Plane choice?

Loveair

Loveair

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
110
Location
Birmingham, AL
Display Name
Display name:
Loveair
I am a student pilot with 14 hours air time. I am really close to Solo. My CFI is talking about it more each time. An offer came up for a 50% share on a 182. I flew it with my CFI and loved it. I called the guy that I would be purchasing the 50% from and made an offer. He said the other 50% owner had decided to buy him out and it was no longer available. :confused: I was taken to the prom and left at the door. Don't blame the other guy. It was a sweet plane. Anyway I now have the bug to own. I fly a 1968 172 in the school. I have also flown a small low wing. I am looking to buy something similar to capacity, speed, and cost as the 182. I loved the 182. But I know there are lots of makes, models, styles out there. What would the recommended plane be??
 
Welcome aboard.

There are a lot of good types with which to get your first ownership experience, but no one that is a best-fit-for-all.

Some questions first:

What part of the country do you live in, and what do you think will be your typical mission after you get your license -- i.e., how many passengers, typical trip lengths, destinations, etc. Do you plan to use short, unimproved airstrips? High-altitudes? Mostly local $100 hamburger runs or a lot of serious long-distance work? Plan to eventually get your instrument rating?
 
As a 182 owner, I'm a little biased, but they do a lot of things well, but they aren't outstanding in many areas.:D Good useful loads, pretty good speed, fuel efficiency isn't as good as Bonanzas or Mooneys, simple to fly and maintain. I plan on 130-135 knots and 12-13 GPH. It would be a simple transition from the 172, I learned from 0 hours in a 182.
Don't be upon a huge hurry to buy something, check out several different models and by all means make sure whatever you buy, it will hold all the folks you are planning on taking!:D
 
Pilawt said:
Welcome aboard.

There are a lot of good types with which to get your first ownership experience, but no one that is a best-fit-for-all.

Some questions first:

What part of the country do you live in, and what do you think will be your typical mission after you get your license -- i.e., how many passengers, typical trip lengths, destinations, etc. Do you plan to use short, unimproved airstrips? High-altitudes? Mostly local $100 hamburger runs or a lot of serious long-distance work? Plan to eventually get your instrument rating?
Click to expand...

Above is Very sensible. Impossible to know with these few hours. Wait a while and look around a lot. Ask questions, etc.
 
I've got most of my time in 172s, but also in the 182 (and Arrow). The 182 is, as you no doubt noticed, a nice comfortable cross country cruising machine. I really like it for that purpose. Now, for beating around the pattern and local $100 hamburger runs, the 172 works just fine and costs less to operate (or in my case, less per hour to the club). As a pre-solo student I think (and take this for what it's worth) it might be a little early for you to lock in on a particular model plane to purchase. Take the time to try a few others and to define what your typical trip requirements might be. The 182 is a great plane, but you might find that something else fits your needs better. Not knowing your needs, I couldn't even begin to suggest what to look at. And, keep in mind that my experiences are limited to a C-150 (never again), C-172, C-182 and Piper Arrow. There are a bunch more airplanes out there to consider.
 
Loveair said:
I am a student pilot with 14 hours air time. I am really close to Solo. My CFI is talking about it more each time. An offer came up for a 50% share on a 182. I flew it with my CFI and loved it. I called the guy that I would be purchasing the 50% from and made an offer. He said the other 50% owner had decided to buy him out and it was no longer available. :confused: I was taken to the prom and left at the door. Don't blame the other guy. It was a sweet plane. Anyway I now have the bug to own. I fly a 1968 172 in the school. I have also flown a small low wing. I am looking to buy something similar to capacity, speed, and cost as the 182. I loved the 182. But I know there are lots of makes, models, styles out there. What would the recommended plane be??
Click to expand...

Too bad, a partnership on a 182 for a new pilot would be pretty optimum. Have you tried contacting the other guy and seeing if there was a deal still to be made?

You are right though, there are a lot of other planes out there, it all depends on what you want it to do for you, how much weight you need to carry, how many people, and where you operate for starters. The 182 is a very all around capable plane.
 
Have you considered a partnership? Its a great way to save $$ on ownership costs if you can find a good friend who is a pilot. Good luck. The 182 is a great plane.
 
Pilawt said:
Welcome aboard.

There are a lot of good types with which to get your first ownership experience, but no one that is a best-fit-for-all.

Some questions first:

What part of the country do you live in, and what do you think will be your typical mission after you get your license -- i.e., how many passengers, typical trip lengths, destinations, etc. Do you plan to use short, unimproved airstrips? High-altitudes? Mostly local $100 hamburger runs or a lot of serious long-distance work? Plan to eventually get your instrument rating?
Click to expand...

