Shopping for 2nd plane...(C182)

4

4RNB

Line Up and Wait
PoA Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2016
Messages
962
Display Name
Display name:
4RNB
Background: Working on my IFR, Maybe 130 hours. Spouse enjoys travelling with me. Own a C172 for less than a year. Current plane is 200 since top overhaul, $5K annual fixing a lot of things. Interior is decent, pain acceptable, dual G5s, AP, Waas GPS. I'm a big guy, would not mind a bigger ride so my shoulder is not jammed into the door. Speed would be nice. Spouse says high wing only please. Still defining the mission but for now aiming to see the states while as young as I will ever be.

I've got the C182 buyers guide. I think I want to avoid fuel bladders so looking at 79 or newer. I'd like reliable engine to start or else pay up for 300HP Airplains (maybe I am dreaming). I'd like a minimum of comparable avionics to current plane, willing to have them installed. Comfortable interior valued, willing to add this. If used it seems the N/P/Q ones offer better useful load. So my questions:

How much are new 182 engines for base models and/or upgraded ones? In other words, what is my worst case check amount if I buy a dud?

For those in a 182, how do you think of a new 182 (2022 or 2023 delivery) versus a used model well equipped versus used that you pay to upgrade?

What 182s have primed interiors?

I do not understand things about "planes flying straight". Is there anything to this that can't be fixed?

My current plan is to get commercial in 2022 or 2023 using my low fuel burning 172, then buy a 182. But if the right plane comes along, I want to be able to spring for it.

Are there one stop shops that can totally upgrade plane to my specs? Airplains comes to mind as a place that seems to do everything. 100K engine? Paint 20K? Interior 15K? Avionics 30K+ to equal or exceed what I am flying with?

What have you enjoyed with your previous plane purchases vs what would you do differently?

Are you really less fatigued in a 182 due to noise and vibration?

Advice?

If it matters, I appreciate quality tools in life, not the el cheapo stuff. I think I could handle new but sure seems to be hundreds of thousands dollars more than other options.

Thanks.
 
@JCranford does some flying for Van Bortel and might have some input on how well the brand new 182's fly
 
A 206 or 210 will have more comfortable second row than 182. The extra shoulder room of the 182 vs 172 is quite nice. If your wife wasn't stuck on high wing the 6/260 and 6/300 are pretty darned nice and along the lines of the 20x series for room and loading.

I'd be planning $50K...60K for a new 230HP Continental "stock" motor. I think the P-Ponk is a nice compromise where it s IO550 (??) cylinders on a 470 lower end. It would say you would be best to also look for low time Airplains and Texas Skyways conversions. One thing I have read is that the Texas Skyways conversion will bump up the TBO from the lowly 1500 to 2500 or something like that. And the Texas Skyways will result in a platform that doesn't make carb ice.

Our 182P flew "pilot wing low" when we got it. Over the course of afew annuals it can now fly hands free for 10minutes or more at a time without touching anything. That is in smooth air of course.

Not sure what you mean about fatigue due to noise and vibration. Get a nice ANR headset for the noise. Make sure the prop is balanced and pull it out a bit in cruise for smooth operation.

The 182 seat is no different than the 172 seat in the regard that it sits like a kitchen chair vs the being slung down low. My max flight time in the 182 is pushing 3.5hrs and I am not sore or fatigued in any way. Flying at 10,000msl and higher for longer times is the only time that will happen if I don't have O2 since I am a lowly flatlander.

If I had $300K to spend today and was set on a 182 I would want a Skyways conversion and nice panel, less concerned about interior or paint.

Your comment about N/P/Q having higher useful loads may get some rebuttal. Some of the older fastback 182 had the best useful loads. But if you go back too far they are still the same cabin/shoulder width as the 172.

Just thoughts.
 
182 owner here. Don’t let bladders scare you off. I’ve had my ‘75 P model for 11 years and the bladders are 21 years old. Knock on wood, but no issues as of yet. I will replace them eventually, it’s a few grand. Never had problems with wrinkling, trapped water, etc. Wet wings have their own issues too.

