My time in 177s goes back to the early 80s and have always loved them. They are great all around airplanes. Probably the easiest airplane to get into and out of.
Many people own them, fly them and love them. Cardinal has its own association as well because of its popularity. You can find people who dislike any airplane for their own, various reasons.
I'm more of a fixed gear guy. OK, it looks like the plane has legs that stick out while in flight but at least there's no extra mechanism involved in extending and retracting the wheels, and mechanical simplicity is always a plus in my book, even if it does come at a slight cost of aerodynamics.
They are great airplanes, you were lucky to be able to do some advanced training in the Cardinal. They’re great for that with their easy, smooth handling characteristics. Thanks for watching and the comment.
They definitely are a more stable plane and should have been continued. I think the combination of the initial lower powered engine and lack of slots in the stabilator (which made landing harder) made for some ‘bad press’ and Cessna either couldn’t or wouldn’t try to overcome that which resulted in them dropping the Cardinal from production. Although I think the 172 will always be seen as a good primary trainer. Thanks for commenting and watching our video.
That tail number keeps reading to me as "too old", but what a beautiful plane as I open up a tab for trade a plane taking a look at the 177 as a possibility.
The 177 is a great option for many different purposes. We have this plane for sale, if you’re interested the link is in the description. Some tail numbers are definitely interesting. Thanks for watching and commenting.
Hey! You're back! Stumbled on your channel when I was researching Cardinals. Ultimately didn't buy one. Too forward of a CG for 2 big guys trying to fly. But definitely a plane I wish I could! 210 maybe?
If the CG is too far forward in a plane (even 182 and 210 can have this), it can be solved simply by using baggage or ballast in the back of the baggage area to balance out. Since the baggage compartment has a longer arm it doesn’t need to be a lot of weight to balance out the CG. Thanks for watching our videos and commenting.
I like the paint but i think the black looks out of place. N-number in Red with gold border would be nicer imo. That interior is very classy and tasteful tho, well done
Thank you for the comment. The reason we used black accents is to keep the red from becoming too bright red. It also gives a sharp contrast. We’ll give some thought to this though and maybe try a more charcoal dark gray color next time to see how it looks in the design.
Thank you, we spent a lot of time designing the paint and interior, glad you like them. They really change how a plane looks when done right. Appreciate you watching and the comment.
In their website, for the 177 upgrade, Powerflow mentions that the upgrade is equal to 10-15 horsepower. It doesn’t actually add HP to the engine since it’s an exhaust system. It gives increased performance similar to what increased HP would. Thanks for continuing to watch our videos.
I have flown the Cardinal many times and many bash it because they had trouble landing it. But it takes a bit more finesse and once you master that it is as easy to fly as any 172. Performances is a bit better than the 172.
Thank you for the comment. Different planes need different landing techniques and training. If learned correctly in any plane, you can fly and land them very nicely. That’s why we offer transition training, so people can learn correctly. My daughter is a student pilot and I’ve trained her in a Cardinal. She never once had to go around and lands better than many pilots. Many people try to land the Cardinal like other Cessnas such as the 172. That is completely incorrect since this plane has a large, stabilator as opposed to the small elevator most other planes have.
Thank you for watching and the comment. 825 miles is the range listed in the pilots operating handbook of this plane. You may be referring to the 177B model, but this particular plane having more power, lower fuel burn and the digital engine monitor to precisely monitor fuel flow can go long distance. It just flew 500 miles with plenty of fuel left. I’ve flown from Northern Indiana to Central Florida. I agree that flight schools don’t use them as primary trainers, for different reasons including being more expensive than the same year range 172 and not as common as 172 or Piper Cherokee and most Cardinals are the B model with a constant speed prop which is not the best for initial training. This particular Cardinal is similar to a 172 but handles better with a roomier and comfortable cabin. If you watch my RV12 video, that is a very good plane to use as a primary trainer. When I was training a while back, my instructor told me the Cardinal was his new favorite plane because of how it handles.
@@aerolife1646 Oh, I suspect the reason for the primary training prohibition is to spare the airplane; we're a joint-ownership flying club. Yes, ours is a -B: thus constant speed prop and 180hp engine. Yours is quite pretty, love the paint. A re-engined -A must be interesting.
I love the video, love the plane too. You said something about the cylinders gave you an additional 10 horsepower, what specifically is it that gives you the 10 extra horsepower, what should I say how does it give it to you?
It is a RAM STC - I’d have to look at the STC for specifics but it can be done by increasing the displacement or changing the compression ratio. An O360 and IO360 have the same displacement but produce different horsepower. Thank you for watching and the comment.
The beauty of the cardinal is not in question, is the only highwing piston to me. But dón't use yourself as a reference in interior matters, because I try to find you in the German Olimpic Handball Team and I couldn't find you. 🤨
I definitely agree, they are beautiful planes. These planes are designed in USA to accommodate the height of average US people. As an example, the Mooney has a smaller cabin than the Cardinal; a couple weeks ago a gentleman well over 6ft sat down and fit nicely even in that plane. This plane will definitely fit. The seats can move forward and aft quite a bit and the left seat can also lift up and down. The Cessna 177 has a similar space to a Cessna 210. If someone can’t fit well in this plane they won’t fit well in other planes either. The only thing is that four large people would exceed the payload and rear seat leg room in many single pistons. I do like the way you put the question though and thank you for watching.
They are the most roomy in this category. We get a limited number of aircraft to maintain the high quality. If we have something you like in the future when you're ready please feel free to contact us, we enjoy helping people find the right plane for them. Thank you for watching.
