Why not 337's
 

Why are the 337's so maligned in so many circles? What other GA aircraft compares in load and range? Am I missing something here, is there something "shady" about this airplane, or is it just not sexy enough? Just curious.

marc

A lot of people cant handle "different". If you keep track I think youll notice its allmost allways chatter by someone who doesnt own an airplane of anykind.

There are a lot of pilots who bad mouth 337's without having flown or many times, sat in one.

Part of the problem was Cessna's marketing of the aircraft while it was in production. Part is the performance compared with conventional multi engined airplanes.

the 337 skymaster for me the best twin outhere period!!!!! for the average joe!!! very inexpensive to operate and fun to fly.

You ask me, it's just p@nis envy...

gkey, you may be correct, but let's talk specifics here.

It is an unusual design in comparison to conventional twins and as it happens, a very safe design because there are no asymmetric problems. This may confuse folks at times, but lose an engine in a conventional twin loaded on a warm day and unless you are on your game, you may find your hands pretty full, with the remaining engine just getting you to the scene of the accident faster.

It is a very well built aircraft with fewer AD's and actual "in use" problems than many other planes out there. Cessna built enough of them and they had to be good to become O-2's virtually straight off the production line.

Some folks say it is expensive to maintain, which in my experience is not the case if you have a shop that knows them or can be trained. In truth, some things are a pretty tight fit, and the plane can have complex systems, but it is not unmanageable. I am in the same ball park costs for maintenance as my friends with Seneca's and the like are.

That said, if you buy one that has not been looked after, you may be biting off a big project. A decent example that has been looked after will give you years of good safe flying for reasonable costs - you get what you pay for.

They are a potentially complex plane if you are stepping up from anything less than a C172, but not overly so. If you are going from a C182 or bigger, it is very straight forward. This is an aircraft in the P series that has a lot of complex systems to learn and understand, but not much more than say a P210.

In summary and I think most owners would agree, it is a delight to fly, has great performance, long legs and carries a really good load. Would I fly something else, yes, maybe, but the 337 is a great plane and a lot of fun for the money - unbeatable in many resepects.

My two cents worth - Dave

Exactly what I meant, just in fewer words.
AKA they are just jealous we have the better machines all-round.

Any time one of you shady, different, unconventional owners of a '74 or newer P337 want to trade for a "real" "macho" twin, just let me know.

Well wannabe, I just bought a 74 P337 and I have zero time to fly her, so maybe I should just "give" her to you !! I think this discussion centers around economics. These quirky 337's are expensive to fly and maintain. Most guys with singles have a hard enough time with the wife to keep the single engine flying machine around. If I just "gave" my 337 to a single owner, and he took the time for the training (Piece of cake) , there would come a time that the "Light bulb" would go "on", and he would no longer feel "safe" flying his single. As for the conventional twin owners, I "prefer" to have my engines inline. Pilots as a whole are a sharp group of folks, it baffles me why the "light bulb" has not gone "on" for many, many more of them. I have NO WAY to put a price on the safety of myself, and my passengers. DW

And to add to that, no wonder the Voyager that circled the globe was an in-line, and what about the new Adams A-500? Rumour has it, it all started with a napkin drawing of the 337 concept...

A friend of mine used to fly a Dutchess, then one day he borrowed my 337 - he has not flown the Dutchess again since, instead nowadays we "share" the 337.