I just priced an overhaul for my O470S. About $25,000 if I don’t have any major components to replace or repair.

A new 182 is magnitudes more expensive than mine. It’s still basically the same plane (with less usable load). I don’t think about it.

There are lots of shops that will completely overhaul a plane, spinner to tail. If you want turnkey, check out Van Bortel.
 
I believe the “planes flying straight” term means you can let go of the yoke and take your feet off the rudders and the airplane will continue to go straight and not drop a wing or start gradually turning. Unless something is bent, not flying straight is usually a rigging issue. That can be fixed.
 
Would run a weight and balance from the poh on whichever model first. Did some lessons in a B, with 500# in the front seats, the rest of useful was the 140# of sandbags in the baggage compartment. YMMV
 
I take it price is not an issue for you since you didn't bring it up. It's better to get a plane that doesn't need upgrading if you can. I was perusing the classifieds the other day and saw a couple 182 IO550s for sale in the mid $200ks if I remember correctly. There was C-206 IO550 for $200k as well but it may be sold now. Good used 206s are basically unicorns now. 1 day for sale and someone shows up with a sack of cash. C-T182T 2001-2004 vintage with steam gauges upgraded with GN750 and G5s is a good airplane, but I'm biased because I flew one for a few years before I recently got relocated to the high desert(where I actually NEED the turbo). You may not need the turbo however if you're near sea level and not around mountains but it does allow you to get high where you can get some speed out of it. And I didn't worry about $$ because it was/is a company plane and I just swiped my credit card. You're probably talking mid $300s for those now. Prices are insane. If you can afford a 22-23 model, consider a used C-206H or even a turbo version. Both the newer 182s and 206s have a Lycoming in front which at the moment has better support that Connies.
 
I'd recommend a Cherokee 6. Tell the wife it's inverted.
 
Sinistar said:
But she drives a FJ Cruiser :)
Click to expand...

People admit that?!?!

Actually, I had the checkbook out to buy one the last year they made them, but the dealer wouldn't move $1000. They called back 2 weeks later and asked if I wanted it for what I offered. Decided in that two weeks I put too much stuff in the back of my truck that I wouldn't want inside a vehicle.
 
I've flown several different 182s. I had access to a 2002 T model for a while and it was a great plane! I've got some time in a 1959B, a 1965K, a 1981R and I own a 1973P. They are all a little different and have there + and -. IMO the P and Q have the best mix of pluses over minuses but its very subjective to what your mission is.
 
ktup-flyer said:
Because I own an R model and know a little bit about 182s. I was going to let you fly in mine if you were relatively close
Click to expand...
Will try to send a PM
 
EdFred said:
People admit that?!?!

Actually, I had the checkbook out to buy one the last year they made them, but the dealer wouldn't move $1000. They called back 2 weeks later and asked if I wanted it for what I offered. Decided in that two weeks I put too much stuff in the back of my truck that I wouldn't want inside a vehicle.
Click to expand...
FJ Cruisers are capable off road and in demand these days.
 
Also owing a 182 that had to replace bladders don't let that alone be a deal breaker...really no big deal and an unexpected repair on a hard tank would be a helluv a lot more expensive!
 
1969 182M model. Had one fuel bladder replaced in the past 20 years and it wasn't outrageously expensive. I have some time in most of the models from M to T. If I were to buy today ideally it would be a 2001 or so T model Nav II. I don't really like the NAV III (G1000) 182s or at least I don't like the extra $$$ you pay for them. That being said the older models fly at the same speeds, have just as much room, and can be had for a lot less money. The 182 is everything the 172 should have been. Pull the power back on a 182 and you get 172 speeds and very near 172 fuel burn, with the benefit of larger fuel tanks and more room. Every time I consider something else, I always go back to the 182. It doesn't excel at anything, but it does everything reasonably well. I routinely do 4 hour + legs in mine and have done up to 6 hours. As long as your bladder holds it will do it. Many faster planes will have you making more fuel stops, which translates into more time to go from point A to B. I've flown mine to all four corners of CONUS. It's a very capable cross country machine, a stable IFR platform, and quite comfortable on long legs. In good weather it will get you in and out of mountain airfields and will fly high enough for supplemental O2.
 
