What type of performance do you guys see out of a 182P?

midcap

midcap

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Sep 19, 2015
Messages
1,515
Location
South Louisiana
Display Name
Display name:
midcap
I know what the POH says, but in the real world what does this bird do?
 
midcap said:
ok, that's not bad. That's a lot quicker than a 172.
Click to expand...

Yes, but at the cost of a higher fuel burn.

Our club has a 182P. I like it very much as it is a very comfortable cross country cruising machine. The fact that we just upgraded the panel to include a 650 and other goodies doesn't hurt, either.
 
Ghery said:
Yes, but at the cost of a higher fuel burn.

Our club has a 182P. I like it very much as it is a very comfortable cross country cruising machine. The fact that we just upgraded the panel to include a 650 and other goodies doesn't hurt, either.
Click to expand...

Speed is mostly what I am concerned about, the fuel burn doesn't bother me that much. The whole reason I want to buy is to do XC flying.

There are so many different choices for older planes, it seems impossible to narrow it down to one.
 
Last edited:
midcap said:
Speed is mostly what I am concerned about, the fuel burn doesn't bother me that much. The whole reason I want to buy is to do XC flying.
Click to expand...
130 knots all day and I plan for 13 GPH in my 182Q, pretty much the same thing other than engine RPM. :) Good cross country machine, leave the window open on hot days. ;)
 
N747JB said:
130 knots all day and I plan for 13 GPH in my 182Q, pretty much the same thing other than engine RPM. :) Good cross country machine, leave the window open on hot days. ;)
Click to expand...

I like those numbers. On a 550nm XC trip I would only have to stop for fuel once and have plenty in reserves before each stop. 5.5 hours in the air beats 13 hours driving.
 
Last edited:
N747JB said:
130 knots all day and I plan for 13 GPH in my 182Q, pretty much the same thing other than engine RPM. :) Good cross country machine, leave the window open on hot days. ;)
Click to expand...

Or climb higher!

midcap said:
ok, that's not bad. That's a lot quicker than a 172.
Click to expand...

The 182 is a great XC plane. I'm based outside of DC and have taken it pretty much everywhere east of the Mississippi, from Nova Scotia to the Bahamas. The P and Q models are the best, IMO.
 
Brad Z said:
Or climb higher!

Agreed, the 182 is a great XC plane. I'm based outside of DC and have taken it pretty much everywhere east of the Mississippi, from Nova Scotia to the Bahamas.
Click to expand...

you went to the bahamas? wow man....my dream is to pilot from KHUM to Provenciales, T&C.
 
midcap said:
you went to the bahamas? wow man....my dream is to pilot from KHUM to Provenciales, T&C.
Click to expand...

Yep, that why we own these silly things. We made a few stops along the way, but it's great for a trip like that. The 182 is great for folks who are really comfortable with a 172 but wished it was a little roomier, faster, and more stable.
 
Brad Z said:
Yep, that why we own these silly things. We made a few stops along the way, but it's great for a trip like that. The 182 is great for folks who are really comfortable with a 172 but wished it was a little roomier, faster, and more stable.
Click to expand...

that's what I have heard that the 182 gives you that good feeling a 172 gives you.

About how long of a trip that was to the Bahamas?
 
Brad Z said:
About 130 kts TAS at normal cruise settings, IME.
Click to expand...
Sounds right... It's not a speed machine like a Mooney. But it is a comfy hauler of 3 normal adults, some baggage, and a full fuel load.
 
AggieMike88 said:
Sounds right... It's not a speed machine like a Mooney. But it is a comfy hauler of 3 normal adults, some baggage, and a full fuel load.
Click to expand...

those mooney's sure are fast and fit my missions.

My short list for possible aircraft's are
182
M20
Comanche 250/260
Cherokee 235
 
I am right about 130, maybe a few more with 13 GPH average

Best part about a 182 is that you can dial it back to 172 speeds and fuel burn...but why?

I do a ton of 250-300nm XC trips and love it. Not the fastest, not the sexiest, but I can get a lot of full size adults and bags there comfortably with its useful load and space and plenty of power. The P&Q also have a STC available that is just paperwork push that will allow you to increase your takeoff weight by an additional 150lbs if you wanna spend the $750.00 for the useful load.

Many call them the Ford 150 of the skies.
 