I live in the Birmingham AL area. 90% of my flying will be within 400 NM. Mostly two people for work. And occasionally 4 people for pleasure. I do plan on continuing forward to IFR rating.
 
Loveair said:
I live in the Birmingham AL area. 90% of my flying will be within 400 NM. Mostly two people for work. And occasionally 4 people for pleasure. I do plan on continuing forward to IFR rating.
Click to expand...

A 182 is a great first airplane to own - Anybody can work on them, parts are easy to come by, they're a good stable IFR platform, they're a good step up from the trainer class in speed without being so fast they leave you behind, and they can do darn near anything you ask of them. They're also so useful and popular that it should be easy to sell if and when you decide to move up to something else.
 
The 182 would make a good plane for your mission. The 182 is a nice IFR platform.
 
182s are nice, I'd also check out a PA-24, faster, handles better, hauls a good amount, and simple.
 
Loveair said:
I am looking to buy something similar to capacity, speed, and cost as the 182. I loved the 182. But I know there are lots of makes, models, styles out there. What would the recommended plane be??
Click to expand...
I can only think of one plane with "similar...capacity, speed, and cost as the 182", and that's the Piper Dakota/235 Cherokee. I'd suggest you find and fly one of them and see how you like it compared to the 182.
 
Ron Levy said:
I can only think of one plane with "similar...capacity, speed, and cost as the 182", and that's the Piper Dakota/235 Cherokee. I'd suggest you find and fly one of them and see how you like it compared to the 182.
Click to expand...

To me, the extra door and easier loading makes the 182 the natural choice there, but then some people want a low wing, and then the PA-28-235/6 makes a good choice, although these days you can get a Bonanza for the same money.
 
Henning said:
To me, the extra door and easier loading makes the 182 the natural choice there, but then some people want a low wing, and then the PA-28-235/6 makes a good choice, although these days you can get a Bonanza for the same money.
Click to expand...
Perhaps so, but over the life of the plane, a Bonanza will not have similar cost to a PA28-235/236 or C-182, so I didn't consider it or any other 300HP-class complex singles.
 
Maybe a good idea is to join a flying club in your area with multiple airplanes so you can fly and get to really know what your future airplane would be.
 
Henning said:
To me, the extra door and easier loading makes the 182 the natural choice there, but then some people want a low wing, and then the PA-28-235/6 makes a good choice, although these days you can get a Bonanza for the same money.
Click to expand...


In that case get a 185, two doors plus baggage, and a belly pod if needed, hauls a bunch, cruise 150kts with straight wheels, 300HP injected, can operate out of a foot ball field :D

If you're on a budget, a 180 will work well too, here's a cream puff.

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/listing?id=1782846
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Perhaps so, but over the life of the plane, a Bonanza will not have similar cost to a PA28-235/236 or C-182, so I didn't consider it or any other 300HP-class complex singles.
Click to expand...

The cost difference over the course of ownership will be a rounding error. The Bo gear is strong and robust and doesn't need much maintenance.

Insurance difference on the same hull value is a tank of gas. And condition of the planes in question will be much more of a factor than if the wheels fold up or not.

Plus, after shopping around for a while, I've noticed that it's much easier to find a well equipped Bo than it is a 182.
 
I would second the PA-24 Comanche.

Fly 150 knots, at 12.5 gal per hour, carry (with tip tanks) 1200 lbs. fly a solid 6 hrs, decent on grass and once you get used to it, ok on short fields.

Very stable instrument platform, and typically less expensive to purchase then a 182.

I will admit, the 182 is probably the best all around single in that it does everything well, but the are priced accordingly.

Flavius
 
A 182 is a good plane, but 3.5 hour legs for 400 nm trips will get old. I'd look at a 150 kt plane. Bo, Comanche, 210, all good options. Even a 182RG. Mooney might be a bit small.

I'd fly them all and see what you like the best. A 182RG is pretty much a 145 kt plane, Comanche 250/260 closer to 155, Bos go up to 165.

Don't get hung up on speed. It's easy to catch up after a few hours.
 
mrkbbd said:
I disagree with the Comanche - the LoPresti wing is less forgiving for a 15hr pilot...
Click to expand...

Yep, having quite a few hours in both the Comanche and Bonanza, the Bonanza is certainly easier to fly and land well, especially for a low time pilot, and the Bo is considerably more rugged.
 
