Buying a 182.....

If you're looking at a 182 and you're worried about how fast you can go, you're looking at the wrong airplane IMO. They're respectable airplanes and they do a lot of things well. Going fast isn't one of them.

LOP ops? I've never had access to anything that could do LOP so my opinion doesn't count. But from what I can tell, most people want to do it out of a desire to get a bit of a free lunch. Burn less fuel, still go almost as fast. When it comes to aircraft performance, free lunches are extremely rare. Yes you burn less going LOP. But you also don't go as fast. I would strongly suspect in many airplanes, you could run LOP to get X fuel burn and Y speed. Or you could run ROP and just pull power back to the same X fuel burn and still get within 5 knots of Y speed. Or bump the power just a twitch and get the same Y speed for within .8gph of X fuel burn.
 
To get back to the 182RG subject, those of you that own them, how much maintenance time and money are you spending on the folding wheels, and have you had any reliability issues?
 
asicer said:
Does a 265hp p.ponk really cruise at 154kt? Or is the seller just blowing smoke?

Applying the cube root rule gives me 141kts.
Click to expand...

The prop is what makes the plane go. Torque is what turns the prop. 520ci can turn more prop more efficiently than 470ci. Does that relate to speed? It can with the right prop. My Pponk? 86” 3-blade. Excellent STOL performance with good enough cruise. My 180 had 850s on it when I was breaking it in. High power cruise netted 185mph straight and level at 1000’ ASL. Would I normally run it at wide open throttle and full rpm? No, but I can if I want to. There is no 5 minute restriction with a PPonk motor like with an IO-520. Consider that when talking about PPonk cruise speeds, or any 0-470 for that matter.
 
Last edited:
Groundpounder said:
To get back to the 182RG subject, those of you that own them, how much maintenance time and money are you spending on the folding wheels, and have you had any reliability issues?
Click to expand...

Had it about 8 months, so not a fair sample. But, including the prebuy and first annual, no problems and $0.
 
Volitation said:
Had it about 8 months, so not a fair sample. But, including the prebuy and first annual, no problems and $0.
Click to expand...

I got my commercial in a 172RG long ago, and if my memory serves me correctly, if you lose all hyd fluid from the system, the gear will not come down. Am I right?
 
asicer said:
Does a 265hp p.ponk really cruise at 154kt? Or is the seller just blowing smoke?

Applying the cube root rule gives me 141kts.
Click to expand...

My P.Ponk will do about 170mph at 24"/2400rpm. I don't have wheel pants installed.

It's a few mph faster at WOT/2600rpm.
 
A 182 can go kinda fast, if burn **** load of gas.
 
The only 182 I would buy is one that has either the Continental 550 upgrade from Texas Skyways or the Lycoming 540 upgrade from AirPlains. They are real screamers.

For your budget, look at the 35 Bonanzas. You'll get a lot better useful load, a lot better speed (especially the V or the S), and the gear is not that big of a deal. Lots of good ones available below $150k.

For a fixed gear that is a bit faster than a 182, a Cherokee 6 300 is a good option. If you can stretch your budget a bit and aren't concerned about useful load, a Columbia 300 is a fabulous airplane.

If you look on the experimental side, an RV 7 or RV 9.
 
Flyfeld said:
As title states I may be in the market for a 182, reason for ownership is I just can't get time in renting. Usually have to book two weeks out and then have a 50-50 chance the weather will cooperate in northeast pa. Therefore I am seriously considering purchasing, I always wanted a 182 since I flew one during PPL training. Most time is in a 172 so very similar, still low time private pilot with no instrument but will certainly entertain instrument training once I own.
Budget is 125k which should get me into a Q, but I have hesitation going back to a carburated engine. It also seems that prices have really gone up since I looked a couple of years ago and a newer airplane is out of reach. Looking for some input or direction from the more experienced owners out there to see what is realistic.

Thanks,

Frank
Click to expand...


My friend has one for sale, asking 82K year 1975, flies great, send me a PM if interested (has lots of extras for sale too that he never installed VGs, STOLkit, MT prop, Avidyne 540 etc)
 
@Flyfeld: I still don't quite get your mission other than wanting to own your own plane to fly it when you want. Maybe you could clarify a bit on how far you will be flying, total passengers, business, etc?

We bought a 182P. I think the 'P' model may have been the most produced(??). So there are lots of parts and lots of STC's including MOGAS. And lots of mechanics know how to work on them including private A&P's not affiliated with a FBO (read: perhaps cheaper annuals if you assist).

