C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

Can anyone help me remove the confusion I hear about the engine to the Hawk XP?  The only information I get from people that are consistent is that the KP is the good engine (K is not).

Some people I've spoken with say this is the best plane ever built.  While others say the opposite, i.e., the Continental engine is nothing but troubles.  This concerns me, if the engine was a mistake, Cessna probably would have dropped its production, which of course it did.  The Hawks were only produced from 76 to 84 or so.  Maybe they shouldn't have taken 172s frame designed for the Lycomings, and to jam a Continental into it.  Having said this, I realize that Cessna shut down all manufacturing, so I can't tell if my hypothesis is correct.  If it wasn't a mistake, why didn't they start up this model when they began remanufacturing the 172s and 182s?.  Now, I would have thought, that since the history of these planes were as military trainers, from the little I've been able to extract in my research, I wouldn't think there'd be any controversy still.  Either these are bad engines, or because they were manufactured for the limited number of years, there aren't enough owners to merit any discussion.

Secondarily, with the added horsepower and complexity of the fixed speed propeller in the 172 frame, I'd think this plane has addressed the well known shortfalls of the 172 over the 182, i.e. the 172 is merely a three person vehicle.  My question is, if I'm right, the 20 to 25% extra power more than adequately must be able to haul the fourth person and still allow full fuel, while still significantly less costly than the 182.  Why haven't these planes been more popular?  What am I missing?

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

Price!

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

There is always controversy.10 guys love a mod 12 hate it.Float models and brands,vg's, robertson stol, ford vs chevy,and it goes on.I think the xp is a good plane.I talked to a cessna engineer once and he told me it was too close to a 182 and not enough sales at the time. 100 years and we will be arguing over stuff that was proven in the forties.A husky owner will argue that supercubs stink! Man o man,wouldnt it be an easier shopping world if we just had facts.          olm,                P.s what about tri gear or nose wheels or superior cylinders ove factory, turbo or non turbo. droop tips over stock. I feel for you ,i get more confused every time somone answers me.

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

Also upon restartin the cessna line,they dropped other good models like the 180/185.I think economics and slimming down in the econmic and frivolous lawsuit times we live in.

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

The Cessna R172 series ( Cont IO-360, 210 h.p., Max GW 2550 lbs) were very much like the XP.  The Air Force Academy cadet pilots trained with these aircraft for many years and needed that extra H.P. @ 6000' field elevation.  The airframe and engine are bullet proof!  The academy got rid of the R172's (T-41C, T-41D) in the 90's for the newer high performance non-cessna trainer, ultimately to be plagued with all sorts of problems with the new trainer.   I know of a flying club that aquired one of these T-41C trainers and is still flying strong with over 13,000 hours on the airframe.

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

Tom:

I can only give you my experience with the XP: 

Ive had mine since 1999.  I bought it with a engine "K" well beyond TBO, but it still had very good compression and ran great.  But I droped a factory remanufactured "KB" in it.  When you trade in your "K" for the "KB" you will not get very much for the core return.  The "KB" also has a longer TBO than the "K". 

Mine currentlly has 650 hrs since I put it in and I havent even had a oil leak, absolutely perfect so far (knock on wood)  The best thing is the fuel injection, no CARB ICE to worry about!!!  The plane is truly a 4 passenger plane, and flys at 130kts.  Maybe thats why Cessna quit making them is that it was competing with the 182's.

The airplane is a screamer at 195hp, you can really tell the difference between this aircraft and a normal 172.  Plus if you want extra hp, you can purchase the STC that takes the engine back to its rated power of 210hp.

I have great praise for the XP.  But this is only one experience of many that are out there.

Sal

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

<HTML>I had a 1979 C172 with the Penn Yan and it made my 172 a workhorse with much improved hauling power and speed and reliability, took the engine to TBO with no problems, gross weight increase etc,</HTML>

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

I've owned my XP since 1998. When I bought it, it had 561 total hours since new with the original "K" engine. I've now got about 950 hrs total and all is well.

I've done extensive work on it since then including paint, interior, avionics, custom metal panel, Isham 210 hp conversion, gap seals, etc. etc. It's a great plane and I have few complaints. I've had one vac. pump failure 3 years ago, and the "dreaded" alternator shaft failure this past fall. No internal engine damage, but they pulled the engine to check none the less. Prop was overhauled 2 years ago when I did the Isham conversion- though it was fine except for the # of years elapsed since it was new.

When overhaul time comes, I will upgrade to the KB engine with the longer TBO and stronger crankshaft, and was interested to read (just this morning) about the just announced brand-new Hartzell 3-blade prop conversion...I may try that before engine o/h! They claim cruise better by 1 to 3 knots, and better climb.

