V35 vs 182RG

Which One?

  • V35

    Votes: 33 53.2%

  • 182RG

    Votes: 29 46.8%
  • Total voters
    62
poadeleted21

poadeleted21

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Aug 18, 2011
Messages
12,332
The 182RGs were out of my $ range, I'm not a fan Cessna retract mechanism, and I'm partial to low wings... so I own an older Bo.

Assuming condition, year, TSMOH, Avionics etc... are similar... Which one?
 
Right now I'd do a 182RG because that's the plane my dad could get in....
 
Bart,

The F35 is definitely the better plane but if you could get a deal on an F22 I'd take it.

But operational and maintenance costs are probably out of your range plus you need a twin rating, a top secret clearance and a checkout you aren't likely to get until the government sequester is over.

Go for the 182.
 
I'd love to have the jump seat, but I hit my head in Bo's and I have to have ground level doors so 182 it is
 
duh.

Oops, actually I meant; duh.
 
bartmc said:
The 182RGs were out of my $ range, I'm not a fan Cessna retract mechanism, and I'm partial to low wings... so I own an older Bo.

Assuming condition, year, TSMOH, Avionics etc... are similar... Which one?
Click to expand...


Really? I'd buy a Comanche 250 and save the rest of the money for gas to fly for the first four years.:) Bonanza's are wonderful planes but I bang my head on the roof in them, they seem a bit narrower, I cannot afford an 1984 or newer one with a newer panel and I don't particularly care for the looks of the older panels.
 
Last edited:
Skylane81E said:
I'd love to have the jump seat, but I hit my head in Bo's and I have to have ground level doors so 182 it is
Click to expand...

If family members could not climb on the Comanche wing, 182 would be next closest plane, if I could not afford something with an air stair or 337 twin.
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
If family members could not climb on the Comanche wing, 182 would be next closest plane, if I could not afford something with an air stair or 337 twin.
Click to expand...

That is exactly why the 337 is the only twin on my radar for possible future step up
 
Is this a question?

Bo' all the way. I'd actually say, especially an older Bo'
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
Really? I'd buy a Comanche 250 and save the rest of the money for gas to fly for the first four years.:) Bonanza's are wonderful planes but I bang my head on the roof in them, they seem a bit narrower, I cannot afford an 1984 or newer one with a newer panel and I don't particularly care for the looks of the older panels.
Click to expand...

Comparable Comanches are no cheaper than a comparable Bo. You can get a lot of S or earlier Bonanza for $70K or less.
 
You can't realistically compare a 235HP plane with a 285HP plane. Either the Bonanza is more than you need, in which case you fly both and buy the one you (or, if you're married, your spouse) like best, or the 182RG doesn't meet your needs, in which case the decision is made for you.
 
Ron Levy said:
You can't realistically compare a 235HP plane with a 285-300HP plane. Either the Bonanza is more than you need, in which case you fly both and buy the one you (or, if you're married, your spouse) like best, or the 182RG doesn't meet your needs, in which case the decision is made for you.
Click to expand...


As I work in the hangar around the 177, I can honestly say the Bo will waste a lot of space that I would rather use for a workshop. Being able to drive into the hangar and park cars or motorcycles is nice to.



That being said, many T hangars out there aren't high enough to jack a 182RG & swing the gear.
 
Then for me the whole low wing, most with one door, just sucks. If I win the airplane then I'll be FD&H to own it :D
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
Really? I'd buy a Comanche 250 and save the rest of the money for gas to fly for the first four years.:) Bonanza's are wonderful planes but I bang my head on the roof in them, they seem a bit narrower, I cannot afford an 1984 or newer one with a newer panel and I don't particularly care for the looks of the older panels.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this comparison. The 250 Comanche was not made after 1965/6, and was replaced with the 260. The comparison Bonanza is 84 or newer because of old style panels? Huh? I'm lost.

Personally, the old style panels in the Comanche are much worse than the Bonanza.

