Scudrunners

Good day everyone,

I have a question about which plane I should choose finalize my training on. I am 8 sessions in and my instructor would like me to choose which type of aircraft I want to stick with, we have flown the P model for the first 7 sessions and this last session was an R. I have to admit so far I like the P model, but only because were practicing stalls and that thing stalls beautifully, and then we switched to the R model the other day and as soon as I stalled it I became a human lawn dart, it seemed to tip a wing far more during stalls as well. It was likely just me, and I am trying not to let it taint my opinion.

Anyway, I apparently need to choose soon, and although I like the P model winter is fast approaching so that has me wondering about the P model, but on the other hand most students avoid the P model so I always have a plane to fly.

As always I come to this wonderful pool of knowledge to seek advice, thank you all for your time.

I've trained on both. There's a lot of bloat on the 172R. According to the POH, the R's empty weight is 1639lbs. The P model weighs in at 1414 for the standard copy. If the P model is cheaper stick with that. It'll save you some money. It also has carb heat and without it, you'll feel lost and forlorn missing out on endless lectures on how to use it properly.

Same price actually, it seemed a little like I was being deterred from the P model as winter approaches but my experience is obviously minimal is winter flying with a carbureted plane enough to switch to the R?

Same price? Ask them for a ten percent discount and you'll use the P for the rest of your training.

I didn't find any difference between the models in winter compared to summer. If you're worried about carb ice, it's more of a concern during humid summer days than winter (for the most part). Honestly, go with whichever makes you most comfortable. The 172R has nicer ergonomics and more modern avionics. Or better yet switch to the Citabria and have some real fun. It's uncomfortable, cramped and has minimal instruments -- in other words perfect.

Citabria and have some real fun. It's uncomfortable, cramped and has minimal instruments -- in other words perfect.

Haha - how times change, we always considered the champ and citabria to be second in room and comfort to the stinson 108, which was a cadilac, a J3 was cramped if you flew it from the front seat

Yup every one should learn to fly on conventional gear. I think the aviation gene pool would be much better off for it.

I stumbled across this and that's my kind of aircraft and fun flying. I found my dream toy. -- DAMN

I always liked the Stinson

I don't think they have one of those Colonel.... But they do have a Citabria and I asked about training on it but there are few instructors available for it and when they did the inspection of it they found many problems, so it will be out of service for a while.

So other than the Colonel's post on his hatred of carbs and love of boobs I haven't found much else to help me decide... About the carbs, I'm all in on the boobs.

It might be good to fly a carburettor and learn, fuel injection will still be there but if you have aspirations of maybe owning in the future the stepping stone 1st aircraft would likely be carburettor equipped. Fuel injection is still likely in the minority for piston aircraft flying today. Carb engine is also way easier to start No one ever thought carb heat was a mystery or a safety issue. It's like the tail wheel, times change and people move with the times.

boobs a good too but no silicone -- they have to be appealing to the touch

Fly the one that gets you flying more. If the P is reliable and always available, grab it.

My first teaching job was at a small school where among the fleet we had a 172R and a 172S. My fellow instructors would always fight over the S model which left the R almost exclusively for me. I may have missed out on tinted windows, leather seats, and autopilot but I flew as much as any four of the other instructors combined.

Of course, the N model flew better than the R or S but it was old and ugly and a hard sell to my students.

I always preferred the 1973-1976 172 M with the Lyc E2D, which I
think Cessna started using in 1968?

Never liked the 1977+ Model N with that horrible H2AD engine
which ate camshafts and lifters even worse than normal Lycomings.

Later 172's only had 30 flap, which is probably not a deal-breaker.
40 flap was almost always preceded by the application of full power
on short final.

All those ancient 172's are so beat up and worn out, that they really
aren't serious training alternatives any more, over 40 years on. Trainers
get landed hard, crashed and rolled up into a ball and used up, like an
old condom.

You drive a 40+ year old car? 40+ year old computer?

PS. I still prefer boobs over carburetors. I can't help it - it's a medical
condition. I'm the victim here - I was bottle fed. Carburetors are fine
on a weed-eater or badly running, ancient lawn mower. They are NOT
something you want to trust your life to. If they don't get you, that
stupid flapper ahead of it will come apart at some point and feed
chunks of metal into the engine.

The irony of being killed by safety equipment never gets old.

I'm not saying that no one should use carburetors any more. But if you
can't tell me two reasons why a carburetor gets cold, you shouldn't be
using one in an airplane.

System knowledge never gets old.