Thinking of upgrading from my 182

Supereri

Supereri

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Apr 5, 2022
Messages
136
Display Name
Display name:
Supereri
I love pretty much everything about my 182 except the speed. I have the panel where I want it and it’s been fairly reliable so far. But I keep wanting more speed. I cruise at about 130k on about 13gph.

I’m thinking about a Mooney M20J, M20k, a Bonanza of some flavor, or a tr182. I really love the idea of an M20k but when I sat in an M20c it felt really tight and they are generally tight on useful. My budget would be around 150k. How bad would maintenance costs increase over the 182? I know insurance would be about 3-4k extra.

Should I just throw some wheel pants on the 182 and be happy with a few extra knots? Will I be hating life with a huge increase in costs?

I know about beechtalk and mooneyspace. Just looking for some feedback. Thanks.
 
Vans RV 10. A true 4-seater like the 182 but will cruise 40 kts faster.

Edit: I missed the part about your budget being $150k. Any Bonanza you find under that amount is likely to be a money pit. Retractable-gear adds to the maintenance as well as insurance.

Adding wheel pants will help add a few kts.
 
Air Plains IO 550 upgrade. Wheel pants, and lower cowl bowl mod. I cruise with some of the barber pole visible. In smooth air, of course. Service ceiling is in the flight levels. Best of all, no carburetor ice!
 
Supereri said:
I love pretty much everything about my 182 except the speed. I have the panel where I want it and it’s been fairly reliable so far. But I keep wanting more speed. I cruise at about 130k on about 13gph.

I’m thinking about a Mooney M20J, M20k, a Bonanza of some flavor, or a tr182. I really love the idea of an M20k but when I sat in an M20c it felt really tight and they are generally tight on useful. My budget would be around 150k. How bad would maintenance costs increase over the 182? I know insurance would be about 3-4k extra.

Should I just throw some wheel pants on the 182 and be happy with a few extra knots? Will I be hating life with a huge increase in costs?

I know about beechtalk and mooneyspace. Just looking for some feedback. Thanks.
Click to expand...
TR182 is a great plane; probably worth about 155 KTAS on 15 gph. Early C210s, while mechanically slightly more complicated, can provide good speed for reasonable fuel burns as well.

As you noted, once you are used to the roomy Cessna cabin, a Mooney, or even a Bo IMHO can feel cramped. Bonanzas are expensive, but their gear is mechanical rather than hydraulic which some prefer.

But all that said, there is no better cost vs. speed vs. utility vs. maintenance than a 182. It's the F150 of airplanes.
 
Are you looking at selling and buying or buying in addition to the 182?
 
Well... if you want to go high add a supercharger? Pponk your engine? Powerflow exhaust (2 kits more?)

Add the wheel pants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDD
Add FAT supercharger and speed mods to your 182, and you can do 155-160 KTAS in mid teens (apparently).
 
I’ve been thinking about a faster Mooney something that cruises over 200mph. There’s also the Lancair IV-P that goes over 300mph. But I’m upgrading my panel and will play around with what I have, I figure those trips might feel shorter if using an autopilot? Let’s see, might upgrade or add another airplane in a few years if we still use it frequently.
 
Supereri said:
I love pretty much everything about my 182 except the speed. I have the panel where I want it and it’s been fairly reliable so far. But I keep wanting more speed. I cruise at about 130k on about 13gph.

I’m thinking about a Mooney M20J, M20k, a Bonanza of some flavor, or a tr182. I really love the idea of an M20k but when I sat in an M20c it felt really tight and they are generally tight on useful. My budget would be around 150k. How bad would maintenance costs increase over the 182? I know insurance would be about 3-4k extra.

Should I just throw some wheel pants on the 182 and be happy with a few extra knots? Will I be hating life with a huge increase in costs?

I know about beechtalk and mooneyspace. Just looking for some feedback. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I own an m20k. Coming from a 182 it will be hard to adjust.

I also own piper Comanches - you will like the roomier size of them and some 260’s will give you a good chunk more speed within your budget.

I know of a 182 soon for sale within your budget with an IO 550. Beast.

I’d stay away from the extra two seats in a bonanza which will most often be empty while you’re burning more in gas and insurance.

Many will always see a bonanza as the catch all end all solution in aviation. I just don’t accept that.
 
Supereri said:
I love pretty much everything about my 182 except the speed. I have the panel where I want it and it’s been fairly reliable so far. But I keep wanting more speed. I cruise at about 130k on about 13gph.
Click to expand...
The 182 does everything pretty well, except get a lot of knots out of a gallon of 100LL.
Supereri said:
I’m thinking about a Mooney M20J, M20k, a Bonanza of some flavor, or a tr182.
Click to expand...
What is your mission? What draws you to those planes?

