Typical 182 Empty Weights?

A

AA5Bman

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jun 14, 2009
Messages
832
Display Name
Display name:
He who ironically no longer flies an AA5B
Quick question: what would be a typical real-world empty weight for a 182P or 182Q? Anyone with 182 experience, can you chime in?

Thanks!

PS I wouldn't mind real-world operating stats as well - true airspeeds and gph would be interesting.
 
Last edited:
I don't have the W&B at hand but believe my Q model is ~1825. I figure about 135kts at 13 GPH. If your interested in getting one make sure you check out the TrollTune STC. It will take the gross up to 3110 for a usefull load increase of ~150lbs. It's a paperwork STC based on the restart 182 and here's the link http://www.182stc.com/
 
The Q model I fly has an empty weight of 1825.82 lbs. Operating stats are about 130 kts at 13 GPH.
 
I don't remember the EW's of the 182's I flew for a 135 outfit many years ago, but the speed and fuel flow sound about right. IIRC, the company-recommended power setting got us 130 KTAS at 12 gph, which fits with 135 at 13.
 
Thanks, guys - very helpful.
 
Geees, My T182T weighs 2117 empty. I know the turbo adds about 90 lbs, but I'm wondering what additional stuff I have that adds the other 175 lbs? Oh wait, is that primarily the difference in engine, i.e. 540 vs 470?
 
skidoo said:
Geees, My T182T weighs 2117 empty. I know the turbo adds about 90 lbs, but I'm wondering what additional stuff I have that adds the other 175 lbs? Oh wait, is that primarily the difference in engine, i.e. 540 vs 470?
Click to expand...

A LOT more soundproofing, new 26g seat design, AmSafe seatbelts (if you have them)...
 
Anyone have any idea how much weight a Horton STOL kit adds?
 
skidoo said:
Geees, My T182T weighs 2117 empty. I know the turbo adds about 90 lbs, but I'm wondering what additional stuff I have that adds the other 175 lbs? Oh wait, is that primarily the difference in engine, i.e. 540 vs 470?
Click to expand...

90 pounds? Wow, that's a steep useful load cost. I wonder if that's why there are 52 turbo 182Ts on Controller vs. 25 non-turbo 182Ts, or is it just a 2:1 relationship of production turbos vs. non-turbos?
 
FWIW, our 1971 182N's empty weight is 1737 pounds (2950 gross), I plan for 130 KTAS and usually get about 133, burning 13gph ROP.

A 2006 182T I flew (in 2006, it had 48 hours on it when I first got it, so a NEW bird), I managed 140 KTAS on 12.9gph LOP. I forget its exact empty weight, but it was VERY close in useful load to our old bird, despite the MGW increase to 3100, so figure it was about 1885 give or take 50 pounds.

I don't remember the specifics of others, but it seems that pretty much every 182 I've flown, even the RG's, ends up having almost exactly the same useful load - As they loaded them up with more equipment, they increased the gross weight to compensate. So, figure that you'll probably get in the neighborhood of 1200-1250 pounds useful on most 182's, though funky equipment and such may change that. Note, I've never flown a turbo 182 so those might be different as described above.
 
Thanks again everyone. Is anyone on this board willing - and qualified - to go through some 182 logs of a plane I'm considering buying? If it will cost me some money, I understand. I'm definitely going to go through them myself, but would love to get someone with more experience than myself to take a look.
 
TangoWhiskey said:
A LOT more soundproofing, new 26g seat design, AmSafe seatbelts (if you have them)...
Click to expand...

And if it's anything like the 172R/S, there are some airframe upgrades. All light airplanes have their weak spots, and Cessna fixed a bunch of those when they went back into production. ANd all of those improvements weight something.

The seats are obscenely heavy. They're built like a bridge and are at least twice the weight of the old seats. Fairchild makes seats that are light and designed to collapse in a controlled manner to reduce spinal injures; I don't know why Cessna didn't do something similar instead of just making those seats so blasted heavy.

And yes, the G1000 stuff weighs considerably more than the steam-gauge technology it replaced.

Dan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top