I tilt towards the Bonanza only because of fuel injection. I think the Comanche 180/250 is the most attractive single engine plane ever made.
 
this was the exact options I was facing when i was in the market. So i chose a Comanche 260 instead of those two. It was less expensive. In hind sight I might have gone with a 182. Now that im getting my CFI the 182 makes more sense. Too late and I love my plane anyways
 
Ron Levy said:
You can't realistically compare a 235HP plane with a 285HP plane. Either the Bonanza is more than you need, in which case you fly both and buy the one you (or, if you're married, your spouse) like best, or the 182RG doesn't meet your needs, in which case the decision is made for you.
Click to expand...

A dollar store foamy is more than I "need".
 
Bart, why are you asking this question? Are you selling the Bo?
 
The 182RG was a better fit for me and I wouldn't trade it for a Bo.
 
retailguy said:
I don't understand this comparison.
Click to expand...

I will slow down.

retailguy said:
The 250 Comanche was not made after 1965/6, and was replaced with the 260.
Click to expand...

The ops quote: Assuming condition, year, TSMOH, Avionics etc... are similar... Which one?

I have a 62 Comanche so between a 62 Vtail, 182 RG (which wasn't made but closest to that is a 62 - 210) I choose the Comanche. :)

retailguy said:
The comparison Bonanza is 84 or newer because of old style panels? Huh? I'm lost.
Click to expand...

I do not like either the old style pre 1964 Comanches nor Bonanza's pre 1984 style. However you can upgrade a Comanche panel but the Bonanza panel still has that WWII look no matter what. Beechcraft finally improved it in 1984 so I would not be that interested in pre 1984 Beechcraft products.

However many Comanches have gotten ride of the shot gun styel six pack and the radio down hidden in the corner for a T panel. I perfer the six pack and T panel.

retailguy said:
Personally, the old style panels in the Comanche are much worse than the Bonanza.
Click to expand...

I have never seen a Comanche with as ugly of panel as any pre 84 Baron, Bonanza. Feel free to show me some you think prove me wrong.

retailguy said:
I tilt towards the Bonanza only because of fuel injection. I think the Comanche 180/250 is the most attractive single engine plane ever made.
Click to expand...

I have mixed feelings about the FI. I do have the FI on my 250 as the engine was upgraded as part of the Rajay Turbo STC. Apparently alot other people perfer the FI also as the most 260's B's and C's are FI.
 
bartmc said:
Comparable Comanches are no cheaper than a comparable Bo. You can get a lot of S or earlier Bonanza for $70K or less.
Click to expand...

I think you are probably right but you can find some awful cheap 60's vintage 250's out there in this market....
 
Not even if you prize the wider operating weight and balance envelope on the 182G?

Ron Levy said:
You can't realistically compare a 235HP plane with a 285HP plane. Either the Bonanza is more than you need, in which case you fly both and buy the one you (or, if you're married, your spouse) like best, or the 182RG doesn't meet your needs, in which case the decision is made for you.
Click to expand...
 
bartmc said:
A dollar store foamy is more than I "need".
Click to expand...
Then I guess you've tried all the shaving creams and buy the one you like best. My point is that it's no different with airplanes -- find the one you like best that is within your budget and meets your needs, and buy it. OTOH, if a plane doesn't meet your needs or isn't within your budget, there's no point asking others if they like it any more than asking other guys whether they prefer briefs or boxers -- you'll wear the one you like regardless of what they say.
 
Last edited:
Nice 182RGs become available in the trades if the owner dies unexpectedly. In most other cases, they are awarded to the first one in line.
 
I don't know Mir. Once you've flown a bonanza it's tough to want something else.
 
I'd really like one of these for my personal transportation. :yes:
rese4yhe.jpg
 
I just don't get why anyone would by a 182RG over any model 210 (except the 1960 tiny 210, those are never on the radar).

The 182RG have a better cabin than the >1963 flat spring gear 210?

For those who don't know the ?1964-1968? 210 is essentially a retractable 205, but to get the wheels in there are huge wheel well bumps in the third row seat area.

After that they had the round tube gear which is longer and allowed more conventional seats in the 3rd row.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top