Fun Fact! Cessna 172 Differences

Рет қаралды 193,082

Sporty's Pilot Shop

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 126

@robertgiggie6366 4 ай бұрын

Fun fact: none of these are a substantial enough improvement to justify the half a million dollar price tag.

@davidjacobs8558 3 ай бұрын

perhaps they should move the factory to China.

@robertgiggie6366 3 ай бұрын

@@davidjacobs8558 or we could increase competition by getting rid of the vast majority of red tape that prevents anyone from making a better GA aircraft.

@ChristianStout 2 ай бұрын

@@robertgiggie6366 The single-engine GA industry is nearly dead anyway. Kit planes and homebuilts are the future of GA now.

@robertgiggie6366 2 ай бұрын

@@ChristianStout sadly that’s the current work around. As the FAA has shown itself to be a corporate profit goalkeeper

@davidrasmussen2975 2 ай бұрын

Lawyers and the govt sucked the money out of factory built aircraft biz.

@coalblest3018 6 ай бұрын

I prefer the manual flaps. Pipers were the same way back in the day

@rogernadal3999 6 ай бұрын

Same here

@danielshcherbakov3728 6 ай бұрын

I’m an instructor and we still have manual flaps on all of our pipers. I love it too.

@jakemiest3053 5 ай бұрын

Archer II & III (also maybe other variants but for sure these two) are still produced with manual flaps

@VoluntaryPlanet 4 ай бұрын

Definitely helps with minimizing ground roll and maximizing braking action on a soft field.

@LordBagdanoff Ай бұрын

Yea I prefer manual too

@beverlychmelik5504 2 ай бұрын

172D, best of the breed. Modern look, manual flaps, back window and the smoother running 6 cylinder engine.

@rfichokeofdestiny 2 ай бұрын

I can’t consider anything beyond a light sport running a 4 cylinder. I know they’ve made advances in engine technology, but still.

@MrRev232 6 ай бұрын

Fun fact : everything about the older model is more appealing

@JWALL_ 5 ай бұрын

I’d say having a back window and vacuum pumps is definitely more appealing, for real pilots at least

@yatokami7907 5 ай бұрын

@@JWALL_ The electric flap switch too, to be honest.

@JWALL_ 5 ай бұрын

@@yatokami7907 yeah I instruct out of both the Cessna and the Cherokee, i do like the manual flaps more, but i know a lot of people like the electric flaps. For me they just feel cooler to use, plus in the cessna if the flap motor breaks, you have no flaps.

@matthewstrauss6402 5 ай бұрын

not that goddamn continental six. sauce: i work as a mechanic at a flight school, we have several older 172s

@robertrhoden2403 5 ай бұрын

Agreed anything continental sucks. Arguably worse in every way compared to lycoming

@wackaircaftmechanic2312 6 ай бұрын

Fun fact: most of the major changes happened between the 50s up to the 70s.

@TheGodlyGamers 2 ай бұрын

Yeah, it’s weird I’m constantly switching from 1969 thru 1975 Cessna 172’s at the flight school I’m getting my private at

@brettgerber795 6 ай бұрын

Oh, besides price, no intercoms, seat belts & ashtrays too! I don’t think the original ones had shoulder harness and as a kid I remember packing the ashtray for the back seats full of candy wrappers. Besides avionics and interior fabrics I wonder what else we are forgetting. Great video!

@chuckwhitson654 3 ай бұрын

I like the older analog stuff

@Stoneymusic22 2 ай бұрын

When I was eight, I used to think this was a fight simulator and then fast-forward six years I’m actually watching yalls stuff and flying

@gman83090 4 ай бұрын

The best thing with being the older model they have an electrical issue you don't lose part of your flight controls betnell if you have everything electrical you need to have redundancy but if you have it manually and if anything electrically goes wrong you can still use the flaps

@indridcold8433 5 ай бұрын

I have a pterodactyl Cessna Aerobat. It is so old that it smells like mothballs and attic. I can lean back and it will go up because the engine is so weak. Lean forward and it goes down. Along its service life, someone installed a Kraco 23 channel CB radio. It still works!

@sneedsneed460 5 ай бұрын

Favorite Cessna I’ve flown was a 1969 XP. Constant speed prop, 220hp, absolute blast to fly

@rescue270 3 ай бұрын

That was an R172J, also known as a military T41B.

@coldsamon 7 ай бұрын

Love the look of a straight tail.

@wtfsalommy3250 6 ай бұрын

Yeah, it does remind you of the Bonanza😂😂

@coldsamon 5 ай бұрын

@@wtfsalommy3250Nope.