Last edited:
I tend to get 135kts or so in my '79Q. Really depends on altitude. They love higher altitude (like 7-9,000ft)- fuel burn is lower and you get a few extra kts. Full fuel with the Q is stupid with about 6-7 hrs endurance. I could theoretically make it from BOS to OSH without stopping (not that I would). The best "jack of all trades" airplane as far as I'm concerned.
 
neilw2 said:
I tend to get 135kts or so in my '79Q. Really depends on altitude. They love higher altitude (like 7-9,000ft)- fuel burn is lower and you get a few extra kts. Full fuel with the Q is stupid with about 6-7 hrs endurance. I could theoretically make it from BOS to OSH without stopping (not that I would). The best "jack of all trades" airplane as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...

So the Q model is the one to get? Seems like it has longer legs than the P.
 
Shawn said:
I am right about 130, maybe a few more with 13 GPH average

Best part about a 182 is that you can dial it back to 172 speeds and fuel burn...but why?

I do a ton of 250-300nm XC trips and love it. Not the fastest, not the sexiest, but I can get a lot of full size adults and bags there comfortably with its useful load and space and plenty of power. The P&Q also have a STC available that is just paperwork push that will allow you to increase your takeoff weight by an additional 150lbs if you wanna spend the $750.00 for the useful load.

Many call them the Ford 150 of the skies.
Click to expand...

That extra 150 would help since I'm husky Lol
 
I seem to get ~130 KTAS on just about any 182. Earliest I've flown is an N model.

The thing that I can't understand is the service ceilings. They are ALL over the place. The 182Ps claim to be able to almost make it to Class A. Never tried to get close, but that seems really high.
 
midcap said:
So the Q model is the one to get? Seems like it has longer legs than the P.
Click to expand...

I belive both the P and Q come in Standard Tanks (60 gallon) or Long Range Tanks (80 gallon) options so it is more a function of available options on the plane than the model specifically.

MAKG1 said:
The thing that I can't understand is the service ceilings. They are ALL over the place. The 182Ps claim to be able to almost make it to Class A. Never tried to get close, but that seems really high.
Click to expand...

I top out at about 14-15K then just get such low climb performance it is not worth trying to climb higher...but I have a tired engine that is about to be replaced.
 
Shawn said:
I belive both the P and Q come in Standard Tanks (60 gallon) or Long Range Tanks (80 gallon) options so it is more a function of available options on the plane than the model specifically.



I top out at about 14-15K then just get such low climb performance it is not worth trying to climb higher...but I have a tired engine that is about to be replaced.
Click to expand...

Oh ok, so it's a plane by plane thing with the tanks.
 
midcap said:
Oh ok, so it's a plane by plane thing with the tanks.
Click to expand...

Yup. Long range are nice but I have standard tanks and did a 2800 mile cross country and at no point did I ever say "wow, wish I had long range tanks". 4.5 hours of endurance was perfect for a pit stop, get out drain pilot's main tanks, grab a bite, and get back going. Long range you are just trading extra fuel for available useful load.
 
As you'll quickly learn.....182s come at a premium price. There are other models more capable and faster for cheaper. Just say'n. :)
 
I have a 79Q. With the Q, I think I have 88 usable and 92 total. 79 is also when they converted from bladders to wet wings. I routinely make book numbers. I file at 140 but typically see 142-143 tas at 7-10k. I plan at 15gph, but typically burn 14-14.5, I keep it fire walled unless I am below 5k or so.

Definitely not the sexiest plane out there, but the useful load is great. I rarely have to fuel plan because the tanks will outlast my bladder and desire to bounce around unpressurized below the flight levels.

Jim
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
As you'll quickly learn.....182s come at a premium price. There are other models more capable and faster for cheaper. Just say'n. :)
Click to expand...

I'm all ears for suggestions. I really like Comanches but I don't want to get over my head In too much plane.
 
midcap said:
I'm all ears for suggestions. I really like Comanches but I don't want to get over my head In too much plane.
Click to expand...
Yup that's a fine example of more value and performance at similar prices.
 
Another benefit with the Q model.... The passenger side window opens.

Also, both the P and Q model have access to a "paperwork" STC that increases the max gross takeoff weight from 2950 to 3100 lbs. Meaning you gain 150 lbs useful load without having to change anything structurally. See http://www.182stc.com/ for more info on that.

Having long range tanks is a nice thing, as it extends the range by an hour. The trade off is the increased weight of the fuel if you depart with full tanks.

