Why a 66?

I’ve been asked a bunch why not another C170?  Why a 180?  Why?

Keep in mind that I am just a knucklehead and no expert. But here are my thoughts-

First why the Skywagon: My goal was to build a light, capable, modern backcountry airplane. I always wanted a Supercub, but in my opinion it’s not as practical as a Skywagon. Plus, Im not that good of a BC pilot yet, and If I can’t get down in the Wagon, I probably shouldn’t be trying to land there yet… I wanted a (relatively) fast, light IMC airplane that I could haul a shitload, fly coast to coast comfortably, and land in the bush.

Why a 180 and not a 185? Built right, it will do everything the 185 can do, and sometimes better. Most of the old timers and mentors will say that its not the fancy mods or the machines anyways, but the pilot.

As far as the year, in my research/opinion, (and as been said here before, many believe that the 66 is the best model around.) It has the elements of the light earlier models, but the big and important changes of the later models, IE modern panel, long range tanks, better TW steering, landing light in the wing, pilot adj seat, 3rd window, 6 passenger, baggage door etc.

I didn’t want an airplane that had already been adulterated, I wanted to find the cleanest, stock example of an “H” I could and make it mine. With perseverance and patience, I was lucky enough to find just that.

By the time its finished, we should have a +/- 130kt airplane with a 6hr range, a stall speed in the high 30’s (mph) that weights in the high 1700’s with a GW of 3190. That’s over-sized tires, 474lb in fuel, two 200 lb guys, and almost 600lbs of cargo/passengers. I think that’s pretty cool.

Now who know if this will be a reality or not. The internet is full of exaggeration and BS. I really don’t care one way or another, but regardless, it is already a hell of a lot of fun!

To learn more about Skywagons and the differences between model years, click HERE: