I'm not sure of the timing but... at some point, a couple yrs ago it went through Farmington, MO. It lived there for a while so I had some time in it. It flies great and I thought seriously about buying it. Prob should have.
@@NotTelling51 I will be working on my pilots license before too long, and I hope to hunt it down eventually. It may just be a dream though, with how prices are going
You're a first rate salesman Mark.. you excel at showing an airplane, as tho they were in your personal collection. The 210 and Cessnas other high wing retractables look so clean in the air.. my high performance checkride was in the 182 RG. Benton airfield, Redding. Very nice ride.
Mark, your E model in this video is a 1965 model! The '64 was a D model and has quite a few differences from an E, even tho both share the IO-520. E is more desirable. Also the '67 AND '68 model have the cantilever, high dihedral wing, not just the '67 as you had stated. The 1969 mode lost some dihedral and the "chin" and the 1970 K-model had the longer window and baggage door moved.
Thanks again Mark, absolutely love these informative videos. In Australia (under CASA) we call an aircraft mechanic a LAME (licensed aircraft maintenance engineer). Would be interesting to know more of your background
I really enjoy your in depth walk arounds of different airplanes. Your head must be spinning trying to keep track of all the detail changes over various year...😃. I just subscribed.....
As another commenter indicated, the E model was 1965. That person also mentioned several significant differences between the D and E models. The only differences I am aware of, the D model originally came with a generator instead of the alternator equipped on the E model. Many of those have been retrofitted with alternators over the years. The D model has a Vernier throttle, and a slight change In propellor shaft length happened in 1965 to accommodate the slightly modified cowling. That is all I am aware of in the way of differences. The 1964 does have electric flaps. Hydraulics are only for gear operation. 64-66 birds are quite special in my opinion.
Glad to see you Saturday at Lincoln fuel pump. We ended up leaving the 172 in Juan’s hangar and flew home commercial Sunday due to upcoming weather Rick
Thought the '67 and '68 had the "big" dihedral. I just remember the '69 was better looking, with the flatter wings and no more "chin." Of course, the oil pan was made smaller (less capacity) so that the nosewheel could be raised higher inside the cowling-- eliminating the chin. Good video!
As always great video Mark. Quick question, you mentioned that a 64-66 NA 210 will cruise around 155 @ 12gph. Are there any significant gains in speed/efficiency on the strutless models and again with the tube landing gear models?
Thanks Mark. Any insights on the difference between the hydraulic systems of the various 210 years? And what was on the back of the front seats on the 64? Is that a restraint system of some kind?
We got some complaints about the opening, so we dropped it. I'll put out a short video and ask for a vote. Will that work for you? We don't want you to go! - Don the camera guy