Cessna 172Q Owner/Pilot/Mechanic Sought

[JohnSBA]

Having bought one in January I'm looking for other owners, pilots or mechanics familiar with the Cessna 172Q. We're planning to fly from SBA to OSH and then across Canada and possibly up to AK, then down the west coast (see our blog for details). I started the Thread titled Q to AirVenture hoping to connect with Q types along our route. I'm posting this because it was kindly pointed out that title didn't convey my subject. Please see that Thread and let me know if you're interested.

 

[AdamZ]

John I'd think that any A&P who has experience with 172s could help.

 

[Areeda]

We used to have a Q in our club, but no more. The same A&P who handles our L, M & p models had no issue with it. It was a good plane, enjoy it.

BTW we're at El Monte, if you need a mechanic 40 min away I can recommend a good one.

Joe

 

[JohnSBA]

John I'd think that any A&P who has experience with 172s could help.

I've found that mostly true. That is, being in other ways a standard 1983 172 she's familiar to most every A&P, and probably even lots of auto mechanics. The different cowl and a few other minor things seem to be pretty much unknown. The cooling is a bit uneven, and I'd like to see fit & finish of other Q cowls and find out what CHT spread is common. We ended up making our own cowl plugs, because the openings require expensive custom fitting. Little stuff like that. It's an odd mix of having the most common GA bird ever built, and a pretty rare critter nobody's ever seen. I might learn a lot by connecting with the "Superhawk" crowd, but those are mostly 172M vintage so a bit different in other ways. It's fun to be different.

 

[JohnSBA]

if you need a mechanic 40 min away I can recommend

Thanks Joe. Recos are always welcome, though I'm pretty pleased with our local A&P. I do hope at some point to show her to an A&P with lots of experience on the Q, because I've found that good mechanics who've spent lots of time with an unusual type will know at a glance what to check. Probably also have some helpful pointers and tips.

 

[AdamZ]

John I'd venture a guess you could get lots of the info you looking for on one of the Cessna owners association boards.

 

[ScottM]

I am not sure why the Q would be a whole lot different than any other 172. I flew a Q model for a while, nice plane. Usually beaten up by former Embry Riddle students.

 

[JohnSBA]

I am not sure why the Q would be a whole lot different than any other 172.

No difference at all - if you're flying solo below 8kMSL with less than two hours' fuel.

So many times on the trip I've just completed, 10.5 and above was easy and useful with 6+ hours' fuel and 400+ in crew & junk. Sure, I've learned a lot about how much weight can be saved based on the stuff we lugged almost 10k miles and never used. The point is that it's great to have more capability than you need. Effortlessly climbing high enough to see and avoid scattered cumulus and showers crossing over Minneapolis in Summer brought a LOT of ease to our transcontinental adventure.

There are excellent reasons the "Superhawk" is popular, and I'm frankly amazed that only 40-something 172Qs seem to still be flying. Sure it would be fun to have a Skylane, but I like ticking along at ~6gph going 110ktGS at altitude.