The 182 is an airplane that is not a "best in a single category" airplane. But in all of the categories combined, it will always be a good choice for those that seek a good balance of speed, range, load, comfort, stable IFR, etc.
 
midcap said:
Which other models should I consider?
Click to expand...

The Cherokee 235 is the Piper answer to the Skylane. @Jay Honeck and @SmashTime can tell you about their experiences. Jay had his named Atlas, because he could carry quite a bit stuff.

The Dakota is the later version of the 235.
 
I have a '75 P model with extended range tanks. 75 gallons useable gives me about 5.5 hours at normal cruise power. long range tanks are nice if you're otherwise flying light because you can tanker fuel. My home field generally has cheap gas, and my regular destination has no gas at all. It's nice being able to fly ~2 hours each way down to the beach and not have to stop for gas (especially when a sleeping toddler is onboard).

I'm a high wing fan, so for me my choice was a 182 or 182rg (I wasn't ready for a 210, and a cardinal RG was a bit short on payload/range). I also do unpaved strips, which the 182 does real well. After watching my hangar neighbors try to navigate around our tight, older hangars with a low wing, I'm glad I have space to work under the wings.
 
midcap said:
Oh ok, so it's a plane by plane thing with the tanks.
Click to expand...
You will find that a very high % of P and Q models have long range tanks, not all, but maybe 9/10. But, even with 60 gallons, that's 3.5 with an hour reserve. Aprroximately 450 miles, that's time for a pee break!
 
AggieMike88 said:
Another benefit with the Q model.... The passenger side window opens.

Also, both the P and Q model have access to a "paperwork" STC that increases the max gross takeoff weight from 2950 to 3100 lbs. Meaning you gain 150 lbs useful load without having to change anything structurally. See http://www.182stc.com/ for more info on that.

Having long range tanks is a nice thing, as it extends the range by an hour. The trade off is the increased weight of the fuel if you depart with full tanks.

The 182 is an airplane that is not a "best in a single category" airplane. But in all of the categories combined, it will always be a good choice for those that seek a good balance of speed, range, load, comfort, stable IFR, etc.
Click to expand...
Not all Q's have opening right side windows, at least one doesn't!
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
As you'll quickly learn.....182s come at a premium price. There are other models more capable and faster for cheaper. Just say'n. :)
Click to expand...
Every plane has its pluses and minuses, but the free market is pretty efficient at quantifying relative value of a plane. There's a reason cheap planes are cheap and expensive planes are expensive, and we can't blame it on large multinational firms dumping old bonanzas on the market to artificially drive the prices down :)
 
N747JB said:
You will find that a very high % of P and Q models have long range tanks, not all, but maybe 9/10. But, even with 60 gallons, that's 3.5 with an hour reserve. Aprroximately 450 miles, that's time for a pee break!
Click to expand...

My advice to buyers...get the LR tanks. If you're planning a 3.7 hour flight in a plane with 3.5 hour tanks, your average speed just took a big hit once you add in that fuel stop.
 
Brad Z said:
My advice to buyers...get the LR tanks. If you're planning a 3.7 hour flight in a plane with 3.5 hour tanks, your average speed just took a big hit once you add in that fuel stop.
Click to expand...
It's probably hard to find one without the long range tanks, but I agree that is my preference. I wouldn't skip a great airplane that had the smaller tanks though.
 
midcap said:
that's what I have heard that the 182 gives you that good feeling a 172 gives you.

About how long of a trip that was to the Bahamas?
Click to expand...

Our flight back was about & hours of flying with two stops in Fla along the way.
 
N747JB said:
It's probably hard to find one without the long range tanks, but I agree that is my preference. I wouldn't skip a great airplane that had the smaller tanks though.
Click to expand...

Can you retrofit LR tanks? I know you can add tip tanks, but I'm not sure about upgrading the factory ones. Probably can, there are about a million STCs to customize your 182.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
What features do you have to have? Two doors? 1100 lb useful load? <140 kts cruise? High wing or low wing? Your yearly budget?
Click to expand...



Yearly budget, probably 20k
Checkout_my_Six said:
What features do you have to have? Two doors? 1100 lb useful load? <140 kts cruise? High wing or low wing? Your yearly budget?
Click to expand...

I guess fast cruise, ability to carry 2 adults, one kid and a suitcase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top