Henning said:
Yep, having quite a few hours in both the Comanche and Bonanza, the Bonanza is certainly easier to fly and land well, especially for a low time pilot, and the Bo is considerably more rugged.
Click to expand...

The PA24 is easy to fly, it's plenty rugged, and it's simpler and a better value for the buck.

Much like the Grumman AA1 debate, if you can't handle a PA24 you really shouldn't be flying.
 
Don't forget how much fuel savings to be had if you slow the Bonanza down to 182 speed. Or - you can turn the wick up and boogie. I'm guessing a 182J-M will go around 135Kts or a bit better? A Bo of similar vintage can do that on 9GPH LOP. Keeps the fuel burn reasonable. Easy on systems.
 
James331 said:
The PA24 is easy to fly, it's plenty rugged, and it's simpler and a better value for the buck.

Much like the Grumman AA1 debate, if you can't handle a PA24 you really shouldn't be flying.
Click to expand...

key is "you" - an experienced pilot; not a student pilot with no time - you are advocating for something that is at odds with the mission
 
I just don't think it would be that hard for him, probably tach on another 10hrs to his PPL, worst case.

Probably the smartest option would be for the OP to hold off on buying till he had 80hrs or so, and his ticket
 
James331 said:
The PA24 is easy to fly, it's plenty rugged, and it's simpler and a better value for the buck.

Much like the Grumman AA1 debate, if you can't handle a PA24 you really shouldn't be flying.
Click to expand...

True on the last, but from what I have seen of the market recently, the bang for the buck argument no longer exists, the price of Bonanzas is down.
 
Loveair said:
I am a student pilot with 14 hours air time. I am really close to Solo. My CFI is talking about it more each time. An offer came up for a 50% share on a 182. I flew it with my CFI and loved it. I called the guy that I would be purchasing the 50% from and made an offer. He said the other 50% owner had decided to buy him out and it was no longer available. :confused: I was taken to the prom and left at the door. Don't blame the other guy. It was a sweet plane. Anyway I now have the bug to own. I fly a 1968 172 in the school. I have also flown a small low wing. I am looking to buy something similar to capacity, speed, and cost as the 182. I loved the 182. But I know there are lots of makes, models, styles out there. What would the recommended plane be??
Click to expand...

I posted this in another forum but I think it addresses your question. The 182 is a great plane.

I bought a 182 when I had about two hours of time. Learned to fly in it, took my check ride, got an IFR rating, flew it across the country and back, hard to go wrong. By the way my home airport is 6300', the 182 is a good mountain plane.
 
Ron Levy said:
I can only think of one plane with "similar...capacity, speed, and cost as the 182", and that's the Piper Dakota/235 Cherokee. I'd suggest you find and fly one of them and see how you like it compared to the 182.
Click to expand...

Only problem with the bigger-engined PA28's is - They're still PA28's, with the same small cabin. Capability-wise, they're very similar, but the 182 is WAY more comfortable IMO.

Ted DuPuis said:
A 182 is a good plane, but 3.5 hour legs for 400 nm trips will get old. I'd look at a 150 kt plane.
Click to expand...

A 400nm leg in our old 182 would be pretty much right on 3 hours. In a 150kt plane it's still 2.7. Speed is nice, but the difference between a 182 and a 172 is about 25% while the difference between the 182 and the "150kt plane" is only about half that percentage.

A 182RG is pretty much a 145 kt plane
Click to expand...

FWIW, both 182RG's I've flown were 150 knot birds.

Don't get hung up on speed. It's easy to catch up after a few hours.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

Henning said:
Yep, having quite a few hours in both the Comanche and Bonanza, the Bonanza is certainly easier to fly and land well, especially for a low time pilot, and the Bo is considerably more rugged.
Click to expand...

Bo is a rugged plane, but the PA24 is an incredibly rugged plane as well. I wouldn't call the Bo "more rugged," and certainly not use ruggedness as a criterion for choosing a Bo over a PA24.

docmirror said:
Don't forget how much fuel savings to be had if you slow the Bonanza down to 182 speed.
Click to expand...

Y'know, people talk about this a lot, but nobody does it on a regular basis, so why do we even suggest it? I've really only slowed a plane down a couple of times - Once to make it all the way home instead of to a night fuel stop after a vacuum pump failure, the other time to make a significantly cheaper fuel stop.

I'm guessing a 182J-M will go around 135Kts or a bit better?
Click to expand...

I planned 130 on our old 182N, usually got about 133.

James331 said:
I just don't think it would be that hard for him, probably tach on another 10hrs to his PPL, worst case.

