A Very close look at two exceptional Planes with MANY modifications

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 31 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 143

  • @blancolirio
    @blancolirio 7 місяців тому +11

    Brilliant! Thanks Mark!
    These are the kind of details we want!

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +3

      I hope I do not have to keep up that amount of info on each. My brain will explode.

  • @jeffsmith1661
    @jeffsmith1661 4 місяці тому +4

    I have a 1980 182Q with a port and polished IO550D-330HP. It is a beast on 29” mains. I sold a TBM 850 and found the joy of flying again. Love Skywagon University!

  • @adamkorekach9936
    @adamkorekach9936 7 місяців тому +14

    The 169N is absolutely stunning! 500 cu in engine must be making at least 400 ft lbs of torque. Hats off to Mark. You’re a wealth of knowledge.

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +6

      520 Cu inches. balance and blueprinted, polished and ported and with ceramic coatings. Dyno'ed at 310 HP.

    • @mannypuerta5086
      @mannypuerta5086 7 місяців тому +3

      Adamkorekach A Ly-Con built PPONK O-470-50 will dyno 308-314 HP and very close to 600# torque.

    • @larryweitzman5163
      @larryweitzman5163 6 місяців тому

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 Is that a Ken Tunnell (LyCon) engine? The formula for hp is torqueXrpm/5252=hp. The rule of thumb for max torque is about a ft.pound of torque per cubic inch. I have a buddy with a LyCon io-550 which makes 607 lb.ft. at 2700 rpm which is about 338 hp. That's 1.1 pound of torque per ci. Tunnell pulled the dyno sheet on it for me.

  • @PaulGentryK4BWG
    @PaulGentryK4BWG 7 місяців тому +15

    Thanks Geekie Mark!

  • @richardkimrey
    @richardkimrey 7 місяців тому +9

    Your presentation without notes is amazing. Big fan of s w u.

  • @Saml01
    @Saml01 7 місяців тому +4

    The quality of the work and attention to detail on that 180 simply incredible.

  • @pauljalbert
    @pauljalbert 6 місяців тому +2

    I love the geekiness! Two amazing restorations! The level of detail, and quite frankly luxury, in the 180 are mouth-watering! I'm guessing the 182 was not refurbished by the same company that did the 180? It's hard not to fantasize about a 182 that might be given the same treatment (and funding)!🤩

  • @TheSportFlyer-xy6sn
    @TheSportFlyer-xy6sn 7 місяців тому +5

    27:10 I like the width of the newer 182's. I finally got an up close look at a 185 yesterday- wow it is a bit narrow.

  • @thebodaciousgaucho
    @thebodaciousgaucho 7 місяців тому +3

    Another great video Mark! I don't understand why a certain company in Granite Falls, Washington wouldn't want you saying their name though.

  • @musoseven8218
    @musoseven8218 7 місяців тому +2

    That 180? Yes please, someone has spent a lot of time, love and money on that.
    Both are cracking aircraft though - I like Cessnas✌️👍😊
    Another great video - alway a pleasure and a school day👍✌️💜😊

  • @sski
    @sski 7 місяців тому +7

    That 180 is my dream plane. That is if I can't have an Ag Truck which is basically the same wing and tail on a different fuselage, then yeah, this beauty. What a sweet plane.
    Edit (20 min mk): You're showing the cockpit of the 180. MEIN GOTT!! What an airplane!! That control panel is so clean and well built! And the lighting! Seats! Interior appointments! Man O Man! Thank you so much for showing this off! Made my day!

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +3

      Yes, that was the 180

    • @sski
      @sski 7 місяців тому +3

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 My accountant will probably string me up just for asking, but what are we looking at for a base price on the 180? Or should I choose another avenue to communicate?

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +2

      @@sski I do not normally mention prices on the videos but since these are so modified and upgraded, everyone is going to want to know so I did mention them. Contact me on or on text at 530 306 4648 for info. They are on my website at Skywagons.com as well. The 180 is $399,000.

    • @sski
      @sski 7 місяців тому +1

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 Thank you, Mark! Very much appreciated. $400 G's for the 180? I expected it to be at least twice that! Amazing! I have to look at a couple things but I will contact you toward the end of the week. Hopefully I won't be too late. Thank you again for your response!

  • @bruce3909
    @bruce3909 7 місяців тому +3

    A great video. I have a 1962 182E with a O-400U. I always thought it was speedy i now know that it has 230 HP at 2400. I looked into the John Jewell stc. I disregarded it due to the rpm limitation in cruise. But the 230 full hp at 2400 makes me smile. I totally agree on the upgrades and the ad ons. I’m pretty much equal on my purchase price to my avionics upgrades. I love it 162 mph at 13 gph is pretty nice.

