John Clonts wrote:
Definitely a heavier feel overall than a 172 It will really drop a wing
in a departure stall. People told me that it was "nose heavy" in the flare,
but I never found that to be the case.


Flying a C-210 is good training for flying a C-402. Elevator forces are very
similar and much heavier than the C-172. That being said, it's a very capable
airplane.

I had access to both normal C-210s and we had one with a Robertson STOL kit
installed. *That* was a beast. V speeds were virtually identical to the
C-172's and a full STOL takeoff involved pulling it off at 42 knots with your
right leg quivering under a load heavier than a Vmc demonstration in the C-402.
Absolutely incredible! No mush even at the slower speeds. Normal takeoff in
the STOL bird was at 60 knots. I used 80 knots in the conventional C-210.

We had a three plane trip from Marsh Harbour, Bahamas to St. Lucie County, FL
once. I was in an ordinary C-210, the other two aircraft were a T-210 and a
Turbo Aztec. We all landed within 5 minutes of one another. I burned 19
gallons, the T-210 burned 26 gallons and the Turbo Aztec burned 59 gallons of
fuel! You just can't beat a C-210 for bang for the buck.

And for what it's worth: a fully loaded C-210 sinks clean at about 700 fpm with
the engine out. Don't ask me how I know this. To compare, a Piper Lance sinks
at 1100 fpm under the same conditions. Don't ask me how I know that, either.


That's all I can think of at this hour, except that it's a great plane
overall, we love ours.


I can see why. The 210 is one hell of an airplane.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE