I am thinking about getting a 182 next. Debating on if I want a narrow body or wide body. I like the looks of the wide body but I like the flaps and flying tail on the narrow body. Anyone have thoughts on it? I don’t have a lot of experience flying a wide body.
I saw this 182 at Arlington the other day. It was pretty sharp looking!
https://youtu.be/Td2SrDJ0FWo
My favorite 182 is the '56 with tall gear. There is no such thing as a bad 182. One of the best GA airplanes ever designed.
Personally I'd go for a 1950's model in a heartbeat.
Lighter and look better IMHO.
Lotsa old beater jump planes out there if you don't mind one that's been rode hard & put away wet.
And some creampuffs if you do.
Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!
Utility vs XC cruiser. Light GWT vs heavier GWT. Maybe not apples to oranges but apples to pears sounds about right.
Yes, as Stewart suggested, there are a lot of differences in early vs late model Cessnas.
Little stuff like fuel capacity, center stack instrument panels, trim tab vs trimmable stabilizer, and others.
So, what’s your mission? That’s what should drive your choice.
MTV
Condition would be my primary concern. Getting into 60 year old Ce$$na products can be costly pretty quick if you have to buy Ce$$na parts.
I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!
I am leaning toward a mid 70's wide body. My mission is to haul 2-4 people 2-300 miles and go into a 1500-2000' strip.
A leading edge cuff and VG's. Maybe slightly bigger tires.
I owned a 1959 for a while and really liked it! Manual flaps and a flying tail. But they're getting a little long in the tooth.
CenterHillAg liked this post
The 182C is reputedly the fastest, with tailplane trim and 185 fuselage. In Europe the Reims 182Q is sought after, having the leading edge cuff and very high build quality (factory corrosion proofing). A nice 182A that had led a pampered life recently changed hands.
Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org
Your mission is pretty well what I do with my ‘56 182, and it does that well. It’s a fairly stock plane, I wouldn’t mind putting a Sportsman STOL or bigger tires on it, but I’ve been into quite a few places without either and haven’t felt like I’m missing out yet. It’s a well balanced plane that hauls a load and is still fun to fly.Originally Posted by Charlie Longley
We exchanged pm’s several years ago when I was considering buying your old 180. The weekend I passed on it I stumbled into my 182, and made a deal on the spot.
If you want to use auto gas stay with 1976 182P or older. The 230hp O-470 likes mogas. For your mission any model will work fine in stock configuration. Dig deep for corrosion on the prebuy.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using SuperCub.Org mobile app
The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands. Psalms 19:1Charlie Longley thanked for this post
Make sure you can get Ethanol free mogas if you want to go this route
Motodave has some good video's to look at on Youtube. Backcountry182.com
I second that. Ive flown almost every decade of 182's except for 90's. My personal opinion for off field work id take my dads 1956 182 any day of the week. 70s or late 60s for cruising and imc flying. I flew the civil air patrols 182 thats in Rapid now when it was new from wichita with only 5 hrs on it. It was an early 2000s model i believe. The 56 is like a sports car and the new turbo'd job is a gas chuggin semi truck. The 56 i always planned for 11 gph blocked at 22 if i remember right. Has been probly 18 years now since i flew it. Just my opinion/observation.
"There are 3 kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." Will Rogers
Guy i hanger with says he wants to sell his. Think it has around 2000 hrs ttaf&e but dont quote me on it. It will need an overhaul and i believe it has a prop ad due. Has been sitting for 10 years or better. Beings 182's were brought up I figured Id throw that out there.
"There are 3 kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." Will Rogers
2-2.5 hours in the 182 for the 300 mile trip.
Me, for 1,500', I would be looking for a Bonanza or Comanche. 182 is a great plane for sure, but if you are traveling distance, speed is nice!! Getting the gear inside out of the slipstream pays dividends quickly.
Bonanza gear is TOUGH!
But if it is a 182 you want, give a few a try. the 180's sequentially fly like a sports car in the early years, to as described for later models- a big truck. Early ones suffer more wing flex cracking and gear rivet working, but fly lighter. New ones carry more, and have less rivet working due to extra braces/metal to support them.
Again, I would be looking for one in good condition with options I wanted- that would be my priority. All will achieve your goal.
I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!
PM sentGuy i hanger with says he wants to sell his. Think it has around 2000 hrs ttaf&e but dont quote me on it. It will need an overhaul and i believe it has a prop ad due. Has been sitting for 10 years or better. Beings 182's were brought up I figured Id throw that out there.
I had a Debonair in my hangar for a while for Annual and radios. It kind of grew on me. Actually had a better useful load then my old 180. Only reason I am thinking 182 is they’re easier to get in and out of.
I am not a big guy and am happy with a standard cub fuselage and stock pacer, but when it comes to the cessna's I have my seat all the way forward and it feels cramped up that far. I flew in my friends wide body and it was night and day as far as room go's. Just something to think about.
DENNY
A friend had a 1981? 182Q with a Horton speed mod kit on the nose wheel and the later style wheelpants. He said it was faster than his previous Debonair.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using SuperCub.Org mobile app
The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands. Psalms 19:1
Posting Permissions
Thanks: 
Likes: 
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks