C182 750 miles? Discuss please

[dell30rb]

Just a disclaimer.. I know all sorts of debate exists on the subject and since i pay a wet rate through my club I just lean till the rpm drops and then crank it back on the rich side. No egt guages or cht on those old birds

 

[Palmpilot]

*shudder* Not a recipe for long engine life.

How so? He was flying a 182S, which I assume has similar performance to the 182T, and if I'm reading the tables correctly, 11.5 GPH corresponds to about 65% power at that altitude. Many have said that at that low a power setting, you can't hurt the engine no matter where you set the mixture. Is that incorrect?

The CHT of 350 degrees doesn't sound like a problem either.

 

[dmccormack]

I was getting 130 knots at 11,000 leaned back to 11 gph in the 205. It is nearly as good as a C182 when leaned back-though just about a half gallon more per hour at altitude and in the minus 8-9 knot range (less than max cruise).

Yep -- that's been my experience (though the 1964 205 I've flown has MPH ASI).

You can get it down to 8 GPH at 120 MPH at 4-6k.

We experienced slightly higher fuel burn the last 18 months or so - new fuel pump helped fix that.

 

[poadeleted20]

It'll definitely require more fuel, but if leaned per the book it shouldn't be quite 4gph. I averaged about 11.5gph on that trip I mentioned above leaned to peak EGT. CHTs were around 350, I was at 8000', and getting about 132 knots true, IIRC. BTW, that was without wheel pants.

Yes, at the same speed, the 182 will burn only a little more than the 172RG. But to get the 10-knot advantage of which the 182 is capable, it takes more like 14 gph leaned out.

 

[poadeleted20]

*shudder* Not a recipe for long engine life.

For a family of 4, I would also endorse a 205. They're not significantly more expensive than 182s either.

...if you can find one. IIRC, they only built about 500 of them. In any event, leaning to peak EGT is the best way to avoid the lead fouling which plagues engines, and will be about 20 degrees cooler CHT than peak power, which should do just fine for long life in an O-470.

 

[Geico266]

Good question...

Not really for sure... Have access to a SR20, which will haul us now,, next year who kn ows...

I know this type of topic has been beat to death many times... I'm just searching for something to train & fly in,,, keeps coming back to the 182..

Look at an RV 10. Cheaper than a SR20, carries 4 full size adults, 60 gallons, 100 pounds bagage, and travel 180-200 MPH. Makes that 750 mile trip in comfort in under 4 hours. Do your own maintenance legally, and can burn $3.60 per gallon mogas. Repair parts are 1/3rd the cost of a 182.

 

[Jaybird180]

Look at an RV 10. Cheaper than a SR20, carries 4 full size adults, 60 gallons, 100 pounds bagage, and travel 180-200 MPH. Makes that 750 mile trip in comfort in under 4 hours. Do your own maintenance legally, and can burn $3.60 per gallon mogas. Repair parts are 1/3rd the cost of a 182.

Bah Humbug.

Who has time to build? And I have a tough time trusting something that some other guy put his soul into and then sold for a mere few pieces of silver.

 

[dell30rb]

I agree with ya there. But there are exceptions. Some A&P's are very well acquainted with RV's and can accurately tell you the quality of the build.

 

[dmccormack]

...if you can find one. IIRC, they only built about 500 of them. In any event, leaning to peak EGT is the best way to avoid the lead fouling which plagues engines, and will be about 20 degrees cooler CHT than peak power, which should do just fine for long life in an O-470.

I know of one for sale.

 

[Henning]

I was getting 130 knots at 11,000 leaned back to 11 gph in the 205. It is nearly as good as a C182 when leaned back-though just about a half gallon more per hour at altitude and in the minus 8-9 knot range (less than max cruise).

Right, but you had to take an altitude & TAS advantage to get it. Just saying all things being equal the 205 uses 4gph more. That's what it was working them side by side hauling skydivers anyway. I like the 205 Ok but wouldn't buy one since I can't put it on floats. If I was gonna stay with a land plane and wanted those capabilities I'd have a 210 or Bonanza from the same era. With the price of fuel leaving the gear out is just a no go for me.