172 vs 182

I am in the market for a plane to solo in. I have started my
training in a 182, should I buy a cheaper 172 to build some hours
then resell for a 182 or spend the money now on a 182. Money isn't
the problem. Will I have any problem with red tap finishinf my
training in a 182? I am planning on both short joy rides and
longhaul trips for 4 adults in the future.
Anybody have any thoughts either way?

-- Wayne Heil, December 10, 2007

Answers

Time in type is important for safety. If you want to fly a 182, you should fly a 182. Do recognize that the plane will handle differently at gross weight with people in the back than with just you and your instructor in front (i.e., throw some young CFIs back there and practice stalls with four people on board). As far as the FAA is concerned, the only difference is that the C182 would require a high-performance endorsement, but I'm pretty sure that a student pilot could get one, just as a student pilot can train in a tailwheel airplane, which also requires an endorsement.

-- Philip Greenspun, December 16, 2007

I have had 2 172's and 2 182's The NA (no turbo) 182 will use the same amount of gas if flown the same speed as a 172S so I bought a NA 182T in 2006 and then bought a new NA 182T in 2008. I would go with the 182 insurance is about the same for both planes.

-- john jones, July 15, 2008

172 vs. 182: I did the same comparison on the Piper Warrior (-151) vs. the Piper Dakota (-236). At low altitude, the Dakota might be slightly thirstier doing the same speed, but since it has double climb performance, it pays to cruise higher, and suddenly it is as economical as the Warrior. At FL100, it will cruise 120 KTAS on 9,0 gph (53% power), while the Warrior burns the same doing 115 KTAS (75% power) at FL80. This supports Wayne Heils 182/172 comparison. But - it takes discipline to fly a great plane so slowly.

-- Henrik Vaeroe, July 15, 2008

Wayne,

I'm working towards my PVT and was first training in a C-172SP Skyhawk with G1000. I decided to buy a near-new 2005 Cessna 182T with G1000 to finish my PVT in and then, use for my Instrument Rating. While I had to rebuild some time-20 hrs-with my CFI for the high-performance endorsement-and as a requirement by the insurance co. before soloing (again). I would not go back to a 172. I'd get the C182T Skylane with G1000 or if need be, an earlier model. Be aware of the crankshaft AD for the 182-S models-late 90s-to 2003-it will eventually have to be replaced at some point. The 2004- and later model 182T's -didn't have that AD issue and were more aerodynamic-a few kts faster, perhaps to boot. The 182 Skylane is the plane you'll want to fly in the future-especially with 4 adults (I wouldn't fly 4 adults in a 172, myself). In fact, there are several Turbo 182Ts priced at the same price as a normally-aspirated 182T right now-with comparable hrs.-see Controller.com or ASO.com. The Turbos outsold the non-turbos and my FBO mechanic said the later turbos usually make it to the 2000 hrs. TBO. I'll probably buy a Turbo, myself someday, as I plan on more Western U.S. flights. Even with the impressive useful loads of 182s, you'll have to watch the weight-probably flying with the fuel to "the tabs" 64 gallons on the long-hauls with 4 adults. Expect that the passengers will want a bathroom break and fill-up then. As the previous posts said, you can dial your speed down to conserve the fuel-at 22-MP and 2300 RPMs and using the lean-assist feature on the Garmin, I can get my fuel burn down to about 11-12 GPH in my non-turbo 182T. Flight plan for 15 GPH, though.

-- Dean Phillips, August 25, 2009