New from Alabeo: C172 Gutlass

dvj said:
Not hammering Alabeao, because I like their GeeBee and classic props, but I'll save a few more dollars and go for the A2A 172. Much more real simulation involvement.
Click to expand...

You won't be sorry. Be sure you get the update that came out last week.
 
BrittMac said:
What made it so bad power-wise? Adding the equipment for the retracts? I just assume that adding that kind of weight would basically cancel out much of the "at speed" benefits and almost all of the lower speed benefits, because of the added weight. Just guessing though, looking forward to whatever insight you may have. Wondering why it would be so much different than the "regular" 172.
Click to expand...

Any airplane is going to struggle more in hot and high conditions like summer in the AZ high desert, but the Gutlass seemed to struggle a little more than the 180hp 172FGs did. The 172RG is no doubt fine if you keep your weights low. I think had they used the Hawk XP's engine....the 210hp (or 195hp derated) Continental IO-360 the Cutlass might have been a better plane. Of course at that point you might as well pay for the 2 extra cylinders and 25 more HP in the a 182RG lol. A true 4 seater. Interestingly the Hawk XP made a much better float version of the 172 then did the standard Skyhawk.

With the 177RG, you have the same basic Lycoming O-360 engine uprated to 200HP, cleaner airframe with less drag...no wing struts.

Of course in FSX, we as simmers actually like the challenge of flying underpowered airplanes at MGTOW:biggrin-new:

For those on the fence with the Cutlass, I would just wait until it hits the F1 wrapper, that way you can return it if you don't like it.

I am definitely going for the Alabeo 195


Cheers
TJ
 
zyella.jpg


zyellc.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top