Hey guys! I wanted to let you know I just launched an "Insiders" Newsletter where once a week I'm sharing an important lesson I've learned in aviation, links to my latest content so you don't miss out, and links to any other interesting or helpful content I've found. I'm also working on a HUGE project I can't announce yet but I'm going to be sharing more behind the scenes info with Insiders first - Subscribe (it's free) at: airplaneacademy.com/insiders
I own a Cessna 182 and use it for business matters under 1000 miles away. I also use it for trips to West Virginia, and all up and down the Atlantic coast beaches. My 182 was one of the last produced before they stopped making them for a while. My 182 still has the old Cessna instruments but I upgraded the radios several years ago. Both my engine and prop are near TBO and I have been thinking about purchasing a new one. This 182 holds a lot of memories. A man I grew to respect and actually worked for until his retirement was at the time was about 90 and at the request of his daughter, I took him for a ride. We spent close to 3 hours that day. Within about a month we lost him. I still have the photo of us sitting in my 182 taken by his daughter on my home office desk. All I can say about my 182 is it has never let me down. Anytime night or day all I had to do was yank it out of the hanger! This 182 still leaps off the runway!
Hi Charlie - Your comments are spot on! I purchased a 182 in 2015 to use as a commuter between work (in the city) and home (in the mountains). When buying it my thoughts were "It's 'just' a 182, and I'll get rid of it when I'm done with this commute". What I didn't expect was that I come to love this plane! It's always ready to go; will haul whatever I'm taking 1/3 of the way across the USA; is surprisingly very comfortable; an awesome IFR platform; is fast enough; makes me a better pilot; and most importantly... my wife loves it too! So now it looks like it's become a part of the family, and I have no intention of ever letting this gem go :)
Hi Greg- that's awesome to hear. I think most people feel that way whenever they actually get to fly a 182. It can sometimes be grouped into the realm of 172's because they look so similar but really it will do so much more. For all of the reasons you mentioned it's a great machine!
Something you didn’t mention is access to the cabin. I loved Pipers for travel and IFR but as I have gotten older (72 now) crawling up a wing and sliding over a seat has become a lot more challenging. The advent of the “selfie” stick means I can check the top of the wing just fine and no climbing required. I like that a lot. Broken legs are no fun, especially at my age. I know 😫
Good to see you are so prejudiced toward your 182. That is a good thing, it shows it fulfills your mission perfectly. Enjoy your toy and thanks for sharing.
I just wish airplanes weren’t so dang overpriced. I showed some of my friends a TBM 930 sitting on the ramp and their jaws dropped when they were told it costs north of 3 million used.
Buy a $24,000 Cherokee with 2 friends, that's 8 grand each. That's like looking at a Bugatti and wishing cars weren't so overpriced. You could always get a used Kia and get to work just fine!
Thank you!! Great presentation. It brought back many wonderful memories. I bought a 1956 182 A in 1984..it came with an 18 gallon aux tank. In 1991 I did a major OH and installed U model cylinders and a new prop. Subsequent majors with the factory crank. Just a clean up.The next year I had flap gap seals installed. As you can sure imagine, it made a great airplane absolutely the Best. 2000’ per minute climb and an honest 150 mph.. somewhere way back I installed 2 KX 170s for IFR. Very stable instrument platform. My wife and I with many friends flew all over America, Canada and Mexico. Camp outs on the beach in Baja for our Whale petting adventures. Fishing in Montana and trips to Florida with stops in NewOrleans for fun.. Even loads of ice on several mercy missions couldn’t get her down. Hurricane relief to Mexico at 400lbs OG. We operated out of some knarley one way in and one way out Sierra Madre dirt trails. It was always easy on maintenance and never failed me. I am now 80 with health issues and decided to let her go. She is now in the hands of another adventurous 63 year old. He plans to take her Fishing and to where she took me. We flew for 37 years and 4000 + hrs.The 182 Cessna is the best production aircraft that was ever produced. It’s been a great life with our long legged girl... 😊👍
Thanks David, It was really cool hearing about your experience and adventures over so many years with this airplane, that clearly still has a special place in your heart. She sounds like a very faithful servant indeed and incredible to think she is now serving a new owner after so many years in the sky 👍 I'm not a pilot, but it seems to me that a well maintained and correctly flown aircraft (such as the Cessna 182) is like a friend to all who depend on them. 😃
C-182 has always been one of my favorite airplanes for the very reasons you mention. A jack of all trades but master of none, and that's not a bad thing.
I've got lots of time in 182's, they're great airplanes. When it came time to buy one though it was just way too expensive. Went with a Piper Cherokee 235 and couldn't be happier!
I own a C172, & love it to bits, but I’ll admit it would be so handy to have a bit more range, speed, room, comfort & ability to carry my whole family of 4 with a little luggage. I’d love to be able to make the switch one day, but until then I’m still very happy with my 172!
Thank you for your kind words. I truly believe that the early model 182 Cessna was the finest production aircraft ever built. With the guidance of an Ai, I personally maintained my treasure for 34 years. She was reliable and at home on the back country dirt strips of Mexico. She hauled supplies for two hurricanes and extracted the injured and sick from remote roads that were made impassable for vehicles. The new owner plans to install floats so she can continue her adventures in the Caribbean All I have to do is close my eyes and replay our adventures together. 😊
Good stuff as usual. Looking for a call today or tomorrow to hear the Debonair I have under contract has finished pre-buy. I’m like a kid at Christmas.
I wanted to fly as fast as I could and still use the plane for training my kids. The 182 was the best plane for that mission. The more I learn about the plane, the more roles I see it filling. I'm putting a new engine and a bunch of Garmin avionics in mine right now. Can't wait until it's done!
Congrats on owning a great plane. The C182 reputation has been known for 60 years. The C182 is the practical SUV of GA SE airplanes. It can actually fly 4 adults in decent comfort. Has good T/O, Climb, Cruise Ldg performance, with good soft field ability.... It is rugged and high wing makes entry and exit easy, easy to camp under wing, easy to sight see countryside go by enroute. Is it the perfect plane? No plane is. If you want the Piper take on this category of plane, the Cherokee 6. No CONS? There are some.
There's a reason the 172 is the most produced civilian plane ever! It's a great bird. Honestly I could have gotten a 172 and only missed out on a small percentage of my missions over the last five years. I'm glad I have the 182 but the 172 would have been a great option, too.
Besides military I've flown 150, 172, 182, Mooneys, Arrows, Piper 140s, Yankee A1As, Traveler, Musketeer, Globe Swift, etc. If you get a 172 with the Lycoming, starting in 1968 and newer, it will be cheap to fly from a maintenance and fuel perspective, still cruise 115+, 36 Gallons usable, and about the cheapest I've found while still being real. Some of the newer ones have 160 hp instead of 150, but require 100 octane instead of 80, at least check it out if its an aircraft that can use auto gas as that is getting pretty popular, it's cheaper, and other gasoline fuels are disappearing. With full fuel, it maxes out with 3 normal size people with camping gear. Most of the time you are flying it with 1 or 2 and once in a while 3. The cockpit has normal room and easy for everyone to get in and out of, front or back. They are good on grass strips. The 182 is a more substantial version of the 172 all the way around, better performance on higher DA days and CSP. It uses the same airfoil as the 172 so it handles about the same but a little heavier. You won't have trouble finding parts for either. Most will have the Continental 0470. My favorites of the bunch to fly distance is the Mooney, hands down. The 0360 ones with 180 to 210 hp are slick and fast, 160, easy on gas, cheap engines to maintain, and I like low-wings because when you turn the wing gets out of the way. They have a wing like the 172 and light on the controls and the aircraft is nimble, unlike the Arrow and so many others. There are no surprises or quirks.
I’d throw in that it doesn’t have to be a retractable gear aircraft (it can be…). That’ll jack up the insurance because gear up landings. It’s also a familiar aircraft for people that have flown C172s… and you won’t lose familiarity should you fly a 182. C172s are available to rent everywhere.
I am a rental pilot and fly the 182 RG my FBO has. With the 80 gallon fuel cell. My long distance annual cross country trip takes me across 5 states. Even though I don't need the fuel stop, I do it at the 1/2 waypoint to be on the safe side. That and lunch, bathroom break, and another call into weather service. Works for me!
@@1973superdad My annual trip won't happen this year in the 182. I drove instead. However, when I did do it, I always made it to my destination. Staying with my mother for a week vacation. Hard to plan something like this. Weather VFR is dicey, and once i was stuck there 3 more days due to a stationary front that wouldn't move out.
Great video I had very similar criteria. I ultimately chose the Piper Dakota due to less need for unimproved runways and the 540 Lycoming vs 470 Continental.
Thanks for the video. I love the detail about the cabin shape due to the high wings. As I only fly in simulators, details like that are fun to know, thanks :)
I had a brand new 2005 182T that I flew for 12 years, 1800 hours. i flew wide open throttle (go fast) for it's entire life, never broke down. payload, range, g1000, kap140 were fantastic.
I decided to buy a 172 (1960 model) because it is a far more economical plane, not that much slower and sips fuel (6 - 6.5 gallons per hour) compared to the 182. The other thing is...in all my years of flying, needing a true 4 passenger airplane almost never happened. The most I ever had was 2 other people in my airplane and the other 95% of passenger time, just 1 passenger. Needing the extra useful load is an individual thing and I would bet that most people don't need it nor hardly ever utilize it. No doubt the 182 is a great aircraft but the 172 beats it hands down, everything considered.
The Cessna 177 is a great plane also. It’s a 182 that burns 5 gallons less per hour. The 177 is a bit slower than a 182, carries a bit less than a 182, but has more room than a 182. It’s 4 inches wider, has far more visibility and ease of entry. In today’s market of hyper inflated 182’s, the 177 is a great choice for 1/2 the price and nearly all of the capability of a 182.
Best plane I ever owned. Confirm everything you said. They do all this but getting real hard to replace because they are in demand and the price keeps going up for a good one. Yes, I wish I never sold mine. Had mine for 30 years.
RV-10 would like to have a word with you. It beats the C182 in just about every category. The only advantage any factory airplane has is that experimental aircraft cannot be used for hire. So if you are not planning on performing charter flights or carry cargo; the RV-10 is, hands down, the better choice.
I live at an airpark. My hangar is built into my house. I love that I can drive my cars and move tractors and equipment thru the front garage doors under the wings to the back. That space and utility would be dead with a low wing plane. Also when flying I'd rather look down than up, and I like the high wing cabin shade. Finally, it's simple to get into especially for old people.
I would definitely agree with everything on your list but for me having flown many types of planes I love the 182 just being able to get in and out of it without trying to kill myself given that I am 6’3 and 250 pounds.
I want a 182 so I can not be grounded in the summer with more than a small passenger here in phoenix in C172. Can't seem to find one though that has good records and reasonable price. I constantly see late 60's early 70s 182s with no upgrades in the cockpit from the original and people want 150K.
My Mooney M20J 1100 useful load. 155 True Airspeed. Fuel...8 gal per hour. IFR ready. Not going to land on grass...ever unless emergency requires. The one thing I completely agree with...choose your mission. I wanted Speed, Economic Fuel Burn, able to carry 3 pax plus me and some baggage for a weekend. I like fuel in the tanks. 64 gal 60 useable. That’s 6 hour travel time but I have a 2.5 / 3 hour bladder so 40 gals can get me to the next location easily. Mission... choose your needs, well 80-85% and remember... 80% of your flying will be done solo....yes it will. I didn’t think so but owning my bird for a year now and 150 hour...120 hours alone.
Our club's 182 had ling range tanks. If you fill all 92 gallons up (as our policy states) I would have to drain fuel out for a good useful load. That's a real pain.
I love the quality of this video, what software program are you using to produce these videos. I know it’s not directly in aviation question but I was hoping you might be able to help with that
If there was a DA-40 with 30% more power to be a true 4-seater - it would be perfect. But instead they went the route of creating a version with a Mercedes car diesel engine, which has LESS power than the original Ly-360... Well, they got more range out of it, but it's still a 3+ seater at best. Yeah, they later made a DA-50 which has more power, but that's a totally different $$$ category, with retractable gear and all. No Tundrastar version to be had there... Or - if SR-22 had something like a poor man's version, without all the bell$$ and whi$tle$... Just a good engine, airframe, basic avoinics like G3X, and cheap seats. Also - keep the parachute.
Love your videos! I’m starting to look into purchasing a 182. Prices sure have skyrocketed recently. Hoping these are more asking prices that are negotiable after inspection
I've owned a 1969 C172K for 11 yrs. It has been a very good little plane for my purposes. It has the 150 HP Lyc O-320 engine and I put a PowerFlow exhaust on it, it is very economical and I can carry 650 lbs of useful load With the full tanks (38 gal). Slow as heck, sure, and really only comfortable for 2 people, but I only fly locally in good weather. My brother owns a C33-A Debonair and it's got like 1400 lbs useful, more now since he just had tip-tanks installed. His 285 HP IO-520 burns between 12-14 g/hr but he goes 160-170 knots usually. It's a great plane, but too expensive for my budget. I'm just a VFR weekend pilot. I've often looked at the older C182's as the next logical upgrade, but even the older ones are usually pricey if decently equipped. For me, I can't justify the added expense of fuel for just a lazy day flying. I keep vacillating between a tandem two-seater taildragger because that's just really fun to me, or, Van's RV, probably the best for me would be a 9A, docile, yet still fun, quick, and economical for both a distance trip or just up and about.
Thanks Pete. It sounds like you've got a great bird, especially for the type of flying you're looking to do. 172's are great machines and I probably could have bought a 172 and still accomplished most of my missions over the last 5 years. Great airplanes.
@@AirplaneAcademy haha, thank you, agreed! As well, I love the C182's, just couldn't justify the extra expense as I almost always fly alone and don't go anywhere far...
Only times that you have too much fuel is if you are on fire or taking off from high altitude airport any other time fuel is like money you can’t have too much. :)
I love the 182. I've had a 180 for a couple of decades and love it as well. But I'm buying a 182 right now to put on floats. Cessna absolutely got it right with the 180/182 formula.
I love the 182! I’ve been putting some videos up of my adventures around DFW. The 182 is a great cross country machine and can comfortably take people around. I did Dallas to Branson and Dallas to Shreveport recently with a guest and luggage and both were easy, great flights.
Great aircraft and a jack of all trades. Check out Backcountry 182's channel if you want to see what a C182 can do off airport. For those on a budget, another option is an older Cessna 172 with the 180hp STC which gives you a gross weight increase and a decent useful load of around 1000 lbs.
Guys, here is a poem from Chat GPT about the Skylane, Enjoy Amidst the clouds, it soars up high, A beauty in the endless sky, With wings outstretched, it takes to flight, A Cessna Skylane, a wondrous sight. Its body sleek, its engine strong, It sings a melody, like a bird in song, Through the wind, it glides with grace, And leaves a trail in its rightful place. Above the earth, it finds its home, A bird of metal, free to roam, The world beneath, a patchwork view, A wonderland, all brand new. With every flight, a new adventure, A story written, like a picture, A memory to hold and cherish, Forever to never perish. Oh, Cessna Skylane, you are a dream, A symbol of hope, or so it seems, For you inspire us to aim so high, To reach for the stars, and touch the sky. What do you think?
The 182 (Kenai) is on my short list for 1st plane. I'd prefer the 177RG but I'm concerned about non-paved landings because of the small tires on the RG. How much experience due you have on soft runways and is it really something to be 'overly' cautious about? Thx, Joe
Few other things I love about the 182: #1. You don't have to switch tanks while in flight...at all. #2. (Obvious one) Two doors it's much easier to get in and out. #3. Higher cabin room compared to other low wing airplanes. (49inches) #4. Stumping the tanks is much easier compared to a low wing #5. If you live in a warmer climate, (Like I do) The shade in a high wing comes in handy.
In addition to all the pluses you mentioned,I'd like to add that my 182S will land in a field and carry enough water to hold out under it's shade wing for days.
Are you ever concerned about the weight on the nose gear when landing off field? I'm considering a 182 but not sure if it can follow a tail dragger into some spots.
Very good conclusion! My conclusion was moving up from a Grumman Tiger to an A36 Bonanza instead of the 182 and still being able to go to smaller (grass) fields with not too much more fuel burn than a 182 but cruising at 170 KTAS. Of course this comes at a price... I found that (in europe) older 182s rarely had anywhere near avionics set up that I like to have. So that would’ve make them almost equally in budget to A36s. I really like the two door high wing set up of Cessnas and the short field capability but the Bo for my missions was the better fit.
You forgot to mention that high-wing airplanes are ugly ;-) What about the RV10? Lower ownership and upgrade costs because it's experimental, it's faster, has a roomy cabin, has good payload as a real 4seater and can land at short fields... Checks all the boxes. Probably also more miles per gallon, especially when you cruise at slightly reduced power (nomal cruise is almost 200 mph!) and it has a 1000 mile range at 55%power or ~850 miles at 75%, depending on the engine (235 vs 260 hp)).
I don’t think there’s anything legally to stop you from training in a complex aircraft (“complex” being, for all intents and purposes, an aircraft with a constant speed prop), but I would start off learning in a fixed prop with just throttle and mixture at the beginning. Perhaps the first 10 hours or so before having an extra control to fuss with.
Hi Linda - thanks! Mine is a 1975 P model. Like Tom said, there's nothing stopping you from training day 1 in a 182. If you were just renting it though, it would be cheaper to learn in a 172 or something because you don't need the extra power and fuel burn of the 182 for your early maneuvers. Later on you can do some transition training into the 182 if that's what you're going to be flying. It's not a bad transition at all. But if you owned one or something you could certainly just start in the 182 all the way through.
I fly a 172N model now and like you advised the useful load is low, 1034 180hp. I have been looking for a good 182 for my family, until then I will continue flying at the flying club. Great video sir thanks for sharing your information
The older I get (now 71) the more I like getting in and out of the 182, rather than having to be a contortionist to get in and out of a low wing plane. The Piper Malibu is the exception, but look at the price compared to the 182
Fine bird, have a few memorable hours in one myself. The points are true enough. My feeling is most pilots over-rate the need for payload & seats when they so rarely actually ever take advantage. That said, some will indeed take full advantage. Either way, if you have the means, why not? My appetites run more toward building an experimental kit. Which is more realistic for me, but all goes to prove there are few one size fits all answers in aviation. But indeed, the Skylane sure covers a lot of bases!
Great video, well done. I liked the “superpower” teaser at the beginning! You make a good case for the 182, but what about the different variants? I live at altitude, so would a supercharged engine be the better choice?
The Turbo182 would be an option, but honestly I get respectable climb rates even at 7000ft so unless you’re really really high up I wouldn’t worry much, just watch the Density Altitude and plan W&B accordingly. Also of note the late 70s and 80s 182s have a “paper” STC that increases the Max Gross 150lb. No changes required just file it and update the W&B in your book.
Agreed with Brian. Really only need the turbo if you're going to put it to work in high altitude operations. Otherwise it just drinks more fuel and is more to maintain. You definitely get some perks out of it but in my opinion you would need to need those features as a normal part of your mission for it to be worth it.
Do you find that with mountain flying, do you really need a turbo? I have friends that say a turbo is absolutely necessary for our Utah mountain flying.
Airplane Academy - Charlie, when did you buy yours, was it actually in 2016? How Much did you pay for it? What upgrades, costs, etc., have you installed and incurred? Major Pros and Cons?
All I know is that you just can't go on a joy ride whenever you feel like it, very often. Everything associated with owning a small plane adds up. You have to have a good, dedicated income stream for this thing. Across the country? I'm flying commercial.
I'd say the 182 will almost take you anywhere... HD flight is not one of those places that i'd trust a 182. That said I suppose with deep pockets and a strong obsession with the 182, people have modded them to be great mountain climbers
If you want to haul a load, Piper Six - 260 can't be beat. Speed and load - Mooney M20E can't be beat. Used to fly past these Cessna's like they were going backwards.
PA-32-260 can be beat. Alot. They're anemic to climb. Borderline pathetic. Mooneys are insanely tiny. You want a PA-24 Comanche 180 or 250 (or like my 400 if you're brave!) for speed and load.
I'm sold! Hey Charlie do you know how I would ship a 182 to Western Australia? shipping container? I doubt it could be flown; or could it? OMG I just checked, it would need to become a flying gas tank lol but what an adventure! USA, Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Scotland, France, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Bombay, Chennai, Thailand, Malaysia, Jakarta Indonesia, Bali Indonesia, Broome Western Australia, Exmouth Western Australia, Geraldton Western Australia, Perth WA and home.......WOW!
Your 182 sounds an awful lot like my NAvion A mod. from 1949. I'm short on carrying by 100 lbs. short on speed be 10kts (9-gph at 120 kts} but otherwise very similar... oh yes, E225-4 225hp fuel injected (bendix) Thanks for a very good video !
Owning a 177 RG since 2008. 850 lbs payload, 9,8 Gallon/ hour @ 137 KTAS. Larger cabin, much better looks and nicer handling. IF you don’t need the carrying capacity out of short n soft fields at high gross weight - a 177 RG is unbeatable in terms of fuel efficiency and comfort.
I don’t like Cessnas ‘cause they are everywhere-there are so many of them that I joyfully yip each time I see a Dimond, a Mooney, etc. Based on that I would say Beechcraft Bonanza G36 does everything the 182 does, but sexier to my taste. Also it flies faster. And carries 6 people instead of 4. However, there are way more than 4,000 182s built, which means there are so many of them that you’ll always and everywhere find any spare part and an experienced mechanic for the Cessna. I would put this as a main pro feature against 182’s non Cessna rivals. Thus, tho my heart says no, my wallet says the 182 is the best plane for sure.
I live in Florida, my son lives in North Carolina, my brother lives in Ohio. We hunt and fish . We will all three get our pilots license. The airplane we are looking for is one that can carry us from Florida to Alaska Montana you get the lifestyle. We are looking for a airplane that can carry us across country and land like a STOL back country. Any ideas?
What year is your 182 and how much is reasonable to pay for one.i use barnstormer to find one and it's so hard to find one that's not super old for under 100k.
Mine is a 1975. I bought it in 2016 for $93k which was a good deal even at the time. Unfortunately prices have about doubled since then. I recommend doing some research to develop a set of comps in order to spot market pricing. I talk about it in this video, hope it helps: ua-cam.com/video/DIMJ7czpfo0/v-deo.html
Don’t forget the big umbrella and the sunshade that also serve as a wing… And there’s 1 gazillion STCs for this aircraft. And 135 kts. is maybe not too fast, but from my own experience a few extra knots make a huge difference when you encounter strong headwind. And and and…
Same reasons I own a 182. Also I disagree with one of your points. With the right setup a 182 can do gravel bars. VGs and big tires make that possible. Big tires aren't for everyone but VGs should be on your airplane regardless of what kind of flying you do.
Hey guys! I wanted to let you know I just launched an "Insiders" Newsletter where once a week I'm sharing an important lesson I've learned in aviation, links to my latest content so you don't miss out, and links to any other interesting or helpful content I've found. I'm also working on a HUGE project I can't announce yet but I'm going to be sharing more behind the scenes info with Insiders first - Subscribe (it's free) at: airplaneacademy.com/insiders
It’s a great airplane... stop telling everyone about it! Just makes them harder to buy! 😂
👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
Seriously. I’m in the market as well for a 182! It’s a hot market.
😂
@@rp61The price tag is what makes it harder to buy.
😂😂😂
I own a Cessna 182 and use it for business matters under 1000 miles away. I also use it for trips to West Virginia, and all up and down the Atlantic coast beaches. My 182 was one of the last produced before they stopped making them for a while. My 182 still has the old Cessna instruments but I upgraded the radios several years ago. Both my engine and prop are near TBO and I have been thinking about purchasing a new one. This 182 holds a lot of memories. A man I grew to respect and actually worked for until his retirement was at the time was about 90 and at the request of his daughter, I took him for a ride. We spent close to 3 hours that day. Within about a month we lost him. I still have the photo of us sitting in my 182 taken by his daughter on my home office desk. All I can say about my 182 is it has never let me down. Anytime night or day all I had to do was yank it out of the hanger! This 182 still leaps off the runway!
Thank you for sharing this with us!
Hi Charlie - Your comments are spot on! I purchased a 182 in 2015 to use as a commuter between work (in the city) and home (in the mountains). When buying it my thoughts were "It's 'just' a 182, and I'll get rid of it when I'm done with this commute". What I didn't expect was that I come to love this plane! It's always ready to go; will haul whatever I'm taking 1/3 of the way across the USA; is surprisingly very comfortable; an awesome IFR platform; is fast enough; makes me a better pilot; and most importantly... my wife loves it too! So now it looks like it's become a part of the family, and I have no intention of ever letting this gem go :)
Hi Greg- that's awesome to hear. I think most people feel that way whenever they actually get to fly a 182. It can sometimes be grouped into the realm of 172's because they look so similar but really it will do so much more. For all of the reasons you mentioned it's a great machine!
And one other thing maybe to mention, any A&P can work on them and parts are available. Great video Charlie
Something you didn’t mention is access to the cabin. I loved Pipers for travel and IFR but as I have gotten older (72 now) crawling up a wing and sliding over a seat has become a lot more challenging. The advent of the “selfie” stick means I can check the top of the wing just fine and no climbing required. I like that a lot. Broken legs are no fun, especially at my age. I know 😫
That's a really good point! I agree, it's very comfortable to get in (AND sit in!).
Good to see you are so prejudiced toward your 182. That is a good thing, it shows it fulfills your mission perfectly.
Enjoy your toy and thanks for sharing.
Thank you. It's been a great airplane.
I just wish airplanes weren’t so dang overpriced. I showed some of my friends a TBM 930 sitting on the ramp and their jaws dropped when they were told it costs north of 3 million used.
...and people drop their jaw to my reply after asked how much I paid for my almost new luxury car
Buy a $24,000 Cherokee with 2 friends, that's 8 grand each. That's like looking at a Bugatti and wishing cars weren't so overpriced. You could always get a used Kia and get to work just fine!
Thank you!! Great presentation. It brought back many wonderful memories.
I bought a 1956 182 A in 1984..it came with an 18 gallon aux tank. In 1991 I did a major OH and installed U model cylinders and a new prop. Subsequent majors with the factory crank. Just a clean up.The next year I had flap gap seals installed. As you can sure imagine, it made a great airplane absolutely the Best. 2000’ per minute climb and an honest 150 mph.. somewhere way back I installed 2 KX 170s for IFR. Very stable instrument platform. My wife and I with many friends flew all over America, Canada and Mexico. Camp outs on the beach in Baja for our Whale petting adventures. Fishing in Montana and trips to Florida with stops in NewOrleans for fun..
Even loads of ice on several mercy missions couldn’t get her down.
Hurricane relief to Mexico at 400lbs OG. We operated out of some knarley one way in and one way out Sierra Madre dirt trails.
It was always easy on maintenance and never failed me. I am now 80 with health issues and decided to let her go. She is now in the hands of another adventurous 63 year old. He plans to take her Fishing and to where she took me. We flew for 37 years and 4000 + hrs.The 182 Cessna is the best production aircraft that was ever produced. It’s been a great life with our long legged girl... 😊👍
Thanks David, It was really cool hearing about your experience and adventures over so many years with this airplane, that clearly still has a special place in your heart. She sounds like a very faithful servant indeed and incredible to think she is now serving a new owner after so many years in the sky 👍 I'm not a pilot, but it seems to me that a well maintained and correctly flown aircraft (such as the Cessna 182) is like a friend to all who depend on them. 😃
The 182 is my fav plane that I have not flown yet. Hope I get to own one in the future.
You'll love it! Wonderful to fly.
C-182 has always been one of my favorite airplanes for the very reasons you mention. A jack of all trades but master of none, and that's not a bad thing.
I've got lots of time in 182's, they're great airplanes. When it came time to buy one though it was just way too expensive. Went with a Piper Cherokee 235 and couldn't be happier!
I own a C172, & love it to bits, but I’ll admit it would be so handy to have a bit more range, speed, room, comfort & ability to carry my whole family of 4 with a little luggage. I’d love to be able to make the switch one day, but until then I’m still very happy with my 172!
The plane that I want is something like a pressurized Cessna 210, but what my pocketbook can afford is something more along the lines of an Ercoupe.
I've never flown in a 210 (much less a pressurized one), but I love their stats on paper. Have considered one for myself one day. Very cool airplanes.
Now that’s strutting your stuff
Thank you for your kind words. I truly believe that the early model 182 Cessna was the finest production aircraft ever built. With the guidance of an Ai, I personally maintained my treasure for 34 years. She was reliable and at home on the back country dirt strips of Mexico. She hauled supplies for two hurricanes and extracted the injured and sick from remote roads that were made
impassable for vehicles.
The new owner plans to install floats so she can continue her adventures in the Caribbean
All I have to do is close my eyes and replay our adventures together. 😊
Best investment I have made yet! Love my 182!
Good stuff as usual. Looking for a call today or tomorrow to hear the Debonair I have under contract has finished pre-buy. I’m like a kid at Christmas.
Awesome!! Exciting times!!
Now I'll never be able to afford one! You let out all the good stuff! Great video - thanks!
:) Glad you enjoyed and that it was helpful!
Vans RV 10 is equal to or better in all the mentioned specs. Many available pre-built.
Just another good option.
AOPA did a comparison.
I have had an RV10 for four years. Best all around 4-seater in my opinion. The second best is the 182. Close second.
I wanted to fly as fast as I could and still use the plane for training my kids. The 182 was the best plane for that mission. The more I learn about the plane, the more roles I see it filling. I'm putting a new engine and a bunch of Garmin avionics in mine right now. Can't wait until it's done!
My 1st choice is :
Pilatus PC 12/45.....This is my dream aircraft.
Congrats on owning a great plane. The C182 reputation has been known for 60 years. The C182 is the practical SUV of GA SE airplanes. It can actually fly 4 adults in decent comfort. Has good T/O, Climb, Cruise Ldg performance, with good soft field ability.... It is rugged and high wing makes entry and exit easy, easy to camp under wing, easy to sight see countryside go by enroute. Is it the perfect plane? No plane is. If you want the Piper take on this category of plane, the Cherokee 6. No CONS? There are some.
You do really good content, Charlie. Solid info. Been leaning 172, but...
There's a reason the 172 is the most produced civilian plane ever! It's a great bird. Honestly I could have gotten a 172 and only missed out on a small percentage of my missions over the last five years. I'm glad I have the 182 but the 172 would have been a great option, too.
Besides military I've flown 150, 172, 182, Mooneys, Arrows, Piper 140s, Yankee A1As, Traveler, Musketeer, Globe Swift, etc. If you get a 172 with the Lycoming, starting in 1968 and newer, it will be cheap to fly from a maintenance and fuel perspective, still cruise 115+, 36 Gallons usable, and about the cheapest I've found while still being real. Some of the newer ones have 160 hp instead of 150, but require 100 octane instead of 80, at least check it out if its an aircraft that can use auto gas as that is getting pretty popular, it's cheaper, and other gasoline fuels are disappearing. With full fuel, it maxes out with 3 normal size people with camping gear. Most of the time you are flying it with 1 or 2 and once in a while 3. The cockpit has normal room and easy for everyone to get in and out of, front or back. They are good on grass strips. The 182 is a more substantial version of the 172 all the way around, better performance on higher DA days and CSP. It uses the same airfoil as the 172 so it handles about the same but a little heavier. You won't have trouble finding parts for either. Most will have the Continental 0470. My favorites of the bunch to fly distance is the Mooney, hands down. The 0360 ones with 180 to 210 hp are slick and fast, 160, easy on gas, cheap engines to maintain, and I like low-wings because when you turn the wing gets out of the way. They have a wing like the 172 and light on the controls and the aircraft is nimble, unlike the Arrow and so many others. There are no surprises or quirks.
I’d throw in that it doesn’t have to be a retractable gear aircraft (it can be…). That’ll jack up the insurance because gear up landings.
It’s also a familiar aircraft for people that have flown C172s… and you won’t lose familiarity should you fly a 182. C172s are available to rent everywhere.
I am a rental pilot and fly the 182 RG my FBO has. With the 80 gallon fuel cell. My long distance annual cross country trip takes me across 5 states. Even though I don't need the fuel stop, I do it at the 1/2 waypoint to be on the safe side. That and lunch, bathroom break, and another call into weather service. Works for me!
Whats your anual trip look like? Do you stay over night places? Get a uber ride to hotel? How do you plan it?
@@1973superdad My annual trip won't happen this year in the 182. I drove instead. However, when I did do it, I always made it to my destination. Staying with my mother for a week vacation. Hard to plan something like this. Weather VFR is dicey, and once i was stuck there 3 more days due to a stationary front that wouldn't move out.
Great video I had very similar criteria. I ultimately chose the Piper Dakota due to less need for unimproved runways and the 540 Lycoming vs 470 Continental.
Thanks for the video. I love the detail about the cabin shape due to the high wings. As I only fly in simulators, details like that are fun to know, thanks :)
Neat work, enjoyed the video. Would love a 182
I had a brand new 2005 182T that I flew for 12 years, 1800 hours. i flew wide open throttle (go fast) for it's entire life, never broke down. payload, range, g1000, kap140 were fantastic.
How high were you flying? After some altitude even a wide open throttle wouldn't push the manifold pressure out of the green sector...
Did you make it to TBO?
Great vid, thanx dude.
Hey, the Cessna 182 is the plane Aunt Bee soloed in! Great video! Subscribed!
Nice!! Excited to have you as a subscriber and thanks for watching.
I decided to buy a 172 (1960 model) because it is a far more economical plane, not that much slower and sips fuel (6 - 6.5 gallons per hour) compared to the 182. The other thing is...in all my years of flying, needing a true 4 passenger airplane almost never happened. The most I ever had was 2 other people in my airplane and the other 95% of passenger time, just 1 passenger. Needing the extra useful load is an individual thing and I would bet that most people don't need it nor hardly ever utilize it. No doubt the 182 is a great aircraft but the 172 beats it hands down, everything considered.
The Cessna 177 is a great plane also. It’s a 182 that burns 5 gallons less per hour. The 177 is a bit slower than a 182, carries a bit less than a 182, but has more room than a 182. It’s 4 inches wider, has far more visibility and ease of entry. In today’s market of hyper inflated 182’s, the 177 is a great choice for 1/2 the price and nearly all of the capability of a 182.
Best plane I ever owned. Confirm everything you said. They do all this but getting real hard to replace because they are in demand and the price keeps going up for a good one. Yes, I wish I never sold mine. Had mine for 30 years.
The one item I disliked was the bladder tanks.
RV-10 would like to have a word with you. It beats the C182 in just about every category. The only advantage any factory airplane has is that experimental aircraft cannot be used for hire. So if you are not planning on performing charter flights or carry cargo; the RV-10 is, hands down, the better choice.
I live at an airpark. My hangar is built into my house. I love that I can drive my cars and move tractors and equipment thru the front garage doors under the wings to the back. That space and utility would be dead with a low wing plane. Also when flying I'd rather look down than up, and I like the high wing cabin shade. Finally, it's simple to get into especially for old people.
I would definitely agree with everything on your list but for me having flown many types of planes I love the 182 just being able to get in and out of it without trying to kill myself given that I am 6’3 and 250 pounds.
A great presentation and very informative,keep up the good work
Thanks so much. Really appreciate it!
Nice video. Very informative. Strait forward advice from an owner.
I want a 182 so I can not be grounded in the summer with more than a small passenger here in phoenix in C172. Can't seem to find one though that has good records and reasonable price. I constantly see late 60's early 70s 182s with no upgrades in the cockpit from the original and people want 150K.
The 182 fit my mission as well. We bought a 182R in November. They are great, and as far as airplanes go, a decent investment also.
My Mooney M20J 1100 useful load. 155 True Airspeed. Fuel...8 gal per hour. IFR ready. Not going to land on grass...ever unless emergency requires. The one thing I completely agree with...choose your mission. I wanted Speed, Economic Fuel Burn, able to carry 3 pax plus me and some baggage for a weekend. I like fuel in the tanks. 64 gal 60 useable. That’s 6 hour travel time but I have a 2.5 / 3 hour bladder so 40 gals can get me to the next location easily. Mission... choose your needs, well 80-85% and remember... 80% of your flying will be done solo....yes it will. I didn’t think so but owning my bird for a year now and 150 hour...120 hours alone.
Kodiak series 100 is the bo Jackson of airplanes, trade off is $ but nothing beats it in all categories
Our club's 182 had ling range tanks. If you fill all 92 gallons up (as our policy states) I would have to drain fuel out for a good useful load. That's a real pain.
I love the quality of this video, what software program are you using to produce these videos. I know it’s not directly in aviation question but I was hoping you might be able to help with that
Thanks John. Adobe Premier Pro
The Cessna 182 is truly a wonderful airplane, I love it too! Thanks for the great video my friend!
I’m an electrician just wandering if it would be good especially in Alaska
If there was a DA-40 with 30% more power to be a true 4-seater - it would be perfect. But instead they went the route of creating a version with a Mercedes car diesel engine, which has LESS power than the original Ly-360... Well, they got more range out of it, but it's still a 3+ seater at best.
Yeah, they later made a DA-50 which has more power, but that's a totally different $$$ category, with retractable gear and all. No Tundrastar version to be had there...
Or - if SR-22 had something like a poor man's version, without all the bell$$ and whi$tle$... Just a good engine, airframe, basic avoinics like G3X, and cheap seats. Also - keep the parachute.
Love the 182! Mind if I ask what camera & lens you're shooting with? The focus and focal length are really great for talking head shots like that.
I’ve got a free, in-depth answer to your question at airplaneacademy.com/start. Check it out and let me know what you think!
Love your videos! I’m starting to look into purchasing a 182. Prices sure have skyrocketed recently. Hoping these are more asking prices that are negotiable after inspection
I've owned a 1969 C172K for 11 yrs. It has been a very good little plane for my purposes. It has the 150 HP Lyc O-320 engine and I put a PowerFlow exhaust on it, it is very economical and I can carry 650 lbs of useful load With the full tanks (38 gal). Slow as heck, sure, and really only comfortable for 2 people, but I only fly locally in good weather. My brother owns a C33-A Debonair and it's got like 1400 lbs useful, more now since he just had tip-tanks installed. His 285 HP IO-520 burns between 12-14 g/hr but he goes 160-170 knots usually. It's a great plane, but too expensive for my budget. I'm just a VFR weekend pilot. I've often looked at the older C182's as the next logical upgrade, but even the older ones are usually pricey if decently equipped. For me, I can't justify the added expense of fuel for just a lazy day flying. I keep vacillating between a tandem two-seater taildragger because that's just really fun to me, or, Van's RV, probably the best for me would be a 9A, docile, yet still fun, quick, and economical for both a distance trip or just up and about.
Thanks Pete. It sounds like you've got a great bird, especially for the type of flying you're looking to do. 172's are great machines and I probably could have bought a 172 and still accomplished most of my missions over the last 5 years. Great airplanes.
@@AirplaneAcademy haha, thank you, agreed! As well, I love the C182's, just couldn't justify the extra expense as I almost always fly alone and don't go anywhere far...
The 182 is the Chevy Suburban of sky, but with better gas mileage. 😉
Only times that you have too much fuel is if you are on fire or taking off from high altitude airport any other time fuel is like money you can’t have too much. :)
I love the 182. I've had a 180 for a couple of decades and love it as well. But I'm buying a 182 right now to put on floats. Cessna absolutely got it right with the 180/182 formula.
Looking at a Pilatus PC 12 NGX for our family plane. I feel the same as you do about the qualities of the Pilatus as you do about the 182.
Uh yeah, for 22 times the price. Good for you if you can swing that. Pilatus is the SUV of the skies for sure.
Very cool. You'll make lots of fun memories in the PC-12!
@@SuperEddietv I'm looking at an A380 for the family and 390 of our closest friends. There should be some on the market at a discount.
PC12 is a great airplane to fly. Great range and decent speed with a great useful load. Other than price, not much downside.
@@brotherlove6216 oh, absolutely!
I love the 182! I’ve been putting some videos up of my adventures around DFW. The 182 is a great cross country machine and can comfortably take people around. I did Dallas to Branson and Dallas to Shreveport recently with a guest and luggage and both were easy, great flights.
Great aircraft and a jack of all trades. Check out Backcountry 182's channel if you want to see what a C182 can do off airport. For those on a budget, another option is an older Cessna 172 with the 180hp STC which gives you a gross weight increase and a decent useful load of around 1000 lbs.
You don't realize how beautifully these Cessnas handle til you fly a flashier, but crappy Diamond.
Guys, here is a poem from Chat GPT about the Skylane, Enjoy
Amidst the clouds, it soars up high,
A beauty in the endless sky,
With wings outstretched, it takes to flight,
A Cessna Skylane, a wondrous sight.
Its body sleek, its engine strong,
It sings a melody, like a bird in song,
Through the wind, it glides with grace,
And leaves a trail in its rightful place.
Above the earth, it finds its home,
A bird of metal, free to roam,
The world beneath, a patchwork view,
A wonderland, all brand new.
With every flight, a new adventure,
A story written, like a picture,
A memory to hold and cherish,
Forever to never perish.
Oh, Cessna Skylane, you are a dream,
A symbol of hope, or so it seems,
For you inspire us to aim so high,
To reach for the stars, and touch the sky.
What do you think?
The 182 (Kenai) is on my short list for 1st plane. I'd prefer the 177RG but I'm concerned about non-paved landings because of the small tires on the RG. How much experience due you have on soft runways and is it really something to be 'overly' cautious about? Thx, Joe
Few other things I love about the 182:
#1. You don't have to switch tanks while in flight...at all.
#2. (Obvious one) Two doors it's much easier to get in and out.
#3. Higher cabin room compared to other low wing airplanes. (49inches)
#4. Stumping the tanks is much easier compared to a low wing
#5. If you live in a warmer climate, (Like I do) The shade in a high wing comes in handy.
In addition to all the pluses you mentioned,I'd like to add that my 182S will land in a field and carry enough water to hold out under it's shade wing for days.
Are you ever concerned about the weight on the nose gear when landing off field? I'm considering a 182 but not sure if it can follow a tail dragger into some spots.
Heh, I recognize a lot of the areas in the video, being from Central Texas 😄.
Very good conclusion! My conclusion was moving up from a Grumman Tiger to an A36 Bonanza instead of the 182 and still being able to go to smaller (grass) fields with not too much more fuel burn than a 182 but cruising at 170 KTAS. Of course this comes at a price... I found that (in europe) older 182s rarely had anywhere near avionics set up that I like to have. So that would’ve make them almost equally in budget to A36s.
I really like the two door high wing set up of Cessnas and the short field capability but the Bo for my missions was the better fit.
You forgot to mention that high-wing airplanes are ugly ;-)
What about the RV10? Lower ownership and upgrade costs because it's experimental, it's faster, has a roomy cabin, has good payload as a real 4seater and can land at short fields... Checks all the boxes. Probably also more miles per gallon, especially when you cruise at slightly reduced power (nomal cruise is almost 200 mph!) and it has a 1000 mile range at 55%power or ~850 miles at 75%, depending on the engine (235 vs 260 hp)).
problem is AVGAS....
Charlie can you use a 182 for flight training from the very start of your training? Love your videos. What year is your 182?
I don’t think there’s anything legally to stop you from training in a complex aircraft (“complex” being, for all intents and purposes, an aircraft with a constant speed prop), but I would start off learning in a fixed prop with just throttle and mixture at the beginning. Perhaps the first 10 hours or so before having an extra control to fuss with.
Hi Linda - thanks! Mine is a 1975 P model. Like Tom said, there's nothing stopping you from training day 1 in a 182. If you were just renting it though, it would be cheaper to learn in a 172 or something because you don't need the extra power and fuel burn of the 182 for your early maneuvers. Later on you can do some transition training into the 182 if that's what you're going to be flying. It's not a bad transition at all. But if you owned one or something you could certainly just start in the 182 all the way through.
@@AirplaneAcademy Thanks Charlie
My question is, are you able to generate income with a 182 or is it an expensive hobby/convenience?
Would love to know
I fly a 172N model now and like you advised the useful load is low, 1034 180hp. I have been looking for a good 182 for my family, until then I will continue flying at the flying club. Great video sir thanks for sharing your information
The older I get (now 71) the more I like getting in and out of the 182, rather than having to be a contortionist to get in and out of a low wing plane. The Piper Malibu is the exception, but look at the price compared to the 182
Cessna 182 or Tecnam P2010 (215 HP)?
Which one is better?
My dad purchased a new cessna 182 in 1969 ... your right great airplane he said the same things that you did ..
Fine bird, have a few memorable hours in one myself. The points are true enough. My feeling is most pilots over-rate the need for payload & seats when they so rarely actually ever take advantage. That said, some will indeed take full advantage. Either way, if you have the means, why not? My appetites run more toward building an experimental kit. Which is more realistic for me, but all goes to prove there are few one size fits all answers in aviation. But indeed, the Skylane sure covers a lot of bases!
The Bearhawk 5, I'm fairly certain, beats the 182 in all of his mentioned categories.
I think you forgot to mention a price range?
Great video, well done. I liked the “superpower” teaser at the beginning! You make a good case for the 182, but what about the different variants? I live at altitude, so would a supercharged engine be the better choice?
The Turbo182 would be an option, but honestly I get respectable climb rates even at 7000ft so unless you’re really really high up I wouldn’t worry much, just watch the Density Altitude and plan W&B accordingly.
Also of note the late 70s and 80s 182s have a “paper” STC that increases the Max Gross 150lb. No changes required just file it and update the W&B in your book.
@@dalgrim Thanks for the reply - that’s good to know!
Agreed with Brian. Really only need the turbo if you're going to put it to work in high altitude operations. Otherwise it just drinks more fuel and is more to maintain. You definitely get some perks out of it but in my opinion you would need to need those features as a normal part of your mission for it to be worth it.
I am 20 years old, looking to purchase a ifr 182 to fly between WV and North Florida.
Great airplane! Had a Cessna 180 tail dragger, flew sky divers 5 at a time (slim people)! Very powerful and maneuverable! I truly regret selling it.
Do you find that with mountain flying, do you really need a turbo? I have friends that say a turbo is absolutely necessary for our Utah mountain flying.
Flown it! Great plane but nowhere as smooth, as comfortable and as quiet in the air as a Bonanza!!
Great - I will definitely purchase a C182, as soon as $1000 bills start falling out of my ***hole!! LOL
Airplane Academy - Charlie, when did you buy yours, was it actually in 2016? How Much did you pay for it? What upgrades, costs, etc., have you installed and incurred? Major Pros and Cons?
All I know is that you just can't go on a joy ride whenever you feel like it, very often. Everything associated with owning a small plane adds up. You have to have a good, dedicated income stream for this thing. Across the country? I'm flying commercial.
You should be an flight instructor. Saludos
Thank you! :
I'd say the 182 will almost take you anywhere... HD flight is not one of those places that i'd trust a 182. That said I suppose with deep pockets and a strong obsession with the 182, people have modded them to be great mountain climbers
If you want to haul a load, Piper Six - 260 can't be beat. Speed and load - Mooney M20E can't be beat. Used to fly past these Cessna's like they were going backwards.
PA-32-260 can be beat. Alot. They're anemic to climb. Borderline pathetic. Mooneys are insanely tiny. You want a PA-24 Comanche 180 or 250 (or like my 400 if you're brave!) for speed and load.
It’s like flying a truck! Try flying a Comanche yip they are old but are superstore a 182 in every department and much much nicer to fly.
Can you find a 182 with de-icing?
Great video and very informative explanation of this beautiful rugged aircraft..thank you
Glad you enjoyed!!
I a recent new PP. I'm looking for a 182, do not like the price for a 40 yr old plane.
Only time you have too much fuel is if you are on fire or taking off from high altitude airport on a hot day. :)
I'm sold! Hey Charlie do you know how I would ship a 182 to Western Australia? shipping container? I doubt it could be flown; or could it? OMG I just checked, it would need to become a flying gas tank lol but what an adventure! USA, Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Scotland, France, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Bombay, Chennai, Thailand, Malaysia, Jakarta Indonesia, Bali Indonesia, Broome Western Australia, Exmouth Western Australia, Geraldton Western Australia, Perth WA and home.......WOW!
Your 182 sounds an awful lot like my NAvion A mod. from 1949. I'm short on carrying by 100 lbs. short on speed be 10kts (9-gph at 120 kts} but otherwise very similar... oh yes, E225-4 225hp fuel injected (bendix) Thanks for a very good video !
Owning a 177 RG since 2008. 850 lbs payload, 9,8 Gallon/ hour @ 137 KTAS. Larger cabin, much better looks and nicer handling. IF you don’t need the carrying capacity out of short n soft fields at high gross weight - a 177 RG is unbeatable in terms of fuel efficiency and comfort.
I don’t like Cessnas ‘cause they are everywhere-there are so many of them that I joyfully yip each time I see a Dimond, a Mooney, etc.
Based on that I would say Beechcraft Bonanza G36 does everything the 182 does, but sexier to my taste. Also it flies faster. And carries 6 people instead of 4.
However, there are way more than 4,000 182s built, which means there are so many of them that you’ll always and everywhere find any spare part and an experienced mechanic for the Cessna.
I would put this as a main pro feature against 182’s non Cessna rivals.
Thus, tho my heart says no, my wallet says the 182 is the best plane for sure.
I live in Florida, my son lives in North Carolina, my brother lives in Ohio. We hunt and fish . We will all three get our pilots license. The airplane we are looking for is one that can carry us from Florida to Alaska Montana you get the lifestyle. We are looking for a airplane that can carry us across country and land like a STOL back country. Any ideas?
Sounds like a mission for a 206.
What year is your 182 and how much is reasonable to pay for one.i use barnstormer to find one and it's so hard to find one that's not super old for under 100k.
Mine is a 1975. I bought it in 2016 for $93k which was a good deal even at the time. Unfortunately prices have about doubled since then. I recommend doing some research to develop a set of comps in order to spot market pricing. I talk about it in this video, hope it helps: ua-cam.com/video/DIMJ7czpfo0/v-deo.html
Don’t forget the big umbrella and the sunshade that also serve as a wing…
And there’s 1 gazillion STCs for this aircraft.
And 135 kts. is maybe not too fast, but from my own experience a few extra knots make a huge difference when you encounter strong headwind.
And and and…
Same reasons I own a 182. Also I disagree with one of your points. With the right setup a 182 can do gravel bars. VGs and big tires make that possible. Big tires aren't for everyone but VGs should be on your airplane regardless of what kind of flying you do.
And that’s how you get me to not watch the video to the end or past the beginning for that matter
As a 2 meter guy the 182 is perfect, lot of legroom for the pilot.