My performance profile has been book or slightly better, and since the Isham mod, the climb rates can be amazing. With ouside temp about 30 degrees F. and light winds, I've seen a solid 1,700+ FPM initial climb at 81 KIAS with full tanks, pilot and gear aboard. The deck angle is steep at 81 so a more conservative climb at 90 KIAS brings about 1,000 fpm. Best of all, on the ramp and on takeoff, the Continental 6 really growls...Sounds like a C210. This ain't your father's 172!

I'd fly my plane over a garden variety 172 any day!

J.G.

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

J.G.  Ive heard people describe the sound of a XP on take off as a " 172 on steriods", lol.  Does sound awesome for a single engine airplane. 

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

Hi Tom, i'm a bit confused also.  I have a 1980 xp in Ireland, and a 77 xp in South Africa. The Irish one has a half life kb 195hp mill in it and at 23/23 cruises at 115kias. The one in SA has a end of life K mill in it and seems to cruise at around 105kias at 23/23.(at one stage i checked to see had i got 10 of flap down!) The K engine, even with 1780 hours on it, has brilliant compression on all six pots.  I've never got anywhere near 130kts in either of them.  The xp is ideal for Ireland, short fields with stone walls at either end, i often loaded it to the gills and it will get out of anywhere so long as you keep the C of G in the right spot. Even with the 195hp, you can giv it full poke, pull the stick back until you have no forward airspeed, and no vertical airspeed, and she will just hang there on the prop (don't try this near the ground),  The one down in South Africa is limited with 195hp, lots of fields have DA's 6000ft>. I intend to put in the KB engine and the Isham conversion sounds good. How does yours perform with this conversion? Where can i get detailed info on it? 

Sal, what is the STC ?

Thanks and take care,  joe

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

Joe:

The STC# is SA1437CE, I have talked to Mr.Isham a few years ago and the cost of the STC was $1500.  He currently offers a digital in place of the mechanical one for an additional cost.  Also, Hartzel just came out with a new STC for a 3 bladed prop for the XP, $9000.00 US dollars. 

Sal S

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

I have a 77 Hawk XP with the IO-360KB engine and McAuley two bladed prop.
it happens to be for sale! I would rather not sell it but with a wife and 3 kids and going to build a house wont allow me to keep the aircraft. maybe I am selling the wrong expenses. LOL!
anyway, I run an FBO and am an A&P IA and of course a pilot. The hawk XP here in wisconsin loves the cold air this time of year. I give a lot of my customers rides and they cant believe the performance. with full fuel and two people and at 900ft AGL. it easily climbs out at 2000 ft per min and still 8 knots above VX.
with four and full fuel it still will do 1500 ft per min.
an earlier post mentioned the continental engines, dont be confused between the older O-300 6 cyl. continental and the larger cont. engines. the older cont. engines were good engines but I have never seen one that didnt leak oil. not to mention lack of power. when cessna switched to the lycomings it was a huge improvement in power, and if maintained correctly no leaks. from my experience with the larger engines a continental is much easier to work on than the larger Lycomings. again this is my preference
not saying it to be a fact.
The XP was mainly designed for floats with the 3 blade prop and upgradable 210 HP engine. is was derated mainly for insurance. I have a 2002 piper (sorry) senecca 5 in my shop with the same KB engine of course this has turbo.
my opinion is its a great performer without the expense of a 182 and demand.
also looks and flies like a 172, just more cruise speed and amazing climb.
Louis

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

I have owned a 1977 Hawk XP for seven years.  Great airplane!  This airplance was years ahead of its time with fuel injection and constant speed prop,  Many people transitioning from a fixed pitch prop, myself included, under estimate the performance advantages of the CS prop.  It significantly increases take-off and climb performance and optimizes cruise performance for what ever you want, speed or range.  This and the smooth Continental give the XP a major advantage over the new 172s.

Regarding why Cessna did not restart production with the XP, they are owned by Textron who also owns Lycoming so they had no choice!  Given a choice I would take a Continental given the sweet sound at idle and smooth power at full throttle.

Tom

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

Just a few bits of info..

The Type certificate 3A17 was originally certified with the Cessna 175 as its meaning. The 175 was built, as many know, with the Continental GO-300 175HP engine. Not a stellar performer but a significant improvement over the O-300 in the 172's at the time. Due to problem with maintenance and TBO issues, the 175's popularity waned in the early 60's and was phased out after the P172D " Skyhawk Powermatic" only sold 65 models. Later, cessna "got the picture" and came out with the R172 and the T-41 on the same Type certificate, this time armed with the IO-360 210HP engine, which is what the 175 should have came out within the first place, but in a rush, Continental had devised the geared idea. The T-41 and R172 airframes were possibly beefed up a little and had a higher rated mximum continuous cruise rating than the 175. Interestingly, the Hawk XP with the derated RPM governor has an even higher rated max cruise- 129 kts. I guess they cleaned up the footprint of the Hawk over the R172- I don't know why its rated higher. The XP has the highest Gross weight of any 17X series aircraft that I know of- 2550lbs. over the 175C's 2450.

I have just purchased a 175 Skylark "XP" that will arrive next week. It has the Continental IO-360-C. I am looking forward to flying it.

These birds had Continentals from the go, Lycoming was the afterthought. - to address the question in the first post. It was, in fact, a Lycoming/Continental Duel that birthed the GO-300.

I think that the Lycoming has a public opinion that is slightly higher than Continental. I think the 4 cylinder is thought to be less expensive to maintain and possible "more" reliable. Wether this is true I don't know, but apperently Cessna has a taste for Lycomings these days. There will soon be an STC for the 175 to run the Lycoming 200HP IO-360.

I'm going with the Continental, though. I like having 6 cylinders.

Kristopher

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

The reason cessna has a taste for them,same company now.Bell textron lycoming cessna all same company.

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

But, If Cessna and Whirlpool should have a merger will the company be called Cesspool?  lol

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

B-o-o-o-o-o!!!!

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

Frank Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi,
    I live in australia and was wondering if some one can give me some leads on buying a new motor for my XP Hawk, an exchange one or a new one
                            Thanks
                                Bruce

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

any one have a check list or a v speed list they can scan for me?
i have to change planes for my checkride and dont have one thanks

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

I need advice.

Just purchased a 1977 hawk xp...taking it to the paint shop and am trying to decide if I want to modify it with the Isham 210hp conversion, while it is down.  I will be flying in flat terrain.  Do I need it??? Is it a drastic improvement over the 195hp climb???? Any increase in cruise speed? Any advice would be appreciated..

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

The extra 15 horsepower is a noticeable difference. I would not hesitate to add the conversion. The benefit is mostly in climb and takeoff performance. You don't want to cruise above 2600rpm because the fuel consumption is terrible. So no cruise speed increase. Top speed will go up probably 5 kts.

Approximate numbers from my experience in a C175 with 210HP IO-360.

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

I have had my Hawk XP11 for about five years now.  It has the K engine and about 1150 hours total time since new.  A couple of years ago I had a set of GAMI injectors installed.  Now, I can cruise at 50 degrees lean of peak at about 60% power and burn about 7 GPH.  True, the air speed drops and if you need to go fast, you can.  These are great little airplanes and I highly recommend them.  Mine is a 77 and I have replaced most of the plastics and painted the rest.  The interior looks like new.  The paint is original and still is decent and takes a polish.

These planes literally jump off the runway, even here in Arizona with high density altitude.  Landing roll is short and I can usually turn off at the first exit.  Maintenance costs seem about average.  You don't see very many of them and most people never heard of them.  For anyone in the market for an older 172, a nice low time one would be just the ticket.

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Re: C172 Hawk XP--Continental Engine KP

I had a 1977 xp with a k engine.....what a great plane !!! it is almost a 182 but 30% less $, I had just under 1000 lbs payload, and with full fuel I could fly 3 adults, 1 child, big bags and go to a beach in old Mexico cruising at 125 tas burning 10 GPH. We never had any trouble with the engine...but they like to leak oil. Ours we had to add a quart every 4 to 5 hours. I landed and departed from short ranch runways (3000') in the mountains as high as 5800 ft without any trouble. I highly recommend this bird !!

Guest
Guest
useravatar
Offline
Posts
User info in posts
Only registered users or members can reply or post

Board Info

Board Stats:
 
Total Topics:
6045
Total Polls:
1
Total Posts:
16355
Posts this week:
2
User Info:
 
Total Users:
2542
Newest User:
caseympritchard@hotmail.com
Members Online:
0
Guests Online:
2126

Online: 
There are no members online

Forum Legend:

 Topic
 New
 Locked
 Sticky
 Active
 New/Active
 New/Locked
 New Sticky
 Locked/Active
 Active/Sticky
 Sticky/Locked
 Sticky/Active/Locked

ankara escort ankara rus escort ankara escort bayan ankara bayan partner ankara escort kizlar escort ankara ankara escort ankara eskort ankara escort bayan ankara bayan partner ankara escort kizlar escort ankara