Also, I generally advise against a turbo unless you need one, and there are two kinds of need: Operating frequently in hot-and-high situations (ie, you're based at Leadville), or you fly a lot of long legs. The definition of "long" depends on the aircraft type, for Mooneys it's about 300nm+, for the 182 it'll be less (haven't done the calculation on those yet). Otherwise, it's usually a waste of fuel and mx dollars. The TR182 is an attractive way to have it all, but an R182 is awfully close too - FWIW, our club R182 did about 150 knots on 14-15 gph (no turbo).
Supereri said:
I really love the idea of an M20k but when I sat in an M20c it felt really tight and they are generally tight on useful.
Click to expand...
M20K is longer than an M20C, and the interior in newer ones may be different too, giving more elbow room. (I'm not sure which Mooneys have the newer interior, or when it was added.)
Supereri said:
My budget would be around 150k. How bad would maintenance costs increase over the 182? I know insurance would be about 3-4k extra.
Click to expand...
That's larger than the entire insurance bill on my Mooney (M20R Ovation, $200K hull) so be sure to shop around.
Supereri said:
Should I just throw some wheel pants on the 182 and be happy with a few extra knots? Will I be hating life with a huge increase in costs?
Click to expand...
If it's a traveling airplane, look at it in terms of cost per mile. My Mooney costs less than a 172 on a per-mile basis, and the miles go by a lot faster.
Steamflyer said:
Bonanzas are expensive, but their gear is mechanical rather than hydraulic which some prefer.
Click to expand...
Mooneys also have mechanical gear, or electromechanical. Same system, just a johnson bar on the older ones or a standard gear switch on the panel with an actuator that ties into the system where the johnson bar used to go on the newer ones.
 
I’ve had my 182 for 17 years and pretty sure I go through what you’re thinking every year since. Now I’m looking at an overhaul and a panel upgrade so REALLY contemplating. But dang a 182 is just so hard to beat. My current thinking is to sell and get in on a partnership in a Cirrus, a Bo, or a twin. While most trips are of a range where more speed wouldn’t matter that much, a lot are. WV to UT, CO, WY, etc. every year, FL often, MS for work occasionally where a bit of speed would matter. I recently ferried an IO550 equipped 182 from here to AZ, but because of tundra tires saw no increase in speed. Climbed like a scared cat though. I’m not helping you I guess, just commiserating. I wish I could afford to be in 2 planes …….
 
Put 400 hours on a 77’ 182 first plane. Got the retractable bug and bought a M20J and put 900 hours on it. Wanted the fastest at the time 200hp retract. Mooney was it.
201 was a good 155 kt plane vs 130kt in 182.
25kts extra per hour adds up. Great IFR plane but I normally only flew alone.
If you need 4 place with some baggage Mooney is not it.
 
LWGII said:
Air Plains IO 550 upgrade. Wheel pants, and lower cowl bowl mod. I cruise with some of the barber pole visible. In smooth air, of course. Service ceiling is in the flight levels. Best of all, no carburetor ice!
Click to expand...
What is the lower cowl bowl mod? If I was the OP, I'd be looking at wheel pants for a few more knots. He has a known good airplane that does a lot of stuff well. I wouldn't open up Pandora's box (a new to me airplane) for +20 knots and poorer short field performance, less elbow room, and less payload...
 
My R182 with flap gap seals and dual ElectroAir electronic ignition delivers a solid 145-150 kts. TAS burning 10.2-11.4 gph. I don't know what those mods might deliver for a straight-leg 182, but it might be worth a look.
 
Just a real-world datapoint for you...

We had a neighbor, and good friend, in the next hangar, who had a beautiful straight-legged 182. All PPonked-out, speed-modded on the gear, etc. We've had a non-turbo TR182 for years now. Our neighbor got annoyed with us passing him every time on the way to breakfast, so he sold his and is now a partner in our TR182. :)

Just can't say enough good about the 182RG....we love it. We put a GFC500 and pair of G5s in it and it's a great instrument platform. We've had it to both coasts and Florida from Ohio. We've had no issues in the mountains out West, but then there's just the two of us so...

People will caution you about the gear, but if you treat the gear well, it will return the favor....just like anything mechanical. Non-issue here, or with other responsible 182RG owners I'm in contact with.

OP may be pushing the budget a bit at $150k, but get a good one!

Jim

PS- Based on my personal experience (6'4"/230 with a 6'0" wife), most other airplanes are going to seem cramped after a 182...YMMV.
 