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +1

      So you have a U in a 62?

    • @bruce3909
      @bruce3909 7 місяців тому +2

      Yup, it was installed under the Texas Skyways STC. I can’t claim the credit for it, it was in it when I purchased it. It’s a beautiful example of a 62 it was painted with the blue, black and gold restart paint scheme. Maybe some day i’ll get a chance to drop in and show it off ;)
      It will be in oshkosh with the Cessna mass arrival crew this year

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +1

      That is a nice upgrade, 500 more hours on it's TBO too.

  • @richardturner6278
    @richardturner6278 7 місяців тому +3

    Incredible airplanes Mark! Those are definitely 2 examples of true sky "wagons". Not as expensive as I thought. Especially when compared to Carbon cubs for what they are and what they can do .

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +2

      This is how it will be. Like the military planes, renovate and re-equip do not build new.

  • @cinnamanstera6388
    @cinnamanstera6388 7 місяців тому +2

    Stoked to see your Alaska content! Floatplanes! Floatplanes! Floatplanes!

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +2

      Erm, yes, we will be in a 185 floatplane. It will be fun.

    • @cinnamanstera6388
      @cinnamanstera6388 7 місяців тому +1

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 Huzzah!! Wishes do come true!

    • @cinnamanstera6388
      @cinnamanstera6388 7 місяців тому +1

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 Huzzah!! Wishes do come true!

  • @erniekelly2479
    @erniekelly2479 7 місяців тому +3

    I’m totally geeked out. Thanks, Mark!

  • @rocketmanpm
    @rocketmanpm 7 місяців тому +2

    Great video, Mark! I hope you can take a walk around Hood Lake when you go to Alaska.

  • @skyepilotte11
    @skyepilotte11 7 місяців тому +1

    Thx Mark...two outstanding aircraft, especially that 180.

  • @mattf49006
    @mattf49006 7 місяців тому +4

    I left California in 86 and moved to Portland Or.....at southwest skyways at TOA was a '79 182 with 2200 TT and a factory reman engine with 100 hours...I didn't have the 25,600 at the time to buy it at the time...still kicking myself over it

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +3

      Oh yes. There are so many of those. Remember though that if you had bought it in 1986 you would have had 38 years of ownership, taxes, hangarage, annual, repairs, engine overhauls, paint, radio upgrades and would be in it $230,000 by now.

    • @mattf49006
      @mattf49006 7 місяців тому +2

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 and at 230k still less than a new Skyhawk or Warrior....lol

    • @mattf49006
      @mattf49006 7 місяців тому +2

      @skywagonuniversity5023 ..while it stung for a while.. I consoled myself with a T210N a couple years later

  • @doctortmd
    @doctortmd 5 місяців тому +1

    Great video! Stunning examples of their type. Would love a future video that compares/contrasts the various STOL kits out there.

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  5 місяців тому +2

      That would be a good video but I'd have to have a few of them here to show. Robertson, Horton, Sportsman, Bush, Owl, Mid America, VG's etc etc.

  • @ph5915
    @ph5915 7 місяців тому +2

    Wow! Those are both GORGEOUS airplanes, verry good, informative video, thankyou, Mark! You are right about the cost perspective.

  • @rogerkober9836
    @rogerkober9836 7 місяців тому +2

    I greatly enjoy all your videos Mark. In the immortal words of Pink Floyd’s David Gilmour, I’m a “earthbound misfit,” but I live vicariously through UA-cam and pilots such as yourself. Thanks.

  • @kevinmurphy3464
    @kevinmurphy3464 7 місяців тому +1

    Boy I love that Cessna 180! Another cool video sir.

  • @craigsanders6925
    @craigsanders6925 7 місяців тому +2

    The 180 is an incredible build!!!

  • @ronstowe8898
    @ronstowe8898 7 місяців тому +2

    Love the geek reviews. The 180 is exceptional.

  • @Salty1952
    @Salty1952 7 місяців тому +1

    Both of these planes are sooo nice!

  • @markbryan9989
    @markbryan9989 7 місяців тому +1

    I am headed out to by a Powerball ticket. If it hits, I will be in Placerville to pick up the 182 as soon as the check clears!

  • @georgemixelogj9749
    @georgemixelogj9749 7 місяців тому +1

    Excellent video. I love the geeky ones. Thank you Mark.

  • @jimbloom7568
    @jimbloom7568 7 місяців тому +1

    Amazing aircraft. Thanks, Mark.