Regarding MOGAS: We have the STC. But have not ran a gallon of it thru yet. Both the seller's mechanic and ours advised against it. The seller's mechanic swore its what trashed the bladders. Our mechanic told us it would trash the bladders. So we are heeding that advice. Also, to be practical about it, you need a way to haul it from the gas station to the airplane. I have seen some pretty awesome small trailer tanks. But here comes the rub. In many public hangars you can not store anything more than (1) 5 gallon can of fuel. I thought this was a stupid rumor. About 3 months after we moved into our hangar we had a note from the city telling us to get down to (1) and it can only be of a certain type. So that cool tank to transport fuel might need to be stored away from the airplane (like your garage at home).

Unless you are really buying the plane to routinely travel far distances (say over 400nm) I just don't think the added costs and risks of the RG models are worth it given the time saved in the air. If you are flying farther than that, then a RG is probably worth consideration but so is a Mooney and Bonanza and other retracts.

If you are the type that's gonna do a lot of back country stuff I think a 182 fixed gear would be a great overall choice.

Regarding Pricing: You can also buy a cheaper one (with good motor, decent interior, older panel) for less money. Then when you are ready to upgrade the panel, get the panel you want. For example, lets say you found a classic 6-pack panel with KX nav/coms for $75K. With your budget of $125K you could have the panel you want and maybe a interior upgrade. But you could start flying now and decide after awhile if you want to keep it and upgrade it or move up to another plane. If you move up to a different plane you would avoid the hit of the added panel costs or the big upfront costs of a fully equipped 182.

Consider your age: My wife and I are now old enough that we decided to avoid retracts. If you are younger I wouldn't worry as much. If you have started learning at or around retirement age, retractable gear and fuel pumps are just two more things to forget but you wouldn't have to with a high wing fixed gear plane.

Just thoughts. We love our 182P. The price was right for us and I learned to fly in it. If you asked me 2yrs ago what panel I wanted I would have said "X" and now today I would say "Y". But I've managed to fly almost 200hrs and close to 25,000 miles with a classic 6-pack, Tablet and ASDBin (all VFR of course). I will start my IR training in it this spring. I won't be able to shoot RNAV's but it has dual VOR's, ILS, DME, etc.

They are great planes.
 
Thank you for the replies, my mission is going to vary but mostly will travel within one to two hour Trips with one or two passengers. There will be some short 45 minute flights in the summer probably twice a week to our summer house in MD. Retracts don’t make sense to me for the little performance vs the maintenance. I do like the approach of designing my own panel if I can find one with a fresh engine.

Have a great Holiday everyone.
 
Does anyone have any info on the fiberglass fuel tank mod on the 182? Looks like it is something that isn't available any more.
 
Why 2600? Pponk redline is 2700 RPM.
Groundpounder said:
Nope, it replaces the rubber fuel bladders on pre '79 182's.
Click to expand...

Monarch used to make some. Must not have been a big seller or Hartwig would still be making them. Why bother? Bladders work great. I wish somebody made bladders for a Cub wing. There’s safety in having a flexible tank when the wings get bent.
 
Stewartb said:
Why 2600? Pponk redline is 2700 RPM.


Monarch used to make some. Must not have been a big seller or Hartwig would still be making them. Why bother? Bladders work great. I wish somebody made bladders for a Cub wing. There’s safety in having a flexible tank when the wings get bent.
Click to expand...

it is already installed in an airplane I am looking at today. Just wondering if there are any downsides to the retrofit. I think it has reduced fuel capacity, the owner says it will only hold 60.5 gallons usable.
 
Flyfeld said:
Thank you for the replies, my mission is going to vary but mostly will travel within one to two hour Trips with one or two passengers. There will be some short 45 minute flights in the summer probably twice a week to our summer house in MD. Retracts don’t make sense to me for the little performance vs the maintenance. I do like the approach of designing my own panel if I can find one with a fresh engine.

Have a great Holiday everyone.
Click to expand...
Thanks for clarifying!

Actually, unless the 3 people are large or you are flying at some high DA / short runway airports you mission could also be served by a 172, 180HP 172, 180HP Archer and perhaps what could be ideal would be a 180HP Cardinal. I'm not trying to talk you out of the 182. I think in the end if you have a preference for a high wings and don't care if you get there like 17min later than a Mooney or Bonanza or Cirrus I think you'll be quite happy with it. The other options listed will be a bit cheaper to own and maintain giving you more money towards the panel.
 
@Flyfeld If you buy a 182.... or any airplane for that matter..... Get one with a G1000. You won’t regret it.

You won’t regret it for IFR training.

You won’t regret it for Commercial (most will have AutoPilot K140 or GFC700) (TAA)

You also won’t regret it when you will be able to “lease back” it to a local flight school to make some money. Since there will be demand for renters and some students.
 
Same system, combine that with a few landing gear parts made of near unobtanium I stick to renting the 182RG. That being said, I do really like them.
 
Unless you’re opening up a DZ why get a 182?

