So rainy day debate... Why is the Cessna 150 so bad in climb and plows nose high in cruise

It’s not the nose gear because the TW conversion is not really a lot different
not the back widow because the old fast back airplanes are similar in climb
Wing is about 10sq ft less than the PA-18-95 which will easily out climb it and cruises almost as fast on 90hp. Gross weight is not far off between them.

I had a thought to rig the wings with the eccentrics fully up to drop the wing trailing edges on both sides. This would at least give the illusion that it’s more “on the step” in cruise with the fuselage closer to level.

Anyone try it to see if it makes a difference?

If I had an Aerobat I’d try a set of wingX extensions just to go around the pattern to see if it makes any difference.

I’ve tried McCauley and Sensenich alternate pitch distribution propellers.
We have a 150hp O-320 conversion airplane on the field but the performance is about the same as the 172I with the same engine when loaded to the same weight. I’d prefer the 172.

It’s just interesting it flies like it’s dragging an anchor all the time. Yet floats in for landing just fine. Glide angle flaps up is better than the cub just for a drag estimate.

Go over to supercub.org and read how the are adjusting the thrust line with the motor mounts. PA -18 wings are mounted 4 degrees up, but the -12 an -14 are not and are faster.

Sounds like it needs the Jenny Craig STC.

Go over to supercub.org and read how the are adjusting the thrust line with the motor mounts. PA -18 wings are mounted 4 degrees up, but the -12 an -14 are not and are faster.

Hi Edward
I’ve rebuilt several cubs, Installed the thrust line kit on a few and it helps, I maintain two PA-12’s here on the field, Doing an engine change in one now before it heads to Labrador this summer. Yes I agree quite a bit different than the 18 incidence. Big speed difference with one PA-12 on stock internal bungee gear, 8.00X4 tires and the other with PA-18 gear and 31” bush wheels. The 18 gear really throws the brakes on. Even on small tires it’s slower.

There is a stock no flap PA-18-95 on the field and it always seemed odd to me the C150 could not keep up with it better. The 150 has less wing and yes it’s not a high lift airfoil but you look at the cub on 8.50’s and it’s really draggy, The STOL kits don’t really help the climb on the 150 so it’s not the airfoil. Plus the 150 has a great set of flaps

The 150 has shorter struts, and only one each wing, no Jury struts, no tail brace wires, no cabane struts on the gear. Lots of fairings, a pretty clean cowling etc. But yet it never seems to get up on the step even solo. The O-200 can wind up in RPM more than the C90 so I can still pitch the 150 prop for climb. No luck.

But the 150 will glide better than the Cub just for a rough drag comparison. Stall speed is almost the same and landing ground roll is close.

Side by side seating is not it because the T craft will outrun both of them.
I just wonder why the 150 has such an anchor out during climb? It would be nice to figure it out because they are everywhere. Yes I know they are mostly unloved but they are cheap and have a pretty good baggage, reasonable cabin and heat, electrics etc. Not too bad except for the climb.

At least by dropping the wing TE I could maybe get it to feel less nose up in cruise. Wing would still be flying the same angle. But that would make the thrust line in cruise lower which could hurt things. Guess I’ll have to snag a local one and give it a try when we have it opened up for annual again.

When I used to instruct in summer, we would literally look for buzzards circling and join the same thermal in C150s.

That said, my Dad once owned two of them, and we field overhauled one. I broke in that engine at Aero Valley, and was accused of having an O320 installed.
It flew great.

Easiest way to improve your cruise speed in a 150 is to install an airspeed indicator marked in mph. That way you’ll always be going over 100!

Robert

Don you didn’t happen to sneak a set of high compression pistons in there?

Yes MPH works to make me feel a little better. Disconnecting the static port gets more speed also...

Cruise is ok It just seems the climb is way out of proportion to the stall speed, cruise, hp and weight compared to the 90hp PA-18.

Jato bottle maybe would help but hard to reload when doing touch and goes. Maybe every one in the northeast just have worn out cams from the humidity.

Maybe I need to try a C90 in one with the long prop. If a solution could be found it would be a heck of an STC. bolt in O-300 conversion with no prop shaft extension?

Which brings up another topic. O-300 powered 172 with the O-200 high compression pistons? 165hp?