Captain Bubba said:
1969 182M model. Had one fuel bladder replaced in the past 20 years and it wasn't outrageously expensive. I have some time in most of the models from M to T. If I were to buy today ideally it would be a 2001 or so T model Nav II. I don't really like the NAV III (G1000) 182s or at least I don't like the extra $$$ you pay for them. That being said the older models fly at the same speeds, have just as much room, and can be had for a lot less money. The 182 is everything the 172 should have been. Pull the power back on a 182 and you get 172 speeds and very near 172 fuel burn, with the benefit of larger fuel tanks and more room. Every time I consider something else, I always go back to the 182. It doesn't excel at anything, but it does everything reasonably well. I routinely do 4 hour + legs in mine and have done up to 6 hours. As long as your bladder holds it will do it. Many faster planes will have you making more fuel stops, which translates into more time to go from point A to B. I've flown mine to all four corners of CONUS. It's a very capable cross country machine, a stable IFR platform, and quite comfortable on long legs. In good weather it will get you in and out of mountain airfields and will fly high enough for supplemental O2.
Click to expand...

I assume you are talking about fixed gear and non turbo for this?
I wonder if G1000 might be slower than what I want, not sure though.
 
4RNB said:
I assume you are talking about fixed gear and non turbo for this?
I wonder if G1000 might be slower than what I want, not sure though.
Click to expand...

Turbos are good if you want to fly out west quite a bit, but otherwise not really worth it, at least for me. I get about 140 KTAS in mine and sometimes up to 144 in the neighborhood of 12.5 gph give or take a gallon or so. The newer ones might do another 5 knots due to the improved cowl design. The older ones with the O-470 can be upgraded to around 270hp for somewhere around $15-20K more than a basic overhaul. This might get you as much as 10 knots more, but will greatly improve high altitude performance. You can go up to 300hp if you want to spend a lot more money.
The RG models have about a 15 knot advantage, but I’ve heard some have gear issues that are costly to fix. Insurance can also be a problem for those with low retract time. Never owned one so I can’t say, but I think if I wanted a single retract I’d go with a Bo and ideally a 300hp F33a. I think there’s a cheaper upgrade path to 300hp with the RG and if you did that you should be able to keep up with the 300hp Bonanzas, so there’s that. I just keep asking myself if it’s really worth spending a lot more money to go 30 knots faster and I can’t justify it. Maybe if I was making money flying cross country or just had a lot of money to burn, and if both were the case I’d have a Phenom 100.
 
Captain Bubba said:
Turbos are good if you want to fly out west quite a bit, but otherwise not really worth it, at least for me. I get about 140 KTAS in mine and sometimes up to 144 in the neighborhood of 12.5 gph give or take a gallon or so. The newer ones might do another 5 knots due to the improved cowl design. The older ones with the O-470 can be upgraded to around 270hp for somewhere around $15-20K more than a basic overhaul. This might get you as much as 10 knots more, but will greatly improve high altitude performance. You can go up to 300hp if you want to spend a lot more money.
The RG models have about a 15 knot advantage, but I’ve heard some have gear issues that are costly to fix. Insurance can also be a problem for those with low retract time. Never owned one so I can’t say, but I think if I wanted a single retract I’d go with a Bo and ideally a 300hp F33a. I think there’s a cheaper upgrade path to 300hp with the RG and if you did that you should be able to keep up with the 300hp Bonanzas, so there’s that. I just keep asking myself if it’s really worth spending a lot more money to go 30 knots faster and I can’t justify it. Maybe if I was making money flying cross country or just had a lot of money to burn, and if both were the case I’d have a Phenom 100.
Click to expand...
That’s about what I get in my R model
 
I hear the best model 182 is the RV10.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top