Last edited:
You'd be surprised how slow M.78 feels after you've gotten used to M.85.

It's all relative.

You'll be giving up a lot of utility in your C182 in exchange for a little more speed in your price range. Make sure that utility is not something you need.
 
Last edited:
Llk said:
I’d stay away from the extra two seats in a bonanza which will most often be empty while you’re burning more in gas and insurance.

Many will always see a bonanza as the catch all end all solution in aviation. I just don’t accept that.
Click to expand...
Have you priced out the "extra insurance"? I have a 36 and I asked about how much more it was to insure the additional 2 seats. It was $0 additional per year. It's not as fast as the short bodies- I'll give you that. However it doesn't have any CG issues and a much larger useful load. I get 165ktas at about 12.5 gph; that's pretty efficient for a $220k airplane.

I agree with you that it's not the catch all. The 182 has always held that place in my mind. If you need/want to go faster than a 182, it's hard to beat the Bonanza IMO.
 
kyleb said:
What is the lower cowl bowl mod? If I was the OP, I'd be looking at wheel pants for a few more knots. He has a known good airplane that does a lot of stuff well. I wouldn't open up Pandora's box (a new to me airplane) for +20 knots and poorer short field performance, less elbow room, and less payload...
Click to expand...
McFarlane sells a modification which smooths out the airflow around the nose wheel pant. As I understand it, that is the pant which has the greatest effect upon drag because of the high pressure blast of air from the prop. I have the three fancy pants enclosing the brakes on the main gear.
 
Most of my trips are local, but about 3 times a year I do a 350 mile trip to Southern California. We also do regular trips to San Diego and Las Vegas. My boys are older so they don’t join us as often anymore. We’re based in phoenix az and regularly fly at 10500 or 11500. With the temps here this can be a slow climb. I’ve thought about the FAT supercharger on many occasions, but I’ve heard mixed reviews. The engine is mid time so a pponk isn’t in the cards right now.

My thought with a Mooney or Bo would be at worst a similar fuel burn and quite a bit more speed. A Mooney like an m20j would also have a lower rebuild cost than my 470. Heck the io360 seems bulletproof as well.

Honestly I’d love a cirrus but this seems like a whole new level of cost and I’m not getting anywhere near an sr22 at even 200k.

I wish someone had a turbo normalizer for the 470 182s that was still being sold.
 
Anyone have an estimate of what I might pick up with some Texas aeroplastics or knots2u wheel pants and the lower cowl mod?
 
Supereri said:
Anyone have an estimate of what I might pick up with some Texas aeroplastics or knots2u wheel pants and the lower cowl mod?
Click to expand...
www.knots2u.net

Fiberglass Modified Main Gear Fairing Kit W/Brake Fairings (6.00 X 6 Tire) Spring Type Landing Gear (CMGF-SP) (Set of Two)

Manufactured by Knots 2U the Cessna Main Gear Wheel Pant Fairings are FAA approved for the Cessna Single Engine Series.
www.knots2u.net www.knots2u.net
www.knots2u.net

Cessna 182 Cowl Body Fairing Kit. CBF-182

Manufactured by Knots 2U the Cessna 182 Cowl Fairing Kit impreoves aerodynamics around the lower cowl and upper nose gear.
www.knots2u.net www.knots2u.net
 
LWGII said:
www.knots2u.net

Fiberglass Modified Main Gear Fairing Kit W/Brake Fairings (6.00 X 6 Tire) Spring Type Landing Gear (CMGF-SP) (Set of Two)

Manufactured by Knots 2U the Cessna Main Gear Wheel Pant Fairings are FAA approved for the Cessna Single Engine Series.
www.knots2u.net www.knots2u.net
www.knots2u.net

Cessna 182 Cowl Body Fairing Kit. CBF-182

Manufactured by Knots 2U the Cessna 182 Cowl Fairing Kit impreoves aerodynamics around the lower cowl and upper nose gear.
www.knots2u.net www.knots2u.net
Click to expand...
The main gear pants say 3-6mph over the stock Cessna pants. Nose gear says 2.75-4 mph over stock and the lower cowl says 3-4mph. I was wondering if anyone had an estimate of what adding these to a 182 without wheel pants might add. Is 5knots a reasonable estimate over no pants? More?
 
Supereri said:
ght now.

My thought with a Mooney or Bo would be at worst a similar fuel burn and quite a bit more speed. A Mooney like an m20j would also have a lower rebuild cost than my 470. Heck the io360 seems bulletproof as well.
Click to expand...
All things being equal, I suspect an 0-470 rebuild is about the same as a IO-360 (Lyc). Cylinders and other parts are often a bit more expensive for Lycs; obviously you'd be buying two less cylinders though.