@@aerolife1646 1000% , I’m newerish ppl. Your videos have been super informative and all your pros on the Cardinal size, fuel burn, etc I think would fit our family flying. Will definitely be looking when it’s time to buy and hopefully get some transition training also. So far I’ve only had 172 and Cherokee 235 experience and the whole one door thing freaks me out
It’s always great to see older planes restored. But sometimes it’s nice to have a new one also. Hopefully you’ll get a chance to get a new 182T some day. Thanks for your comment and watching our videos.
I don’t know most people would complain about something being too easy! But I do understand what you mean. Sometimes it’s nice to challenge yourself. Thanks for the comment & watching.
414A/421C in my opinion, are the BEST bang for your "Cabin Class" buck. Pressurized comfort, twin redundancy, solid handling and quiet/smooth as a mouse (421 especially)..... Way less expensive MX compared to a turboprop, although, there's trade offs obviously. If the 400s fit your mission, you can't beat em. Stay current with training (AST in Texas is great), and treat those throttles as if they're made of crystal. You'll easily get TBO on either the TSIO or GTSIO with proper handling, it's not hard. Cheers for the great video! Fly safe!
I wish i could give this video multiple up votes: No annoying music background 👍 You actually included timestamps👍 No clickbait. Video exactly what it claims👍
The 414A definitely has the easiest fuel system of the twin Cessnas. If you’re looking for a multi engine trainer, the pressurized, cabin class 414A may be a bit of a leap; the 300 series Cessnas are a bit more in reach. And you can always upgrade again later. Thanks for commenting and watching.
They are like a mini, personal airliner. There are so many factors to consider when looking at pricing a plane that it’s hard to compare or predict it. Thanks for watching and the comment.
I have owned a Mooney 231/“262” since 2008 and couldn’t be happier. The only difference is the 252 is a 28V system, and the “262” is a 14V Mooney 231 but with all the 252 hardware. I’ve heard not all the “262”s have all the 252 hardware, but mine does, with the TSIO-360MB engine, dual alternators, backup vac, 252 cowling with variable cowl flaps, speed brakes,gap seals, inner and outer gear doors, and other mods I probably don’t even know about. Why the previous owners went to such trouble I will never know, but it’s all to my benefit. With a 115 cu-ft O2 tank I can go high, and even though I have been to FL210, I prefer to fly between 15k and 17k which is above 99% of the piston GA and below all the turbine. A turbocharged ‘teens’ plane owns the airspace, there is nobody else cruising there! The 252 “262” engine is a superb turbo, cylinder head temps stay between 350 and 380F, and my biggest problem is trying to keep the oil temp above 145. Put on a ST 3-blade prop and got an extra 100-200 gpm climb, and no loss in cruise speed. I fly regularly San Francisco to the Canadian border in 4 hours, 12 gpm, 170 kts, 65% power at 16,000’. I pick up ice every summer at some point flying through some clouds, but almost always exit icing before having to alter altitude.
Beautiful plane. I've always love the C4XX planes. Sadly, I will just have to make do with my Mooney Ovation. :) Great video showing all the goodies this plane has to offer.
We like Mooney’s too, they’re good planes. When you decide to upgrade to a cabin class, pressurized plane hopefully this information will help you. Thanks for watching
nice unit.. i've always loved twin cessnas.. i have some time in most all the twin cessnas back in the day.. quite a bit in 414/421.. if you fly heavy IMC alot.. just to have the reduced workload and safety features of this hard loaded bird makes it worth the investment.. and with nothing new coming out of the factories to compete with it.. it will hold its place in the market well.. but let's face it..if you can afford this ship.. and can afford to actually use it.. you can most likely make the jump to a turbine.. i had to make that decision a few years back.. i was outgrowing my Duke.. looking at 414/421s.. Navajos.. aero commanders... ran the numbers and started looking at King Airs, MU-2s, a conquests, cheyennes, turbine commanders... I landed on a nice C90 with some speed mods, low time engines, just out of all the expensive inspections, and some nice panel upgrades... all for about the same price as a nice piston twin.. never looked back.. even though it wasn't "that" much faster than a 421c.. the comfort.. single engine performance, reliability, the ramp appeal.. I had to pull the trigger on it.. granted, the maintenance and operating costs were a bit more.. but i felt it was worth the additional expense.. let's face it.. if you fly piston twins enough, you WILL experience an engine failure.. and there isn't much margin left at critical phases of flight.. the statistics back me up on this.. the turbines are just so much more reliable.. and SE performance isn't even comparable.. fast forward a couple of years and i had an awesome opportunity to trade up into a PC-12.. i gave up the "engine out" performance for all the glass and comfort.. extra useful load.. more seats.. my fixed and operating costs are less.. my deal was exceptional.. i just happen to be in the right place at the right time and got to take advantage of an opportunity.. this is one helluva nice 414 tho.. she will be a treat to own and fly..
Thank you for the detailed comment and sharing your knowledge and experience. You made good choices. I like your stage upgrades starting with piston twins and then King Air to PC12. Especially the PC-12, it’s a great plane. You gained experience and knowledge that way, waited until you outgrew your needs and then upgraded. We personally skipped the turboprops and went straight into light Jets. Turboprops and light jets are superior to piston twins. That comes with higher operating costs and maintenance costs. This plane can fly burning 25-30 gallons per hour. Our jet will burn 185 gallons per hour. You will get to the destination a little faster at a much higher cost. Unlike twins, maintenance and inspections can be very expensive and could take months for a major item. Turbine engine overhauls alone will cost more than the price of this plane. For our jet, the brake pads alone $4500 and the battery is $4200. Many flights we still fly Cirrus when it makes sense. What I learned is there is no perfect plane. There is always compromise.