Probably the smartest option would be for the OP to hold off on buying till he had 80hrs or so, and his ticket
Click to expand...

Yup! Any of the options that have been discussed will add extra time to the PPL. Not necessarily a bad thing, but it may be easier and cheaper to finish the PPL and then get checked out in a new plane.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
.

Bo is a rugged plane, but the PA24 is an incredibly rugged plane as well. I wouldn't call the Bo "more rugged," and certainly not use ruggedness as a criterion for choosing a Bo over a PA24.



Y'know, people talk about this a lot, but nobody does it on a regular basis, so why do we even suggest it? I've really only slowed a plane down a couple of times - Once to make it all the way home instead of to a night fuel stop after a vacuum pump failure, the other time to make a significantly cheaper fuel.
Click to expand...

True, the reason I would choose the Bo is it has a much more forgiving wing.

As for slowing down, I always flew my 310 slowed down, my MPG was the same as a Cherokee 6.
 
Henning said:
As for slowing down, I always flew my 310 slowed down, my MPG was the same as a Cherokee 6.
Click to expand...

You didn't fly it THAT much slowed down - You were still doing 180 knots, not 130. I don't consider that slowed down, I consider that smart flying. I could fly the Mooney 10 knots faster too, but at that point the extra 5 gph I'd be burning for that last 10 knots would probably be the least of the long-term costs I'd incur for operating that way.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Y'know, people talk about this a lot, but nobody does it on a regular basis, so why do we even suggest it? I've really only slowed a plane down a couple of times - Once to make it all the way home instead of to a night fuel stop after a vacuum pump failure, the other time to make a significantly cheaper fuel stop.
Click to expand...

I may be the only one. The point is, that if you want to slow down to 182 speed you can. If you want to go 165+ knots -- you can. :yes:
 
flyingcheesehead said:
You didn't fly it THAT much slowed down - You were still doing 180 knots, not 130. I don't consider that slowed down, I consider that smart flying. I could fly the Mooney 10 knots faster too, but at that point the extra 5 gph I'd be burning for that last 10 knots would probably be the least of the long-term costs I'd incur for operating that way.
Click to expand...

Slowed down 15kts from book cruise, and pretty much at where MPG levels out to best.
 
If you think the PA24 has poor visibility or a un forgiving wing, that's just sad, and not something I would admit to in public. It's a easy docile, get er' done, nice handling plane.

I used to use one as a initial complex trainer for CPL students, not one had a issue mastering the plane, and rather quickly too.


As for slowing down, my 185F gets it's best range at the bottom of the cruise charts, for most of my flights I stay in the middle of the economy to speed area.
 
My PA-24-250 is pretty docile, if landings are hard put ballast in the baggage compartment and it will land fine if properly trimmed on approach. Its dead simple to operate with great fuel economy.

It has no problem with short (2k') runways and support is as good as a Bo
 
Henning said:
Slowed down 15kts from book cruise, and pretty much at where MPG levels out to best.
Click to expand...

Lemme guess... WOT, props at the bottom of the green, and LOP? Again, that ain't "slowing it down" that's just smart operation. Only an idiot who hates their money is gonna fly at book (or in this case, brochure!) cruise.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Lemme guess... WOT, props at the bottom of the green, and LOP? Again, that ain't "slowing it down" that's just smart operation. Only an idiot who hates their money is gonna fly at book (or in this case, brochure!) cruise.
Click to expand...

No, she really liked turning 2450, just a sweet spot for smooth, WOT, lean till she drops off the pipe, richen her back till she finds her throat and call it good. That ended up at 10.5 GPH/side. For climbing or higher than 10,000', I'd just add RPM, she didn't mind turning 2675 one bit. I tend to control power using fuel reduction first.
 
Thanks to all! I agree with what several have said about waiting until I have more hrs to decide and purchase. One of the main reasons I am wanting to purchase is so I can speed up my training. The trainer I am flying now seems to be always booked or down for maintenance. I would like to fly two or three times a week. I show up and "Sorry she's down for maintenance again". I will check out all of the planes mentioned above. I have a feeling I will come back to the 182. Just want to make sure I have covered my bases before doing so.
 
Loveair said:
I live in the Birmingham AL area. 90% of my flying will be within 400 NM. Mostly two people for work. And occasionally 4 people for pleasure. I do plan on continuing forward to IFR rating.
Click to expand...

I agree that the 182 is always a good plane - but the Bonanza is an awesome option.

I knew of a really nice Bonanza for sale in Birmingham a while back - so I bought it and it lives in Dallas, now! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top