There's no replacement for displacement.

The 182 is the best GA airplane overall. All basic four seaters are perturbations on one parameter - speed, at the expense of less utility and smaller cabin, whether it's a Bo or a Mooney. The 210 is a fast version of the 182, and a Comanche is also fairly fast, but you have to like the low wing.
 
Supereri said:
Most of my trips are local, but about 3 times a year I do a 350 mile trip to Southern California. …
My thought with a Mooney or Bo would be at worst a similar fuel burn and quite a bit more speed. ….
Click to expand...
The problem is you’re not at cruise long enough to make an appreciable difference between 135 and 150kts. Maybe shave 0.3 off the total duration on that 350NM leg.

Real gains come with being able to skip a refueling stop. In our 172 that’s right around the 3hr mark or 300-ish NM. In the 182 I occasionally fly, that same three hours gives me another 100NM range non-stop. Stepping up to the 150kt space and it’s only another 50nm or so added for the same 3hr leg.
 
TCABM said:
The problem is you’re not at cruise long enough to make an appreciable difference between 135 and 150kts. Maybe shave 0.3 off the total duration on that 350NM leg.

Real gains come with being able to skip a refueling stop. In our 172 that’s right around the 3hr mark or 300-ish NM. In the 182 I occasionally fly, that same three hours gives me another 100NM range non-stop. Stepping up to the 150kt space and it’s only another 50nm or so added for the same 3hr leg.
Click to expand...
^this

Have made more then 10 coast-to-coast trips in a 182. Granted it did true around 145-150 ktas, but a few knots really doesn't change much on a long flight, and is immaterial on a short 300-400 nm flight.
 
bonefishpete said:
If you need 4 place with some baggage Mooney is not it.
Click to expand...
If you want "if it fits it flies" with full fuel, no. If you're willing to actually calculate your W&B, it can be. I've taken four adults and bags for a weekend with four hours of fuel and flew from Milwaukee to Houston with one stop.

Yeah, my full fuel payload is only 525 pounds... But full fuel is 7:20 and 1040nm (with an hour reserve) worth, which is kinda ridiculous... So I only fill it up when I actually need to, which lets me get cheap fuel along the way and save even more money.
Jim Rosenow said:
We've had a non-turbo TR182 for years now. Our neighbor got annoyed with us passing him every time on the way to breakfast, so he sold his and is now a partner in our TR182. :)
Click to expand...
You've had a what? TR182 is turbo. R182 is non-turbo. The T stands for Turbo if it's before the 182... And the R for retract. The letter that comes after 182 is the variant of the plain old 182; for confusion's sake there's been a T and an R there, and the worst is the turbo fixed gear models which could be called T182R.
Jim Rosenow said:
Just can't say enough good about the 182RG....we love it. We put a GFC500 and pair of G5s in it and it's a great instrument platform.
Click to expand...
It's a really hard plane to beat in terms of what it can do. It'll do pretty much anything you ask it to, much like the straight-leg 182, but it also goes enough faster that it doesn't feel like you're sacrificing anything to get that capability. If you can only ever have one plane, the R182 is the one to have.
 
Supereri said:
The main gear pants say 3-6mph over the stock Cessna pants. Nose gear says 2.75-4 mph over stock and the lower cowl says 3-4mph. I was wondering if anyone had an estimate of what adding these to a 182 without wheel pants might add. Is 5knots a reasonable estimate over no pants? More?
Click to expand...
I think 5 knots with wheels pants is pretty much in line, might be 4 might be 6. Check your rigging too, our 182Q with factory pants averages 135-138 knots.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
You've had a what? TR182 is turbo. R182 is non-turbo. The T stands for Turbo if it's before the 182... And the R for retract. The letter that comes after 182 is the variant of the plain old 182; for confusion's sake there's been a T and an R there, and the worst is the turbo fixed gear models which could be called T182R.

It's a really hard plane to beat in terms of what it can do. It'll do pretty much anything you ask it to, much like the straight-leg 182, but it also goes enough faster that it doesn't feel like you're sacrificing anything to get that capability. If you can only ever have one plane, the R182 is the one to have.
Click to expand...
I thought Iwas pretty clear it's a non-turbo when I said "a non-turbo TR182". Yup, I aware of the semantics and it's registered as a R182. ATC usually insists on TR182 or C82R, and occasionally R182, and a couple times even the Columbian version of the 182 has shown up. . So shoot me.... LOL!

It's hard to be argumentative with your last statement tho!