  • @bradfieldrich
    @bradfieldrich 7 місяців тому +1

    Fun watching you geek out. Respect and gratitude for what you do.

  • @wiffleful1
    @wiffleful1 7 місяців тому +1

    That’s really excellent info Mark. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Thank you.

  • @arpeltier
    @arpeltier 7 місяців тому +1

    Both of those planes are gorgeous. I wish I was able to pick up either of them!

  • @garyowen9044
    @garyowen9044 7 місяців тому +1

    That was a great video! You have surpassed even your normal high standard of geekdom, to a new level of PhD Geekness. We salute you!

  • @pforbom1844
    @pforbom1844 7 місяців тому +1

    Great airplanes. Thanks for the video.

  • @bobcfi1306
    @bobcfi1306 7 місяців тому +2

    Very informative 😊

  • @BeauInPDX
    @BeauInPDX 7 місяців тому +1

    Amazing planes! Thanks for all the info, I can only imagine how awesome those are to fly.

  • @aldohattonduran5227
    @aldohattonduran5227 7 місяців тому +1

    Awesome 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼 ty very much 🛩️🇺🇸🙏🏼👌🏼

  • @fridge7515
    @fridge7515 7 місяців тому +1

    Some dream planes right there! Awesome video as always, thanks Sir

  • @jimkoney4200
    @jimkoney4200 7 місяців тому +3

    Beautiful airplanes.

  • @rogerreimer6787
    @rogerreimer6787 7 місяців тому +2

    Have you ever put a diesel engine in any of the modified airplanes like 182 because of the cost of aviation gas I only have about 10 hour in a 182 but my favorite Cessna air plane I ever flown is the 177 I think it is even more stable than a 172 which is the plane I have most time on.

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +2

      I flew a 182R (1983) with a flat four cylinder, air cooled, four liter, direct drive SMA diesel (Jet fuel) 230 HP engine in it. It had a TBO of 3500 hours, no gearbox, and did 230 HP on half the gallons of the 470 and in an R model with a 92 gallon "wet wing" it was able to fly across the Atlantic to Sweden where it's new home was, without ferry tanks. It was an incredible engine. Not sure why it did not take off unless Continental and Lycoming found out about it etc etc. It was hardly heavier, faster, longer lived and twice as economical as the 470. 4.0 TDI and a six cylinder was in the pipes for the 520 powered planes. French Company.

  • @RaceMentally
    @RaceMentally 7 місяців тому +2

    I flew over yesterday from Tahoe. Should’ve stopped in. Went to Columbia and got a flat too 😂

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +2

      I have a tube.

    • @RaceMentally
      @RaceMentally 7 місяців тому

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 thanks! I greased a few pockets and got it handled. Installed TPMS set up today. Also running 40-45 now. Hopefully better results. I’m going to have to fly in there sometime soon. Love your videos and why I got my RV6A

  • @FlyingNDriving
    @FlyingNDriving 7 місяців тому +2

    That 180 is Niiiiiiiiiiiice

  • @AlohaJeff
    @AlohaJeff 7 місяців тому +1

    Fantastic 30 minutes! N641AB would be a great 125 kt cruiser!

  • @iward940
    @iward940 7 місяців тому +2

    Mark is the Mona Lisa Vito of Cessna airplanes.

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +1

      It is. We should have had a silent walkaround with serene music playing instead of me jabbering.

    • @iward940
      @iward940 7 місяців тому

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 The jabbering is the best part! Model years, feature changes and anomalies, etc. …jabber on sir.

  • @LittleManFlying
    @LittleManFlying 7 місяців тому +1

    169N is a king hell fetish machine! I've worked the hell out of these airframes, but I'd be afraid to go anywhere near this thing

  • @LittleManFlying
    @LittleManFlying 7 місяців тому +1

    Are those Atlee Dodge seats in the back of the 180?

  • @spinb
    @spinb 7 місяців тому +1

    Nobody else on UA-cam does these types of videos. Very nice style. A true plane-lovers channel.
    (Perhaps you'd have more subscribers if you put giant red arrows in your thumbnails.)
    (That's a joke, btw.)

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +3

      I do not know how to get high tech and get more subscribers. Most thumbnails are fake too. The scene in the thumbnail is not in the video and that is why I watched it. Any pro-tips on more subscribers would be welcome.

  • @mikemc330
    @mikemc330 7 місяців тому +1

    Would there be a benefit to putting a 3-bladed prop on the 182?

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +2

      A little, Looks cooler, better tip clearance, smoother, pulls harder but costs more, slows you down a bit.

  • @hotttt28
    @hotttt28 5 місяців тому +1

    I love geekiness !

