I bought mine 8 years ago with a fresh overhauled engine, motor mount redone, new baffling, seller said it was expensive.

Since then Ive burned fuel. thats it.

Mine has floats, in winter on wheel it rips. if it fits it ships the UL is 1000lbs but don't worry much in the cold. maybe at high d altitude id keep within WB.

Empty the front wheel is easy to clunk. flys nice with gear or people.

Make sure it has the 210hp kit.

172XP is a really good plane.

I went for my first solo and the 152 was down. I was crestfallen and looked it, so they offered the XP instead with a quick differences course. Went to McMinnville, did a few circuits and then the instructor got out. The XP positively levitated off the ground.

After I had my private, I rented an XP out of Houston and did a cross country to Las Vegas, NM, Bryce Canyon, Carson City, Reno, flew over Yosemite to Death Valley, then Page, AZ, Del Rio, TX and home. I had about 80 hours and GPS wasn’t a thing yet. The power and simplicity of the plane helped make that a fun trip.

I flew one from Portland to Whidbey Island with wife and MIL. They went to weaving classes and I landed at every open airport in Puget sound. They shopped. And shopped. The plane was packed tight and heavy, I was concerned on take off. 4500’ but grass. It just flew off without any problems at all.

A pilot flew into Gonzales recently in his XP looking for a hangar. Nice XP, Horton STOL, new overhaul, 3 blade prop. He just got it back from a full Garminization procedure, paint and interior still to go. If I had to give up my retractable 210 for insurance purposes, I would look for an XP just like his, put in 1500’ strip on my place and enjoy a slightly slower pace but with a big margin of performance on a simple solid airframe.

Lots of IO-360 continentals in M4 and M5 Maules also.

The rental one I flew had a good sized sandbag in the baggage compartment and it helped. I really liked flying it but no one else did so the FBO gave me a great rate. The only downside was the original Cessna radios and eventually they quit on me which did not amuse Boston Center and I said enough. Airframe-wise though it was a good plane.

It is also known as a T-41. Yes, a military trainer.

As I remember - The Air Force used and flew the “A” and “C” models. The Army flew the
T-41 B. The B had the constant speed prop. Most were handed down to flying clubs. And most clubs did the STC for 210 hp.

I flew one frequently from the Monterey Navy Flying club up to Lake Tahoe. Handled it well. As noted, they are faster than a normal 172, MIGHT get near to a 182 if lightly loaded.

But it is the same engine as the Money K, sans Turbo. If you put a STOL kit on it, it will take off MUCH quicker than expected.

They are fun. Enjoy!

Martin

A 182 is a lot more plane if you can pull it off.

Comfortable wide cabin (‘62 and later).

Faster, better load hauler. The engine is way cheaper to overhaul.

The 172 airframe falls on its face with any real weight in it, and gets real slow while doing it.

Thanks everyone for chiming in. A worthy buyer scooped in before I could get my hands on it. Probably for the better as that would be plane # 4. I appreciate all the pireps.

You can never have too many planes!

I was always underwhelmed by the XP!

T-41A has O-300, 145HP.

B was IO-360 with constant speed. C was IO-360 with fixed pitch.