Jim
 
Jim Rosenow said:
I thought Iwas pretty clear it's a non-turbo when I said "a non-turbo TR182".
Click to expand...
Except T means Turbo if it's in that position, so you said "A non-turbo turbo R182". ;)
Jim Rosenow said:
Yup, I aware of the semantics and it's registered as a R182. ATC usually insists on TR182 or C82R
Click to expand...
C82R is the correct flight plan code for the R182. Confusingly, The TR182 is C82T while the T182 is C82S:

Screenshot 2024-12-08 at 7.33.12 PM.png

How is ATC "insisting on TR182"? I've never had 'em call me anything other than "Skylane" or "Cessna" with any flavor of 182.

 
flyingcheesehead said:
Except T means Turbo if it's in that position, so you said "A non-turbo turbo R182". ;)

C82R is the correct flight plan code for the R182. Confusingly, The TR182 is C82T while the T182 is C82S:

View attachment 136001

How is ATC "insisting on TR182"? I've never had 'em call me anything other than "Skylane" or "Cessna" with any flavor of 182.

Click to expand...
You clearly care about this a lot more than I do....carry on! Sorry about the thread creep OP! ‍♂️
 
The reason I was looking at Mooneys for example

Kdvt to kcma on a random day
Current 182 is 2h 56m and 37g
An m20k would be 2h 11m and 26.2g even at 8500 ft
S35 Bo 2h 15m and 35g


This is all according to ForeFlight planning.
 
Supereri said:
The reason I was looking at Mooneys for example

Kdvt to kcma on a random day
Current 182 is 2h 56m and 37g
An m20k would be 2h 11m and 26.2g even at 8500 ft
S35 Bo 2h 15m and 35g


This is all according to ForeFlight planning.
Click to expand...

How often do you do that trip and is (optimistically) 0.7 worth it?

I’m not Mooney expert, but I think the fuel burn at 8500 is optimistic, even with an intercooler and the Merlin wastegate. @Pinecone could better answer that question since he has one.
 
TCABM said:
How often do you do that trip and is (optimistically) 0.7 worth it?

I’m not Mooney expert, but I think the fuel burn at 8500 is optimistic, even with an intercooler and the Merlin wastegate. @Pinecone could better answer that question since he has one.
Click to expand...
It’s a reasonable question. I do that trip a few times per year. But to answer is it worth it I need to understand the cost difference. If the answer is 1000 extra in annual inspection for retract and an extra 3000 per year insurance that’s 4000 extra per year to go everywhere 30-40 knots faster at a full flow that’s -1.5gph lower. I have no idea of what the maintenance difference is for a 182F vs an m20k. I guess that’s what I’m trying to understand.

I don’t think the difference in fuel directly pencils out to savings. I doubt the fewer hours spent going places directly pencils out. But if I can spend a few thousand more per year and go 30-40 knots faster then that has a value to me. I just have little idea what that extra cost per hour looks like.
 
Supereri said:
Most of my trips are local, but about 3 times a year I do a 350 mile trip to Southern California. We also do regular trips to San Diego and Las Vegas. My boys are older so they don’t join us as often anymore. We’re based in phoenix az and regularly fly at 10500 or 11500. With the temps here this can be a slow climb. I’ve thought about the FAT supercharger on many occasions, but I’ve heard mixed reviews. The engine is mid time so a pponk isn’t in the cards right now.

My thought with a Mooney or Bo would be at worst a similar fuel burn and quite a bit more speed. A Mooney like an m20j would also have a lower rebuild cost than my 470. Heck the io360 seems bulletproof as well.

Honestly I’d love a cirrus but this seems like a whole new level of cost and I’m not getting anywhere near an sr22 at even 200k.

I wish someone had a turbo normalizer for the 470 182s that was still being sold.
Click to expand...
I think the FAT supercharger is more robust than a turbo, based on what I have read.
 
Supereri said:
It’s a reasonable question. I do that trip a few times per year. But to answer is it worth it I need to understand the cost difference. If the answer is 1000 extra in annual inspection for retract and an extra 3000 per year insurance that’s 4000 extra per year to go everywhere 30-40 knots faster at a full flow that’s -1.5gph lower. I have no idea of what the maintenance difference is for a 182F vs an m20k. I guess that’s what I’m trying to understand.

I don’t think the difference in fuel directly pencils out to savings. I doubt the fewer hours spent going places directly pencils out. But if I can spend a few thousand more per year and go 30-40 knots faster then that has a value to me. I just have little idea what that extra cost per hour looks like.
Click to expand...
How much is your insurance on the 182? My Bonanza insurance is only $2600/year for $200k hull (I'm underinsured). How much are people paying for Mooney insurance?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top