  • @Captndarty
    @Captndarty 7 місяців тому +1

    Gorgeous Skywagon. You almost had me until I saw all the android, I mean Dynon stuff…

  • @bernardanderson3758
    @bernardanderson3758 7 місяців тому +1

    Mark I would love to own the 182

  • @ronboe6325
    @ronboe6325 7 місяців тому +1

    I'll take both. Will you take a check? :^D You have some very nice planes there. I bet you hope to sell them quick before you decide you'll keep one. :)

  • @av8bvma513
    @av8bvma513 7 місяців тому +2

    30:50 "QUACK-QUACK" Mark does not bat an eyelid . . . .

  • @mannypuerta5086
    @mannypuerta5086 7 місяців тому +3

    Interesting the choices people make to modify their airplane. If one were happy with all the mods…good deal. If not, then a redo after spending almost 400K would be painful. My 185 after 24 years of ownership and mods isn’t for everyone, but it is perfect for my needs.
    Someone once said something like: you can go fast, takeoff and land slow and carry a load with a Skywagon (especially a 185). If you want to settle for only two of those, buy something else. I think that’s true…relatively speaking.

  • @Fletch001
    @Fletch001 7 місяців тому +3

    I want the 180.

  • @tropicthndr
    @tropicthndr 7 місяців тому +1

    The absolute best version of a 182 is the Kenai from Peterson performance plus.

  • @Grimace427
    @Grimace427 7 місяців тому +3

    I almost would rather live out of a nice 182 than to deal with real estate choices right now.

  • @paperclipmaniac
    @paperclipmaniac 7 місяців тому +1

    I was under the impression that the O-470U engines couldn't use mogas? Maybe I just read it wrong.

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +2

      You are correct. "No Mo For U". Too high compression. Only the 76 and olders with the K, L, R and S engines.

    • @paperclipmaniac
      @paperclipmaniac 7 місяців тому

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 Ah ok. Cool video, keep up the good work.

  • @4437RR
    @4437RR 7 місяців тому

    Mark wirh a built-in teleprompter! Ma, I wish my memory was 1/2 as good😢.

  • @michaelrice500
    @michaelrice500 7 місяців тому +1

    Pro tip - don't give the camera person Scotch until AFTER shooting the video. Otherwise, perfect.

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +2

      The camera is on an gimble and it is not fast moving but I know what you mean.

    • @michaelrice500
      @michaelrice500 7 місяців тому +1

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 Just kidding, of course. The conditions with the lighting and with the autofocus having fits it would have been impossible to do any better. Thanks for the excellent report, except now I have to find a '79 182!

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +2

      Cockpits are difficult environments to shoot in. The range in light is more than my cameras can handle effectively, but I don't have $30K to buy a rig that would do it. And yeah ... my gimbal went wonky for a moment as well, but if I cut that part out, we'd miss what Mark was saying, so I left it in. Appreciate the grace. We do our best. - Don the Camera Guy.

    • @michaelrice500
      @michaelrice500 7 місяців тому +1

      @@skywagonuniversity5023 I hope you got the Scotch!

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +2

      @@michaelrice500 I didn't get any scotch. Not sure what you mean. Thanks. Did you send some.

  • @wojciechkowalewski5848
    @wojciechkowalewski5848 7 місяців тому +1

    :)))))) this is the video

  • @tmaschm
    @tmaschm 7 місяців тому

    Someone out the 180 company 😂

    • @raartsen
      @raartsen 7 місяців тому

      It's Bushliner

  • @DanFrederiksen
    @DanFrederiksen 7 місяців тому +1

    Rather than spending a lot of effort on reworking what are old planes of questionable design, why not make new planes that are vastly superior?

    • @skywagonuniversity5023
      @skywagonuniversity5023  7 місяців тому +4

      Because a new one is a million dollars.

    • @mattf49006
      @mattf49006 7 місяців тому

      not sure where you get "questionable design"...at the time they were front line aircraft and now with a reasonable amount of money invested in your long since paid off air frame you have a aircraft that will match or exceed what's currently in production at less than half the cost

    • @Jerrylumdegaard
      @Jerrylumdegaard 7 місяців тому +1

      Proven designs that have had decades of well tested mods and tweaks. Classic, timeless designs.

    • @DanFrederiksen
      @DanFrederiksen 7 місяців тому

      @@mattf49006 but at the time was 1952. Try comparing a 1952 car to a Tesla Model 3 performance

    • @mannypuerta5086
      @mannypuerta5086 7 місяців тому +3

      @@DanFrederiksen Well, if you want an airplane that won’t carry anything and only go a couple hundred miles with an occasional tendency to self-immolate…