172RG Question

TrinidadGT20

Vice President of Awesome
I recall reading a while ago that there is a sizeable demand for used 172RG airplanes. I don't understand why the feature of having the front gear retract is such a big deal. Can anyone shed some light on this for me?

Thanks!
 

NJA_Capt

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I recall reading a while ago that there is a sizeable demand for used 172RG airplanes. I don't understand why the feature of having the front gear retract is such a big deal. Can anyone shed some light on this for me?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure what you mean by singling out the nose gear. All 3 of the wheels on the RG's retract. Not just the nose. The only aircraft that I know of that ONLY the nose gear retract are the "Quickie" series homebuilts.
 

mtsu_av8er

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I recall reading a while ago that there is a sizeable demand for used 172RG airplanes. I don't understand why the feature of having the front gear retract is such a big deal. Can anyone shed some light on this for me?

Thanks!

[/ QUOTE ]

You might want to take that aircraft in to the shop...
 

TrinidadGT20

Vice President of Awesome
I guess I need to take another look as it appeared that only the front gear went up. I've never actually seen one up close--only in pictures.

Nonetheless, what makes a 172RG such a sought after item versus a regular 172?
 

jtrain609

Anarcho-Bidenist
The same things that make the Arrow more attractive over a Warrior. Both planes have about the same performance. I think it comes down to being able to do your commercial in a 172RG as opposed to a 172. It fly's faster than a 172 and has more power, yet fly's very much like a 172 (from what I'm told).

Cheers


John Herreshoff
 

ready2fly

Well-Known Member
The landing gear fold up backwards into the fuselage. Ther's not a door to speak of... just a small bay that the gear saddles into. You can't see it in that photo.
 

SUSPilot

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
The same things that make the Arrow more attractive over a Warrior. Both planes have about the same performance. I think it comes down to being able to do your commercial in a 172RG as opposed to a 172. It fly's faster than a 172 and has more power, yet fly's very much like a 172 (from what I'm told).

[/ QUOTE ]

Comparing the Arrow to the Warrior is a little different than comparing the Cutlass to the C172. Yes in both cases you have the same basic fuselage as the fixed gear, but the Arrow has 200 horsepower to the Warrior 150 or 160. While the Cutlass has 180 horsepower to the C172 150, 160, or 180 depending on model. In the Cutlass case it was built almost solely to be a complex trainer, and doesn't have much more performance than a 172, while comparing the Arrow to the Warrior you will see about a 30 kt increase in speed, a substantial jump in climb performane, and a large increase in useful load and gross weight. Even when comparing the Arrow to the Archer(180 horsepower), the extra 20 horsepower, constant speed prop, and reduced drag from the gear being retracted will lead to a greater performance difference than folding the legs and putting a constant speed prop on a 172. Neither plane is difficult to make the transition to, but it is a bigger difference between the Arrow and the Warrior than it is between the C172RG and the C172.
 

ready2fly

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
What is a constant speed prop?

[/ QUOTE ]
It's a prop where the pilot controls the pitch and RPM.

Unlike a 172 or Warrior, which have a fixed pitch prop.
 

stuckingfk

Well-Known Member
In response to your question about the 172 RG, the gear fold back into the fuselage. In the first picture that you gave, you can see actually see where the gear retracts into, you just have to look closer.
 

Jeff_S_KDTW

New Member
[ QUOTE ]
In response to your question about the 172 RG, the gear fold back into the fuselage. In the first picture that you gave, you can see actually see where the gear retracts into, you just have to look closer.


[/ QUOTE ]In the future I would appreciate it if you would post the LINK to the airliners.net photo, rather than putting it on your website.

Here is the link:http://www.airliners.net/open.file/473499/L/

BTW, JLS_Photo is me.
 

stuckingfk

Well-Known Member
Yeah I can do that, sorry that you had a problem with it, but I am going to ask you something. What is the difference if I post a pic here or post a link leading to the same thing?
 

Ralgha

Well-Known Member
I don't see why people bash the 172RG so much for being slow. I've flown both a 200HP Arrow and a 180HP 172RG, and they both go about the same speed. The 172RG trues at about 130, and so did the Arrow. Those that say the retractable gear on the 172RG makes no difference are full of it. I flew one from Redding to Corvallis with the gear down (it woudln't retract) and I was only doing about 110. That and it barely made it up to 10,000 to cross the mountains, when it easily climbed to 11,000 going the other direction with the gear up.

Yeah it's not the greatest climber, but so what. It's significantly faster than a regular 172.

Oh, I wouldn't say the Arrow has 30 knots on the Warrior either. I've also flown Warriors a fair amount, and the Arrow only has about 20 knots on it.

Flying characteristics: the 172RG is a lot heavier on the controls than a 172 is. It feels like a much bigger airplane.

Compared to the 172RG, the Arrow flies like a dumptruck. The 172RG is a much more fun airplane to fly in my opinion.
 

PFactor

New Member
I agree, I like the 172RG much more than the Arrow. Unlike the RG if you lose the engine in the Arrow, it will drop like a rock!
 

mtsu_av8er

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see why people bash the 172RG so much for being slow.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that alot of it is perception. Many people start their training in high-wing Cessnas, and they think that whenn you move up, you've got to get away from those private-pilot type Cessna airplanes!!

I've got a CFI-friend that doesn't particularly care to go above 5 or 6 thousand feet in a high-wing Cessna, but will do it all day in an Arrow or an Archer. Doesn't feel quite as "safe" in a Cessna. His reasoning: Nobody ever goes that high in a Cessna (except for me - almost never lower than 7,000
).
 

Ralgha

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What is a constant speed prop?

[/ QUOTE ]
It's a prop where the pilot controls the pitch and RPM.


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, in most cases, the pilot only controls the RPM, the prop takes care of the pitch itself.
 
Top