Get a proper skywagon or a PA24 or something
 
I wasn't trying to talk @Flyfeld out of a 182. We love ours!!! I say get one. Heck, get a G1000 version if you can afford the extra $100K :)

But to be fair, in what seems like a rare PoA "Looking for a plane..." post his mission does not include flying across the country, over mountains with 5 people and a dog. So there are other less expensive options.
 
had the 182H out today for a spin with 2 brother in laws and kid. Was a great little loop. But was a good lesson on how they are carb ice makers!!! Was an odd day in NEPA winter temps mid 30’s But real hazy with front coming in. Leveled off @4500 and about 10 min later it sounded funny. With ANR headset I think I can hear engine changes easier. Started hearing a couple of “misses”. Pulled the carb heat and engine Rpm dropped a bit and about 30 sec later as carb temp came up slowly the engine actually started running a Little higher then before I pulled the heat.
Was supposed to have a checkride today but last min cancelled from DPE, I think I was extra tuned up to paying attention to things plus with new family in plane I was being extra attentitive. Kept heat on for rest of flight.
The 182 is a great plane and fits a lot of missions. There is something to be said for later fuel injected models. Carbs are cheaper to maintain though -I think. I’m quick to pull the heat. Just how I was trained.
 
Did you re-lean when running with full carb heat? Our 182 runs rich with full carb heat, especially noticeable at lower power settings like downwind, base and final :)

I usually lock the MP to a specific mark (eg 19" @ 7500msl) and make sure it is locked in my engine instrument scan. As long as I am keeping altitude that thing should not budge. My first CFI caught it making ice via the MP, well before you could hear it in the engine. But you could definitely tell it was carb ice when we pulled on the heat (that ice crunchy/gurgle). Even then though we didn't run with full carb heat. We watched it and used it as needed. I know the POH says as needed but I feel like using 100% of the time leaves nothing else to get rid of the ice. Then again I have not be in a case where its making ice non-stop...and have no desire to either.
 
asicer said:
Sounds like a carb temp gauge might be a good investment?
Click to expand...
We have one. With the exception of warm summer air, its always in the yellow. That gauge freaks you out more than it helps - if you ask me.
 
When I had a 182P we had a carb temp gauge. With as easily as it made ice, I couldn’t imagine flying without it and having to wait for rough to know, especially doing other stuff in IMC.

Now maybe it was lying too me a lot, but I liked having it. A touch of carb heat was usually enough if it got too low.
 
Last edited:
Sinistar said:
Did you re-lean when running with full carb heat? Our 182 runs rich with full carb heat, especially noticeable at lower power settings like downwind, base and final :)
Click to expand...

Ours has the same behavior. I've come to leaving the mixture lean until final, then as part of my GUMPS check I push in the carb heat, and go full rich.
 
Sinistar said:
I wasn't trying to talk @Flyfeld ...But to be fair, in what seems like a rare PoA "Looking for a plane..." post his mission does not include flying across the country, over mountains with 5 people and a dog. So there are other less expensive options.
Click to expand...

This is true. But as a counterpoint, I can use myself as an example. I bought (and loved!) a nice later model PA-28-161. I lavished money on it to get all the squawks sorted out. Did my ASEL and most of my instrument rating in that plane, and flew it all over the place. But it was so fundamentally limited due to 850lbs useful and anemic climb (and I'm an east cost flyer). Also, I wanted to upgrade the panel but the net value of the airplane at about 50k didn't support dumping 10k or so into upgrades. So I wound up selling it in top condition to a very happy new owner, but as expected my investments really didn't pay me back in selling price.

I settled on a 182. Yes, they are expensive to get into (mine was about $120k with a 430W and 345, new paint, new-ish interior, mid-low time engine), but really not more expensive to own. The extra speed is nice, as is the extra roominess of the cabin. The crazy good climb rate is a big safety factor, particularly for IFR. But the fact that I can actually put 4 people in this thing and go someplace is the killer feature.

On the topic of fuel burn, the increase just isn't enough to have a material impact on the yearly spend. For the average 100h private pilot, you are talking maybe $1500 more per year in gas. Really think about that, its less than the smallest unplanned Mx event I've ever had ;) And that is on a per hour basis. If you calculate on a MPG basis, the difference is even less due to the 10+ knots more in cruise.

In my limited experience, the big cost in an airplane purchase is the first year or two sorting out all the things it needs that the last guy let slide. Why pay that twice (like I did haha)? So moral of the story, unless you are really certain that the lower powered 4 place airplanes will suit you for a long time, buying a plane once with less limits (if you can afford the premium at purchase time) is less expensive than realizing you needed a bit more and doing this twice.
 
Sinistar said:
We have one. With the exception of warm summer air, its always in the yellow. That gauge freaks you out more than it helps - if you ask me.
Click to expand...
The one in my Skyhawk (from the factory) actually seemed to help. Still, was trained to pull carb heat in the pattern, even if it was 104°F outside!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top