182 in our future?

tonycondon said:
the only way you are going to get 165 out of a TR182 is way up high. like way way up high.
Click to expand...
Tony, you must have flown a dog.

TRG182 is 155 kts down around 4000, and about 165 at 13K with some reliability.

But it's not a go fast bird. It's a Get ABOVE bird. There is nothing, but nuttin like loafing along on top at 15K, 55% power, booking 190 kts over ground, the air is smooth, vis unlimited, and it's cool/comfy up there. But I do hesitate to take the RGs into unsealed strips. The back and forth action of the mains can be.....unnerving.
 
NC19143 said:
Originally Posted by gprellwitz
As Chris said, my understanding is that insurance companies insure based on what the plane is certified for. So you can't pull out seats to reduce the passenger carrying capacity. :(

This must have changed since I insured my 170 for the 2 front seats
Click to expand...
Possible, or maybe it depends on the insurance company. Who did you use for that?
 
i think you are probably right. it had a 3 blade prop on it. and i took off about 1 minute behind our NA R182 (fresh out of engine overhaul after nosegear collapse) and the NA beat me to Ames (100ish miles) by over 5 minutes. so it was probably barely hitting 150. I suspect the three blade prop was probably it. I guess im just too used to slugging it out in the lower levels.
 
What feedback does the collective have on the Air Plains conversions for the 182RG ? I thought about finding a total run-out and put this conversion into it rather than overhauling the existing engine.
 
Last edited:
jdwatson said:
What feedback does the collective have on the Air Plains conversions for the 182RG ? I thought about finding a total run-out and put this conversion into it rather than overhauling the existing engine.
Click to expand...
If you already had the 182RG, I can see where it might make sense. If you're buying fresh, why not go with either the TR182 or the 210? Any idea how much it costs? What it does to the weight & balance? (I understand that the R182 is nose-heavy to begin with. A larger engine up front would only exacerbate that).
 
jdwatson said:
What feedback does the collective have on the Air Plains conversions for the 182RG ? I thought about finding a total run-out and put this conversion into it rather than overhauling the existing engine.
Click to expand...
The cost is a little staggering - about $70K last time I checked. So, if an overhaul will cost $25K you are looking at a difference of $45K for the conversion. The performance is great and let's you have 75% of the old 235 engines HP (176 HP) up to about 12,000 feet.

If I had the coin and wanted to go high alot it would make sense to upgrade my plane since I know what I have. However if I was starting fresh, then a TR182 would probably make more sense.
 
gprellwitz said:
What it does to the weight & balance? (I understand that the R182 is nose-heavy to begin with. A larger engine up front would only exacerbate that).
Click to expand...
The weight is not all that much more you are already starting with the same basic engine building block, an O-540. The replacement engine is an IO-540 which has different heads and a fuel injection system. Biggest item is the 3 blade prop. The battery gets moved to the back if it wasn't there already and, I believe, there is some weight bolted to the tail to help as well.

This is not a simple conversion. Small header tanks are added below the floors to help feed the fuel injection, the fuel system is totally reworked, etc. This work is only performed at Air Plains shop and they will not allow another shop to do the work. That tells me that this is not something you want just any A&P attempting.

I have never had problems with excessive nose heavyness with my R182 and it doesn't seem any different than a straight leg 182 in terms of landing. Just remember that trim is your friend...
 
Okay, we're looking at one right now that was attractively priced, but we just found out that it's been pulled from the line because the last few oil changes have shown "too much metal." The engine is a turbo, and it has about 1500 hours on it. The price we've seen was before the metal was reported to the broker. Should we just walk away at this point, before we have anything but a couple of phone calls invested?

If not, should we have the current owner do the overhaul, or should we discount it as being basically with a totally worn-out engine and do the overhaul ourselves? We don't have the engine reserves for a full overhaul right now, of course, so how could the financing be done? Could we get a loan for the plane based on a zero-time engine and use the amount over the sale price to put in the new engine? Are the loan companies that flexible? If not, how does someone without an engine reserve go about getting a loan to put in a new engine?

There aren't many improvements we'd want to make on the panel, but with the engine already pulled, it seems like this would be the time to do them. Could they be rolled up into the original loan?

(Yeah, I wish we had the cash to just buy it outright, but that ain't happening!)
 
I agree with Bill that the 201 and 182 are the two best options in used SEL airplanes. What it comes down to between them is whether you want speed or payload. Both are simple airplanes system-wise, both hold their value, both are well known and maintainable. Both are great, dependable IFR platforms

If you intend to fly mostly single pilot or two people, or two people and small kids, you'll love a 201/J. If you want to bring lots of stuff or people, you'll love a 182. Regardless of which you buy, you'll likely not lose much when you sell.
 
A 1,400-hour turbocharged engine that is making metal is almost certainly due for an overhaul. That could be a good thing, as you will know how the engine has been run from day one. However, the purchase price has to reflect the fact that it's runout, rather than just getting on in life. You should be able to roll the cost of the overhaul into the loan. If you have a lender let them work out the numbers. Engine time is closely allied to aircraft value, so they don't really have a problem with that. Avionics is another matter, however, because the labor is so great the installed value is at best half the cost of buying and installing said devices. That will be tougher to borrow money for.

Does the current owner have an engine shop? The problem with having the seller do it is you're just asking for a bare minimums approach. It's your only engine. Get it done the best way you can. If the seller has a good engine shop, then make it a separate transaction from the sale of the airplane to minimize the temptation to cut corners.
 
Ken Ibold said:
A 1,400-hour turbocharged engine that is making metal is almost certainly due for an overhaul. That could be a good thing, as you will know how the engine has been run from day one. However, the purchase price has to reflect the fact that it's runout, rather than just getting on in life. You should be able to roll the cost of the overhaul into the loan. If you have a lender let them work out the numbers. Engine time is closely allied to aircraft value, so they don't really have a problem with that. Avionics is another matter, however, because the labor is so great the installed value is at best half the cost of buying and installing said devices. That will be tougher to borrow money for.

Does the current owner have an engine shop? The problem with having the seller do it is you're just asking for a bare minimums approach. It's your only engine. Get it done the best way you can. If the seller has a good engine shop, then make it a separate transaction from the sale of the airplane to minimize the temptation to cut corners.
Click to expand...

What Ken said.

If it were me I would negotiate it the price as a run out engine and then do the rebuild myself to my standards. If you let the owner do it he may make choices that you would not, he also is not likely to let you have influence on those choices as he would be stuck footing the bill if you were to walk.
 
smigaldi said:
What Ken said.

If it were me I would negotiate it the price as a run out engine and then do the rebuild myself to my standards. If you let the owner do it he may make choices that you would not, he also is not likely to let you have influence on those choices as he would be stuck footing the bill if you were to walk.
Click to expand...
That's what I'm thinking, and one of the reasons I was asking about whether it would be possible to finance the engine rebuild. So this was welcome news:
Ken Ibold said:
You should be able to roll the cost of the overhaul into the loan.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top