hp C-172 but flown regularly in one a friend owns that is a tail dragger C-172. He picked up about 5 mph in cruise when he upgraded his 150 hp engine to 180 hp.

If you want a true load carrying Cessna that is fast buy a C-182, no 172 series aircraft can match it no matter what you do to it. However, no other Cessna can match the C-172 for simplicity, ease of maintenance and lower cost of ownership and good basic transportation. The 180 hp conversion turns the 172 in to a much better aircraft but does not make it a lot faster.

One final note, I owned three Cessna L-19 Bird Dogs with O-470 213 HP engines and fixed pitch prop, normal cruise was 90 knots.


Edited by Pilot110 (10/22/14 08:23 AM)

Top
#212113 - 10/22/14 10:12 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: Pilot110]
Pilawt Online   content
Club Sponsor
Gold Pilot

Registered: 02/13/10
Posts: 1889
Loc: AZ
Originally Posted By: Pilot110
I owned three Cessna L-19 Bird Dogs with O-470 213 HP engines and fixed pitch prop, normal cruise was 90 knots.


At what power setting? I know those are severe climb props, so they probably overspeed at what would otherwise be normal cruise horsepower settings.

Has anyone ever put a cruise prop on a Bird Dog?
_________________________
Jeff Jacobs
C-172N-180
KGYR / Phoenix, AZ

Top
#212114 - 10/22/14 10:38 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: Pilawt]
Pilawt Online   content
Club Sponsor
Gold Pilot

Registered: 02/13/10
Posts: 1889
Loc: AZ
Just another data point about the 180 hp C-172N ...

My '78 172N has the Air Plains 180 hp STC with O-360-A4N and fixed-pitch prop, plus long-stack Power Flow exhaust with an added fiberglass fairing where the exhaust stack exits the cowl; full factory wheel and brake fairings; and flap gap seals. Cruise speed between 9,000 and 12,000' density altitude is routinely 125-130 KTAS, at 10-10.5 gph.

_________________________
Jeff Jacobs
C-172N-180
KGYR / Phoenix, AZ

Top
#212122 - 10/22/14 11:46 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: Pilawt]
dshirey Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 26
Loc: Collinsville Okla.
I have owned and flown a 1977 Hawk XP for the last 7 1/2 years. True the 172XP was built on the 175's type certificate, but the 172XP is a 172 from the firewall back. Only difference is in the nose where the Continental IO-360 is. The cowl is longer and comes up higher that a stock 172. Also has the cowl flap on the bottom of the cowl just infront of the nose gear. If I remember right, the XP's came with rudder trim as standard to help in a long climb to altitude, as more right rudder is required due to the extra torque of the big engine and prop. Speaking of prop, yes it is a constant speed, but the blades are huge compared to a normal 172. Being a fuel injected engine, it does have an electric fuel pump, but is only used to 'prime' the engine during starting, and possibly for emergency use. It is not used during takeoff or climb or during landing as may a/c with them are. I fly out of a 4400 ft grass strip in Oklahoma with a field elevation of only 680 feet, so I can't give any observations on high altitude, short strip performance, but I would guess that the performance would be more than enough for high/short field ops. I am glad that I bought the XP. The smoothness of the 6 cylinder fuel injected engine is worth every penny, and this one came with a factory reman with only 135 hours when I bought it. It is the heavy case/crank model, the -KB. Gross weight on the XP is 2550 lbs, and I can say that you can fill the seats, the fuel tanks, and go.
_________________________
Donnie W. Shirey
Cessna R172K HawkXP N3806V


Top
#212223 - 10/23/14 09:24 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: farnk]
Renegade 9 Offline
Club Sponsor
Gold Pilot

Registered: 02/14/10
Posts: 1082
Loc: SF Bay Area
Originally Posted By: farnk
...Rented an fuel-injected IO-360 once we got to Missouri and were severely disappointed. Our mechanic stated it was likely the fuel injection that made the rental a 'dog'...


Well, I've never heard the XP described as a dog. Ever. A beast perhaps, but not a dog. Maybe you flew a dud?

I don't have any experience in a converted 180hp legacy. But I do with both the 172SP and a Hawk XP in heavy, high density altitude scenarios. The XP performed much better in climb, no contest. The XP in question having the Isham STC bringing the derated IO-360 back up to 210hp @ 2800rpm, for takeoff. It's no 182, but it's certainly no dog either.

How does performance of a legacy converted 180hp compare to an SP, at the same weight?
_________________________
smirk

Top
#214488 - 11/06/14 08:03 AM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: dshirey]
RocketPilotHD Offline
Second in Command

Registered: 07/05/14
Posts: 144
Loc: Europe
Originally Posted By: dshirey
I am glad that I bought the XP. The smoothness of the 6 cylinder fuel injected engine is worth every penny, and this one came with a factory reman with only 135 hours when I bought it. It is the heavy case/crank model, the -KB. Gross weight on the XP is 2550 lbs, and I can say that you can fill the seats, the fuel tanks, and go.


I can only second that! While I have never flown the XP I have flown the Reims Rocket. Also, I can only compare it to the C172 SP build in 04 and newer. My opinion: The Rocket outperforms the new C172 with 180hp.

With the Rocket/XP you have a full 4 seat airplane with full tanks and luggage. Better climb, faster in cruise and the sound is pretty amazing... I have also heard the rumors about the engine problems. But from what I am told you need to look if the crankshaft is the updated stronger one. Mine was done at the last overhaul. But that was before I bought it.

But one thing the Rocket/XP are trim heavy planes. Took me a little to adjust to the extra nob for the prop and the heavy nose that just drops when you cut the power...

Top
#220830 - 12/14/14 12:15 PM Re: C172 180hp vs 172XP? [Re: RocketPilotHD]
NightHawk XP Offline
Second in Command

Registered: 09/22/14
Posts: 197
Loc: WY
Here's a great article on the XP which was written when it first came out. It doesn't speak about engine problems as it was brand new then, but it does give a good assessment of the plane compared to the original 172.
http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepCessnaHawkXP.html
I own and fly the XP in the mountains of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho and I think it's great. It would certainly perform well for you around Illinois!
I hope you find what you want! It stands to reason that your maintenance and especially rebuild costs will be higher with the six cylinder and CS prop. My fuel burn is about 8.5 gph at cruise and I don't seem to get that great of airspeed out of it but maybe I haven't got it all figured out yet either! I sure wouldn't call it a dog! Mines the 195 HP one. One other thing, no worries about carb ice! You trade that knob for the prop speed knob!
_________________________
If you have integrity, nothing else matters, if you don't have integrity......
Nothing else matters!

Nuff said,
Hawk !!

Top


Moderator:  Ward Holbrook 
Cessna172 Tribute
THIS MONTH'S SPONSOR
Special thanks to:
You!
Thank you for making this site great
Today's Birthdays
asthecrowflys, BrentVDW, crfflying, Mistersky, Sandman
Helpful Links
100LL Price Finder
AD Directory
Aging GA Aircraft
Aircraft Directory
Airplane Report
AirNav
Airport Facilities Directory
AOPA
Aviation Weather
Barnstormers
BaseOps
C172 History
Cessna
Controller
Crash Records
DUAT Voyager Planner
DUATS
FAA
FltPlan
Flight Aware
Flying Tools (Files)
Google Earth
Ground Speed Records
National METAR Map
Sky Vector
Trade-A-Plane
Uvalde Flight Ctr
All the Webcams
Shout Box

AOPA
AOPA
Weather Lookup
Airport code:
(separate multiple codes with spaces)

List of stations