My point was just because you can doesn't mean you should. Flying below 1000 ft is asking for trouble. Can we say "engine failure"? What's the glide ratio of a C150? How about a C172 or C182?
The 150, 152 and 172 all have a glide ratio of 9:1 at best. Lose an engine at 500 feet and you've got, at most, 4500 until you hit the ground, much less until you hit a tree, hill or ridge.
A 182 brings it up to 11:1 meaning you might get 5500 feet. Still not good if you have any kind of obstacles in your way
Now, lets "buzz" an R/C field at 75 ft. The 150, 152 and 172 will give you 675 ft. of maximum gliding distance. Now, lets see how long you would be airborne. At 65kts, you're traveling at 109.7 FPS. That gives you just 6.1 seconds, at most, to get the plane on the ground before it does it for you. If you're lucky enough to be in a 182, you'll have a whopping 7.5 seconds, at most, to land before gravity takes over. What I found interesting is that the Cessna's all had a better glide ratio than the Piper Cub