@robertriggs75 4 ай бұрын

Square tail looks better and more effective

@aplacecalledfear 6 ай бұрын

back then, flew faster, flew farther, carried more

@MishMashMoto 5 ай бұрын

Personally, I would take a good straight tail fastback over a new one.

@Workerbee-zy5nx 5 ай бұрын

Computers weren't on cessnas before the 2000s, lectric flap trim cane out in the 70s. The fastback 172 was replaced by the lighter, fancer bubble back in the late 60ish. All Cessna are well built, fin birds. 🤠🇺🇸🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

@AV8RMike 7 ай бұрын

Fun fact: I’d take any one of them!

@alexhuey6489 5 ай бұрын

You can slap a fancy set of avionics in a 58 172. But you can’t make a new one fly good🤷‍♂️ I’ll take the straight tail, tall gear and fast back any day over the modern trash

@adamr9215 2 ай бұрын

Sounds like they have degraded it quite a bit over the years. Those flat 6 engines run so much smoother than the 4 cylinder engines, that alone is a huge downgrade.

@chrissullivan1983 6 ай бұрын

Back then it was spring steel landing gear

@davidh7799 3 ай бұрын

What a fantastic airplane. But one significant change you didn't mention: the change in price!

@thomasaltruda 6 ай бұрын

Manual flaps are better, taller gear is better, the straight tail was better, (sloped back was for looks, doesn’t go any faster, and arguably is less effective than the straight tail) and the no rear window was better aerodynamically (think fast back) The Lycoming engine is a good improvement, that old Continental was smooth but underpowered..

@Justsomegamergamingandstuff 6 ай бұрын

I'm team Lycoming for life. Me and a friend, who's also a pilot, and I flew a 172S (IO-360-L2A) 3 ½ hours from Denver to Amarillo, Texas on 3 out of 4 cylinders without even realizing. We got there and noticed an insane amount of oil on the engine and the ground, and found out one of the cylinders was cracked. The only thing we noticed was a little bit of a feeling that the climb performance was a bit weak, but other than that, it flew pretty much normal. Needless to say, we did not fly that plane back home. The fact that the engine ran almost perfectly with cylinder two spraying oil out and not making compression is seriously impressive, and they have my business for life.

@thomasaltruda 6 ай бұрын

@@Justsomegamergamingandstuff that’s a great story, I too love Lycomings, but you weren’t running on 3 cylinders.. if you lose one cylinder on a 4 cylinder, you’ll know it. You don’t just lose 25%.. it is probably close to 50%, but the real problem is the vibration is so bad, you have to throttle back. Ask someone who gets a stuck valve in flight.

@danmart9087 2 ай бұрын

Sometimes the old ways are better because anything that is man made is apt to fail

@rickoshay6554 3 ай бұрын

Missing Fun Fact: The price "back then" and now.

@cdsnider9496 2 ай бұрын

I love how all the "now" changes are 50 years old

@thecanadianavee8r660 3 ай бұрын

The bigger difference with the landing gear is that they used to be flat leaf springs but in the early 70s were switched to a tube spring with a fairing around it.

@justcallmeBIG_L 28 күн бұрын

I flew a 172 built back in 1977 last year. Registration was N9002E. That was the first time I ever flew a plane.

@Cruiser777 2 ай бұрын

I like the old ones better.The only thing I don't like is the 0300 continental, and the electrical system.😅

@floppygdog 7 ай бұрын

Always wondered the upgrades. Thank you.

@peteh6445 6 ай бұрын

The flaps aren’t an upgrade, also he didn’t mention the landing light being moved from the wing to the nose, also a huge downgrade

@thomasaltruda 6 ай бұрын

@chrissullivan1983 6 ай бұрын

Also landing gear was spring steel back then!

@peteh6445 6 ай бұрын

@@thomasaltruda a true man of culture who knows his stuff!

@AwestrikeFearofGods 6 ай бұрын

Now do the Chevrolet Corvette.

@timwilson8118 3 ай бұрын

I don’t a thing about them but I do know I would love to fly. I missed the boat there.

@dbuck1964 Ай бұрын

It’s never too late. Just go get your PPL.

@The_Swedish_Government 5 ай бұрын

..Never thought I'd see my flight program on KZfaq.. 😅

@mgweld 3 ай бұрын

The original one had more character

@046rishabhshukla2 2 ай бұрын

Back then !!

@hud86 5 ай бұрын

Straight tails are WAY better

@AirplaneModeIsOn Ай бұрын

My air cadet squadron uses the old 172’s to practise solo flights

@larrysouthern5098 6 ай бұрын

I like the new electric flaps..the older flaps were a pain in the buttocks... And the new swept tail just looks fast.. Yep the new 172 is my main squeeze..❤️

@blumac9801 6 ай бұрын

Amen. Always got jammed, and it was also easy to skip forward 2 flap position due to lack of good detents

@thomasaltruda 6 ай бұрын

The look of the swept tail looks nice, but the straight tail has better authority. The change to sweep it was only for marketing, and didn’t make it go any faster.. also I’m actually a bigger fan of the manual flaps. If you are a little fast, then you feel how heavy the flap pull is. The electric flaps are too easy to overspeed if you aren’t checking limitations. Also if you are skipping notches, theres a technique that you can apply.. basically you press the button and as soon as the lever moves, you release the button and allow it to find the next notch.

@blumac9801 6 ай бұрын

@@thomasaltruda It’s possible that the aircraft I flew just had worn detents. I routinely used that method and it would still be a challenge to let it settle in the next detent confidently

@rogerwilco4736 2 ай бұрын

I much preferred the manual flaps but the continental six cylinder engine was inferior to the four cylinder Lycoming

@themightymitsubishilancere8027 Ай бұрын

i flew the cessna 172skyhawk as a copilot and im 12, it was very cool

@robinj.9329 6 ай бұрын

You would be surprised by the number of "Older" pilots who still prefer things like the taller gear legs and manual flaps!

@doriangray2020 6 ай бұрын

Yeah…and I bet you will hold onto your flip phone forever. 😂

@erosnemesis 2 ай бұрын

Yup. Manual flaps are superior

@InitialRelic593 Ай бұрын

Hmm some of those are not improvements but nightmares waiting to happen. I think they should have left this as simple and safely as possible. Most people don’t have access to top rate engineers, make it so the common person can fix it!!

@spudwickthrockmorton2112 6 ай бұрын

How about price difference lolol

@mianatwood 6 ай бұрын

$80k va $500 probably

@warster321 2 ай бұрын

You forgot to mention that back then you could buy a new Cessna for about twice the price of an average car... Now they cost more than the average house

@gryphon1six801 Ай бұрын

A LOT of changes??? That was 6 changes in nearly 70 years which isn’t even 1 per decade. Bicycles have evolved considerably more lol

@user-dn6ht6bo7r Ай бұрын

Apart from the shorter landing gear, the rest seem to be good. The increase in price not so much

@casualartguru4462 2 ай бұрын

A lot of those same changes are also in the Cessna 150-152 series

@DavidJohnson-yy4de 8 ай бұрын

Awesome!

@badwolf9765 2 ай бұрын

The real question is have these changes really made the plane any better? Is it any faster? Can I carry more weight? Can a fly farther?

@Lando62 Ай бұрын

Yeah, and went from about $600 to half a million.

@sophiasocal68 22 күн бұрын

Back then: an average household could afford one. TODAY: You have to be an elitist to afford one.

@fazole 25 күн бұрын

Cessna 170s are such fun to fly, 172 is boring Chevy sedan

@MisterRorschach90 4 ай бұрын

I wonder if anyone still makes modern biplanes. Not reproductions or historical stuff. But actual modern biplanes with modern features.

@TheLoganatorz 19 күн бұрын

Are the VOR antennas on the older 172 on backwards?

@planespeaking 2 ай бұрын

Still folds like a tin can if you crash it. GA is stuck in a time warp.

@NoahAviation2010 3 ай бұрын

I prefer the 172S

@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935 11 күн бұрын

And no more 40 degrees of flap because Cessna thinks pilots are stupider now.

@fellow7000 2 ай бұрын

Flaps 40 have left the video :)

@clarkpolinski5775 Ай бұрын

Old is better. Less continuous maintenance.

@BeechSportBill 2 ай бұрын

30 times more expensive

@ChampionJockey_James 5 ай бұрын

Fun facts old cost same as new

@ryukiddin Ай бұрын

The price 1970 12000 2024 500,000

@trumpwon2240 3 ай бұрын

Why does it seem all cessna's, if not all planes, have a call number that starts with the letter N

@engineerofefficiency 2 ай бұрын

All US planes are given a registration starting with N. Germany uses D. Most countries have been assigned a two letter identifier.

@cyb5761 2 ай бұрын

Too bad the elbow room is still horrible.

@thebluegreengoose Ай бұрын

Old is better.

@roddyrobertson5393 4 ай бұрын

Dated 70 year old design. Something like a Diamond Da40 would be the modern choice for today!

@adamr9215 2 ай бұрын

Neither of them appeal to me. I’ll keep my 1948 Stinson 108. It’s better for off airport landings and short take offs, and has a better capacity than the Cessna.

@mianatwood 6 ай бұрын

So everything got worse essentially 😂

@Cj-xl3jv 6 ай бұрын

Nah working on the originals before the K models was awful. Parts are nonexistent and they’re incredibly dated. Most of the major changes happened around 69 to 84.