Best and Worst C182 Models

P

Piper Dreaming

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jun 13, 2023
Messages
33
Display Name
Display name:
Piper Dreaming
If a person were 182 shopping, what are the best, and which models should be avoided?
I'm considering a 182, not very knowledgeable on them.

I'm going to guess that a new one is both a long wait to get, and a big chunk of money to buy, but I sure would love a new one.
 
Early 70s + fresh pick / mogas / extended baggage STCs.
PID4_temp.jpg
 
The early models after the rear window was added had an elevator/horizontal stab that turned out to be too small, I forget which ones, I think the E and F, maybe the G.
 
Wow, what a loaded question. Are you looking to start a war here or what? LOL!

First there are no 'bad' years for the 182. Some years are just better suited to certain missions. The early years (pre '62) are sought-after for back-country flying because of the higher gear and manual flaps. Mid 60s through the 70s have more room and useful load. The restarts (mid 90s through current) have fuel injection, more modern panels and avionics.

I have a 1962 and love it. I think the sweet spot is really the 70's models, though. If you're into fancy panels, just know that any year can be upgraded to state of the art and then some. Lot's of engine upgrade options out there, too. The current production engine (Lyc 540) fine, but hardly the best you can do.

C.
 
BTW pre E models had the narrower cockpit.
 
Last edited:
camorton said:
If you're into fancy panels, just know that any year can be upgraded to state of the art and then some.
Click to expand...
The G1000s are a little less so in this department.
 
There’s no bad model 182. For me the P was the best one. Great UL, great performance numbers including range (80 gal), 40 Deg flaps, mogas, simple and comfortable. Later ones are a little faster and newer. Look at the models and figure out what suits you best.
 
Watching. I lined up two 182 partners last fall but so far have not started looking in earnest. I hope to pull the trigger in the next 6 months.
 
182H driver here. Love it. Could use a bit more useful the older models have but they all are great birds.
 
- Anything since 1964 can be added a BRS. It takes away 85 lbs of useful load, but moves the CG backward, so it's easier to land. It also cruises faster.
- '76 and earlier uses the S model of the engine, which can use autogas.
- '77 and earlier uses bladders, which I think is better than wet wings
- '72 and later have an extended baggage, so if you plan to get the BRS, this will minimize the negative effect on the baggage space
- '72 and newer have a leading edge mod (from the factory) that make them nearly stall proof. An amazing safety feature. Plus, no need for STOL kits.
- '73 and later have a more aerodynamic cowling for a bit extra speed.
- P and Q models can increase the useful load by 150 lbs (to 3100 GW). Therefore, they can have a very large UL (typically ~1300 lbs).

In summary, I think '73-76 are the best years. Just add the BRS and you will still have ~1200 lbs of useful load. That is 720 lbs of people/baggage with full tanks (80 gals). An incredible machine.
 
MountainDude said:
- Anything since 1964 can be added a BRS. It takes away 85 lbs of useful load, but moves the CG backward, so it's easier to land. It also cruises faster.
- '76 and earlier uses the S model of the engine, which can use autogas.
- '77 and earlier uses bladders, which I think is better than wet wings
- '72 and later have an extended baggage, so if you plan to get the BRS, this will minimize the negative effect on the baggage space
- '72 and newer have a leading edge mod (from the factory) that make them nearly stall proof. An amazing safety feature. Plus, no need for STOL kits.
- '73 and later have a more aerodynamic cowling for a bit extra speed.
- P and Q models can increase the useful load by 150 lbs (to 3100 GW). Therefore, they can have a very large UL (typically ~1300 lbs).

In summary, I think '73-76 are the best years. Just add the BRS and you will still have ~1200 lbs of useful load. That is 720 lbs of people/baggage with full tanks (80 gals). An incredible machine.
Click to expand...
My R has a 1323lb useful load and 88 gallons usable. Does everything I’ve asked of it, besides go fast.
 
Many consider the 182P models as a high point. Add the Fresh Pick STC and useful load is about 1300 plus lbs. Most have long range tanks and extended baggage compartments.

Parts for fixed gear 1972 and onward are largely still in production and tons of PMA parts from companies like McFarlane for good support.
 
Last edited:
I'll add more things, too. However, the best is the '56-D. If off airport, then the '56 wins as it has the highest clearance. You'll just have to get the wingX for the useful load bump.

1. Prior to the M model, they used steel landing gear. It took a beating way better and were slightly narrower than the later tube gear you see today. Great for grass.
2. The flap controls were electric after the D model. However, the flap presets didn't happen until '68 or '69, i.e. you'd have to hold it.
3. The E model has smaller elevators. I have them on my plane and if you're CG forward you will need to put trim full when landing.
4. After the G they added alternators.
5. The landing gear on the 182RG is solid except if they fail, then you're screwed. Repairing the saddles will cost as much as an engine.
 
The 182D (1961) and earlier are nothing more than tri-gear Cessna 180s, with the 180's delightfully lighter handling (compared to later 182s). They have manual flaps and an adjustable stabilizer for pitch trim, rather than the fixed stabilizer and elevator trim tab found on the 182E and later. Downside to the earlier ones is the narrower cabin, same as a 180 or 185, just a fraction of an inch wider than a 172.

Later 182s are wonderfully capable airplanes. My biggest gripes with them, though, are the heaviness in pitch, and poor cabin visibility. The top of the instrument panel/glareshield is the same height as the top of the side windows, so you're constantly craning your neck to see over the panel, and ducking down to see out the side.
 
[QUOTE="Later 182s are wonderfully capable airplanes. My biggest gripes with them, though, are the heaviness in pitch, and poor cabin visibility. The top of the instrument panel/glareshield is the same height as the top of the side windows, so you're constantly craning your neck to see over the panel, and ducking down to see out the side.[/QUOTE]

Visibility from 182 has never been an issue for me. On TO/landing, I move the seat forward and raise it to the max. I can easily see over the cowling. In cruise, I lower the seat and push it back. Now I get to see everything from the side and corner windows, while still seeing forward well enough for cruise.
 
Funny you bring that up. I find that although I’m 5’11”, raising the seat to max height works best for me in the 182. Good visibility, and as a bonus a comfortable “sit up straight” sitting position.
 
Early T182T restart is a fabulous version of the breed, especially if out west. There is no bad 182 however.
 
The only bad ones are the non-WAAS G1000 models.
You can no longer buy the WAAS upgrade from Garmin, and can not remove the G1000 as it is part of the certification.
Might be able to upgrade to G1000NXi, but that is not exactly cheap.

I have a 182S, converted to glass, with other changes.

My main reason for a restart one was:
- Fuel injection
- Anti-corrosion
 
Just like dog owners, every 182 owner thinks theirs is the best, and they are all correct.

Like others, I'd highly recommend the CPA buyer's guide. It steps through what changed each year of production. Decided what's important to you/what you're flexible on, then start shopping. I looked for about 6 months in 2021 and found my '78 Q which is the year that had both bladder tanks and a 24V electrical system. Just be careful with listings. Mine was listed as a 1977, but it was built in December so was actually a '78 model year. Compare S/Ns if there's some feature that's a deal breaker for you.

I was also surprised with the height of the glareshield. I'm 6'2" and used to bringing the seat all the way down in a Skyhawk. That's too low for me in a 182. I lose sight of the end of the runway in the flare and switched to looking off to the side.

I also called an avionics shop the day I closed on the plane. It has all worked out perfectly with just a little bit of luck.
 
TimRF79 said:
The only bad ones are the non-WAAS G1000 models.
You can no longer buy the WAAS upgrade from Garmin, and can not remove the G1000 as it is part of the certification.
Might be able to upgrade to G1000NXi, but that is not exactly cheap.

I have a 182S, converted to glass, with other changes.

My main reason for a restart one was:
- Fuel injection
- Anti-corrosion
Click to expand...
Same here…182-S. I wanted F.I. and the epoxy anticorrosion. Useful load is not astounding at 1147 lbs but, since this will be primarily my training aircraft until I figure out my most common use pattern, it works for me. Also the seats and 3pt restraints are comfortable.
 
TimRF79 said:
The only bad ones are the non-WAAS G1000 models.
You can no longer buy the WAAS upgrade from Garmin, and can not remove the G1000 as it is part of the certification.
Might be able to upgrade to G1000NXi, but that is not exactly cheap.

I have a 182S, converted to glass, with other changes.

My main reason for a restart one was:
- Fuel injection
- Anti-corrosion
Click to expand...
All the R models came zinc chromated. Fuel injection is a plus on the restarts since 182s are such notorious ice makers
 
2008 or greater, for WAAS GPS

Van Bortel has pretty much captured that market and keeps the prices pretty high...
 
My dad bought a P model new in 72, 73 model that we bought earned our private in and I got my IR in it too. Fast forward about 25 years and my youngest son wants to fly, we bought a 77 Q model. The Q is quieter, slower turning prop and higher TBO. Otherwise the 77 Q is the same as a P model, main difference is the engine. One thing I didn’t pay attention to when we bought the 77, right seat isn’t adjustable and right side window is fixed!! Minor details, but it’s a pain in the rear end not being able to lower the seat and open the window when I’m in the right seat!! Overall great airplanes!
 
FPK1 said:
2008 or greater, for WAAS GPS

Van Bortel has pretty much captured that market and keeps the prices pretty high...
Click to expand...
My 2007 t182t had WAAS. Though not sure when it was made. Had it for close to 10 years. Was my first plane after getting my license. Loved it. Sold it and eventually replaced it with a t206h. Agree about Van Bortel. I did buy my 182 from them, but got it quite cheap. It was repossessed and had "hail damage." For what it's worth however dealing with van Bortel was easy and they were definitely customer friendly, and very accommodating. Cannot say the same about the company I sold the plane to, but that was on me. I should have backed out.
 
douglas393 said:
My 2007 t182t had WAAS. Though not sure when it was made. Had it for close to 10 years. Was my first plane after getting my license. Loved it. Sold it and eventually replaced it with a t206h. Agree about Van Bortel. I did buy my 182 from them, but got it quite cheap. It was repossessed and had "hail damage." For what it's worth however dealing with van Bortel was easy and they were definitely customer friendly, and very accommodating. Cannot say the same about the company I sold the plane to, but that was on me. I should have backed out.
Click to expand...
I’ve dealt with Van Bortel several times over the last 30 years, I’ve referred several people to them for buying and selling Cessnas. I fly older airplanes, older than what they sell, but I’m still friends with Howard. They take great care of their customers, they ain’t cheap, but they are honest and straightforward.
 
Here is a refurbished 1977 Cessna 182Q getting ready for sale (KLGB). Many upgrades including a 300hp engine...

 
My 73 P model is the sweet spot. Really. As explained above. Like all of us I’ve contemplated what’s next since I got it 16 yrs ago, but really tough to beat without going crazy. Really stunning what you can carry compared to just about every other SEP. Not fast, but long range.
 
aggie06 said:
The retracts are definitely the best 182s. 150+ ktas and a lycoming.
Click to expand...

Do these have a high percentage of issues with the gear saddles? Can these be checked easily during a pre-buy?
The Cessna 182 buyer's guide doesn't cover the RG models.
 
Our club’s rg needed gear saddle work. $40k and that was with used parts. Which were hard to find. Can’t say how often it occurs - but if it does it’s the cost of an engine overhaul.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top