A friend is considering buying a 172 Hawk XP with the Continental IO360 engine.

I would much prefer the Lycoming 360 and that's what I thought the plane had. I was surprised to see 6 cylinders. Does anyone have any pireps on this engine? Is it supported or an orphan? Does it suffer from the typical Continental Cylinder and camshaft issues or is it somehow immune because it's asking for a lot less horsepower per cylinder than the 470, 520, etc...?

Thanks in advance

I flew one just after I got my private pilot license. Compared to the 150 I had been flying, it was wonderfully powerful, roomy and fast. It’s a better plane than the standard 160hp Skyhawk for a private owner taking trips and using the useful load or flying in high density altitude. Of course the simple, fuel efficient 4-cyl model is better for a flight school.

The problem with the 172XP is that once you are paying for 6 cylinders and trying to use 3 or 4 seats for adults and luggage, and taking trips at 135 knots …

….the 182 is a better Cessna for that mission for basically the same operating cost. Why own the oddball model with the smaller back seat? The main appeal would be if 182 prices are ridiculous and you can sacrifice backseat room to get a cheaper 172XP that is otherwise similar.

If you just Google Continental (or TCM) IO-360, you will discover that it's not an orphan. There are one or two airplanes with that engine.

It's got the smaller cylinders compared to the bigger brothers, so the operating stresses are likely similar. The usual Continental valve fit/longevity questions are still valid, I expect, if using factory cylinders.

I flew one a little bit in college a long time ago, and really loved it with my vast experience at that time in 150s, 152s, and 172s including one with an Air Plains 180 hp conversion. It was a much better performer with 195 hp, and a lot smoother than the carbureted O-360 172s. IIRC, cruise was ~125-130 KTAS but I don't recall the fuel flow and that was long before I learned of LOP ops.

I haven't looked at the market for them and wonder if they might be overlooked compared to the normal Lycoming versions that have gotten crazy in the last few years. Flight schools want commonality so they would be less likely to be found there IMO so maybe they're not in as much demand?

If it suits the mission, I would not hesitate to buy one if the only hesitation is due to the Lyc vs. Conti debate. It will cost a little more to own due to the CS prop and 6 cylinders, but not enough to move the needle IMO as it is a better performer. If I'm wrong on the market value these days and they're encroaching on 182 territory, then getting a 182 is likely wiser. If the prospective owner is low-time, staying under 200 hp/High Performance might be good. IMO it might be ideal for the first-time owner that wants to build time with some XC trips and get an instrument rating in it. It would take a while to "outgrow" if that is the scenario.

A colleague had one and really liked it. I only flew in it one time. I'd be tempted to cross-shop with a Cardinal. I got a few hours in a 177B (180hp) and I really liked that airplane. It looked cool and the view without the wing struts is amazing.

I have had a couple. Continentals don’t have the Lycoming rusty cam issues because it is on the bottom. They are basically the same as the Skymaster/O2 and T41 engines and in same family as the Seneca IIs and up and the Mooney 231. They run smoother than 4 clyinders. Some are eligible for 210 HP (simple mod). Could still have a non VAR crank that has to be condemned per AD if case is ever split.

Great aircraft, many upgrades compared to the previous

Aircraft holds its value over time

C172p and xp are valued

The one I flew had the 210 hp upgrade so the flight school could use it as a high-performance trainer.

I really liked it compared to the 150, 160 and 180 hp 172s. It had great takeoff and climb performance, and it was faster. I forget what the cruise speed and fuel burn was, it’s been 25+ years.

If you don’t need the size and useful load of a 182, it’s a decent option.

I assume overhaul would be more expensive than a 4 cylinder Lycoming.

Same basic engine as the Mooney M20K models. So not an orphan. Also in Turbo Arrow and many other planes.

STC upgrades to 210 HP, with basically adjusting prop governor to higher redline and remark tach.

I'm surprised you found one. Not that they aren't popular, people love them. But every one I've seen has been on floats.

I flew both of them some and preferred the Cardinal.

It is half of a 182. Decent UL. I recall 125-130KTAS on 9-10 gph. It was a bit nose heavy with only front seats filled. I enjoyed flying one for a few hundred hours.

Thanks for all the details. This is very helpful.

Which half?

If you think an overhaul is in the near future I would get some quotes on what that might cost.

I had a friend interested in one and when we checked on OH I recall we found the camshaft for the O-360-F1A6 had a camshaft that drives the governor that is unique to the engine and that, while available, increased the cost significantly if needed.