TR182 vs Turbo Normalized 177R

[westslopeco]

Working on trying to find my next plane. Because I live in Colorado, I really want something with a turbo. I wanted to get some opinions on the TR182 vs the 177RG with a Turbo Normalized added. Any advantages or disadvantages between the two planes? The smaller useful load of the 177 still fits with what I need to carry. I will rarely have 4 people, and when I do it will be for shorter local flights. Longer cross countries will be with two adults, two medium dogs, and baggage. I think that with the addition of the Turbo on the 177 the performance should be fairly similar to the TR182, maybe a bit slower and less climb rate? I like the idea of maintaining a 4 cyl vs a 6 cyl engine. What do you all think?

Tony

 

[TCABM]

Aside from this 15 year old article, I know little about TN’d cardinals.

Turbonormalized Cardinal - Aviation Consumer

Aviation Consumer Chief Editor Paul Bertorelli reports on Cessnas 177 Turbonormalized Cardinal; 177 knots on 11 GPH turns the Cardinal into a contender.

www.aviationconsumer.com

Parts support is what I’d find answers to before I spent much time trying to find one.

Turbonormalized Cardinal - Aviation Consumer

Aviation Consumer Chief Editor Paul Bertorelli reports on Cessnas 177 Turbonormalized Cardinal; 177 knots on 11 GPH turns the Cardinal into a contender.

www.aviationconsumer.com

 

[westslopeco]

I read that article, which is what made me start to consider the 177 as in a normally aspirated configuration, it is definitely not a good choice for high DA departures. Luckily Tornado Ally Turbo looks to still be in business and still offers the TN service on 177's. They also have a separate website just for parts.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I’ve flown both. Out of KAPA. The issue with the 177 and high D-Alt departures is real. Great cruiser but not departure.the turbo might help with that, but I have trouble picturing it meeting the 160+ speed of the TR182.

 

[RyanShort1]

I don't like takeoffs in the 177RG even in Midland during the summers when it's 100 degrees outside. DA is a real thing with the Cardinal.

 

[TCABM]

I read that article, which is what made me start to consider the 177 as in a normally aspirated configuration, it is definitely not a good choice for high DA departures. Luckily Tornado Ally Turbo looks to still be in business and still offers the TN service on 177's. They also have a separate website just for parts.

Yeah, I wouldn’t be looking at buying one that ain’t already converted.

 

[Steamflyer]

TR182 is a lot more airplane. And flying it well below its capacity only improves things. Unless converted, 177 does not have an pressure controller, so you have to manually operate the waste gate using the throttle. Not a big deal, but different than other turbos in a descent. Cardinal also has its own spar AD, but presumably anything still flying has had that done (similar to strutless 210). Both have some expensive gear attach fittings that must be looked at for cracking.

 

[luvflyin]

I read that article, which is what made me start to consider the 177 as in a normally aspirated configuration, it is definitely not a good choice for high DA departures. Luckily Tornado Ally Turbo looks to still be in business and still offers the TN service on 177's. They also have a separate website just for parts.

Besides the engine, think about the rest of the plane. The Cardinal is an Orphan. Getting parts is not easy some times. I owned one. There weren't a whole helluva a lot made and the inventory just keeps getting smaller. I would suggest joining https://www.cardinalflyers.com/home/_home.php and start doing some homework before buying one.

 

[Skip Miller]

On the 177, the wing spar carry through must be rigorously inspected. It is made from Unobtanium. Seriously. I looked into buying a 177B about 10 years ago, and I just couldn’t get comfortable with that risk. But, as usual, YMMV.

-Skip

 

[Eldorado]

The TR182 has as good a reputation for durability than any turbocharged single over the past 40 yrs. A derated O540 is about as bullet proofed turbo as one can find.

 

[Rgbeard]

The 177, while a beloved aircraft by those that enjoy the large doors, is also a lesson in sequential unintended consequences of engineering changes.

It’s a plane with relatively high maintenance costs, when you add in the spar stuff, and the Cessna-type insect-inspired landing gear, it wouldn’t make my list over a 182.

 

[hindsight2020]

nothing to add. 182 would be the safer bet long term. It's all orphany stuff these days anyways....

 

[Clip4]

While I really like Cessna retract models, one has to go in eyes open that Cessna isn’t supporting these models with many landing gear parts these days. This includes gear doors, steering bungees and other parts.

There was only about 2000 R182s built and probably less 177RGs.

Also the TR182 is a carbureted engine with a turbo and the Bendix single drive mag.

 

[pilotrick]

Honestly your best bet is a T182T. Forget the older ones that you can over boost and forget a turbo 177. That will be a mess.

 

[sansoneservices]

Working on trying to find my next plane. Because I live in Colorado, I really want something with a turbo. I wanted to get some opinions on the TR182 vs the 177RG with a Turbo Normalized added. Any advantages or disadvantages between the two planes? The smaller useful load of the 177 still fits with what I need to carry. I will rarely have 4 people, and when I do it will be for shorter local flights. Longer cross countries will be with two adults, two medium dogs, and baggage. I think that with the addition of the Turbo on the 177 the performance should be fairly similar to the TR182, maybe a bit slower and less climb rate? I like the idea of maintaining a 4 cyl vs a 6 cyl engine. What do you all think?

Tony

My pick would be a plain-jane 182.. plenty of power and cheap to keep

 

[AA5Bman]

If you want a turbo, get one that is standard to the model. When it comes to engines (not so much with avionics or anything), I was long ago advised to try to keep them as stock as possible. And regarding turbochargers, I had to learn that lesson twice before it sunk in. Trust me, stick with the stock configuration of the TR182 if that’s what you want (it’s a way better plane anyway just in general, too).

 

[Pinecone]

Turbo normalizing does not stress the engine any more than flying at sea level. It is limited to 30 inches manifold pressure.

 

[Steamflyer]

Honestly your best bet is a T182T. Forget the older ones that you can over boost and forget a turbo 177. That will be a mess.

After thousands of hours in one, along with nearly all the other Cessna singles, can say the T182T is probably the best Cessna ever built.