CESSNA 195 ?

or170B · Post by **or170B** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:40 am

I am looking at purchaseing a 195 after many years of 170 ownership. Do any of our members have any experiance with this type? Also how hard of a transition is it? I love my 170 but need more room. Thank you all.

Post by **GAHorn** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 4:41 am

The 190/195 series is one of my loves as well. I was looking for one when I changed my mind and bought a 170.

The 190/195 is a beautiful classic. It's no harder to fly than the 170, just bit less manueverable.

But it's an entirely different animal from the maintenance perspective. It is expensive. A 180/185/206 is a much more manageable maintenance situation, with similar performance as the 190/195, except the 206 will haul a lot more.

Of course, it's not apples to apples. There's no comparison to classic airplanes, but your comment about wanting more capacity caused me to comment on suitable alternative aircraft with similar performance as the 190/195, but which are much more serviceable.

or170B · Post by **or170B** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 5:07 am

What particular things make this aircraft so expensive to maintain? Although the engine has a lower TBO. I have looked into engine overhaul costs and they dont seem much more expensive than most flat engines. I just have a hard time getting away from that round tail !!!

Dave Clark · Post by **Dave Clark** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 11:13 am

I have owned about six 190-195's but kept only one for ten years, the others were for resale. It's commonly understood the 275-300 hp Jakes (R-755) are the better engines and I would agree for most people. The Continental is pretty underpowered and some parts for the 245 are hard to come by. Mine was an R-915 of 330 hp at 26" MP (limited) and I thought it was spectacular. This was a later engine with limited use and didn't get as fully developed as the R-755. Pistons for it were made from unobtainable but I lucked into a new set so I was good for life.

The 190 with continental gave better visibility and was a three pointer.
The R-755's were good all around, about C-180 performance.
The R-915 3" larger cowl (but who needs to see forward anyway?) and has spectacular C-185 type performance. A little heavier in the nose so it wanted to wheel land.

As for maintenance difference from a 170 it's all forward of the firewall, and there it does take a little more. The swing out motor mount gives great access and things are really simple.

Like any model of 50-60 year old airplanes it's best to pay the money and buy the best you can find. Once you have a plane in great condition tailwheel to spinner it's much easier to keep up with it.

Do it, it's the best airplane experience I ever had (out of about 40 owned planes). Good luck!

blueldr · Post by **blueldr** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 5:52 am

Round engines sound nifty and they use a LOT of oil!

Post by **GAHorn** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 7:31 am

Click on the ( > ) after the file loads.

http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogalle ... arting.wav

http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogalle ... p_AN_2.wav

mboone · Post by **mboone** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:25 pm

Aviation Consumer recently wrote up the 195. You may find good info there.
Bob

iowa · Post by **iowa** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:44 pm

i have always wanted a 195!
but....
here is a pic i took at oshkosh in 2005!
dave

bradbrady · Post by **bradbrady** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 2:14 am

Dave,
I had a 195 and a LC-126, I wish I had them both back! But my Kids ARE going to Collage! And with Kendel's expences my Hawk is probaly for sale now!

brad

LEA · Post by **LEA** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 11:59 pm

I purchased and rebuilt a 1952 C195B in 1964.After 39 years I managed to destroy it in December of 2003. It is the ultimate in aircraft transportation. The comfort
of the large cabin and feel of stability. With the 80 gallons of auto gas aboard I could cruse 1950 RPM at 20" MP indicating 152 MPH using 13.5 GPH with a Jacobs 275 hp. I was able to attend most fly-ins and return home without having to purchase fuel.
Sure the aircraft consumes more fuel and oil ( 3/4 QT per Hour) .however
the fuel burn over a cross country flight is equal to my C170.
To own such an aircraft ,it behoves the owner to possess mechanical abilities and have a working relationship with an A & P + AI. If this is not the case with you ,then you had better have deep pockets ,because this
Jewel does demand constant attention .
Please research this thoroughly before making a decision!
Respectfully,
Bob Lea

c170b53 · Post by **c170b53** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 6:16 am

Saw two from a distance for sale at Renton Wa. last week, both were on floats. So like they say if you have to ask you can't afford it, so I kept my distance.