I'm thinking of downsizing my fleet (A Seneca II and a Cherokee 180) to just one plane that can do the high and (fairly) fast thing, yet fit in my highly overpriced T-hangar and still be good for the burger runs and so on. I can't afford the rent nor the wait for a hangar big enough on my field to hold the Seneca II.

There's a few on the short list, and the turbo charged 182R (retractable gear, turbocharged 182) looks like the one for me.

Any long-term owners of one chime in?

I'm tire kicking, but could be serious about it fairly soon.

worst landing I've ever made was in a C182 RG, It lands really strange. Any operators have thoughts.?

I owned a N/A 182 RG for several years and I have flown the turbo....

Personally, I would go for the N/A model, unless you live in the Mountains... But even then, they haul a load really well....

I often flew the N/A in the mid teens.

There is nothing strange about the way they land at all. The small high pressure tires are easy to slide and flat-spot.

One of the best airplanes Cessna ever built IMHO.....

Larry,

Over at CPS there are several folks who have had a non-restart turbo 182 for quite a while. Some of them may come here once in a while but...you may have btter luck there. You might also get hands on a copy of John Frank's 182 Buyers Guide - immensely useful for any 182 purchase.

That said, the non-restart turbo 182s have a few quirks. The biggest is that they are all wet wing planes. If the tank seal is all good, not a huge problem - but if it ever did leak - or develops a leak - they are far worse than bladders to fix. A CPS member just went through a tank reseal and it was a mess by his accounts. Seems unlike Mooney, which has a least a couple of shops that specialize in fixing wink tank sealant issues, there is no shop with such expertise. Maybe second biggest is that the motor is oddly turbo charged, the waste gate and throttle are linked and throttle lever movement affects both. Odd linkage, not used elsewhere and reputed to be a pain if parts fail or there are adjustment issues. Last, Cessna 1XX/2xx retractable gear have challenges, both in the actuating system and the attendant brake lines. If the brake lines have not been done since new, get a big discount or walk - especially if any brake line swivels which are apparently made of a special, rare isotope of unobtanium.

Good luck...

RAS

Like every 182 they are nose heavy - and the turbos even more so...VGs may help but there have been well documented reports of serious upper end speed loss.

RAS

A Bonanza can do just about anything the 182rg can do, including go fast and land on a grass strip. There are a decent number of tc or turbonormalized bonanzas out there if you want to go high. Bonanzas have a 6 seat option unlike 182s.

Not sure if there is a significant cost difference to purchase. ( I know, not what you asked, but this is a Beech forum...)

If you like Pipers, anything wrong with a turbo lance or Saratoga?

I used to fly a club 182RG (NA). Phenomenal airplane. If memory serves ours had 1250 useful, cruised at 155 KTAS, landed on a dime. You can depart close to MGW and still get a good climb rate to 14k.

It is carbureted. I was renting wet so I never tried LOP operations. I hear there are tricks.

A Bo is better. Little spindly crappy designed RG gear in the Cessna and small tires. There's no upside.

I have lots of time in non-restart N/A C182RGs and a bit of time in a turbo C182RG.

I liked the N/A C182RG - honest performing, easy handling aeroplanes. Took them into lots of bush strips with no issues.

While I never took the turbo C182RG above 10,000', I was underwhelmed by this aeroplane - insufficient speed increase to justify the increase in fuel burn.

As for landing weird - nah, lands like a Cessna.

Personally, if a C182 was on my shopping list I would go for a restart model. Great aeroplane IMO - good performance, good load carrying (if not loaded up with "toys"), easy handling, great range, very comfortable touring aeroplane.

Then again, if I wanted a four seater, I would buy a Bonanza.

I can't think of anything a C182RG can do that a Bo won't. I often cruised the N/A V35B in the low teens and even had it up to 19,000' on one occasion.

I flew my V35 in formation with a Turbo Skylane RG from Utah to Alaska and back. What I found was that at non-oxygen altitudes I had to pull back some power for him to keep up, but by the time he got to 14,000' or so, he was a bit faster. We almost never flew that high, of course.

Plus, the V35 just plain looked better.

Tank problems seem to occur if flaps are repeatedly extended near the high limits for speed 1000's of times. The flap track is mounted to a tank brace. Problem doesn't occur very often, but it can occur if flown carelessly. Owners who know, extend flaps and gear at lower speeds. Choose the right plane.
. It's said to be a set-up that shouldnt work, but it works very well. If you want a 182RG, don't be afraid of the TR182. Cabin noise is significantly quieter than my NA, but add $5-10 per hr for the turbo rebuild and typical maintenance. . Brake swivel assemblies are an expensive Cessna part. Rebuild parts are not available in the parts book from Cessna. If the R/TR182 were an experimental model, those assemblies would be rebuilt with a standard O-ring.

Now, Richard mentioned the doozie; the main pivots. They are crazy expensive. AKA "saddles" they are the big aluminum assemblies which hold the bearings that hold the main gear legs. Not a Cessna stock item, one can take months to get. Cessna prices them at $15-17,000 ea. depending on which side. Order one and they wait until they get an order quota before they have Boeing make a few pre sold units. An machine shop and 182RG owner in WA got fed up, developed an improvement. Promoted as a permanent fix, he got FAA approval and charges a still salty $5000, with only a 3-week lead time. (ingenuity is an example of what we need more of for GA.). Trick to manage the outrageousness is to simply pay attention by checking gear leg end play at pre-buy, and when jacked at every annual. If end play gets excessive, thrust is placed on the housing instead of the bearing. Then housing cracks. You can't see the crack, so if you jack the plane at pre-buy, let gear hang straight down, grab and try to move the gear leg in-out. If there's end play, stop the inspection and run to the next specimen. If there's no end play, which there usually isn't, then the pivots are ok. Said not to be from hard landings, simply bearing wear.

Landing is not a problem with practice. Controls are heavy, but can be gotten used to. I land better with 20* flaps than 30*. I don't know why, but I'm not the only one.
Not pretty, and not fast, the 182RG is a very utilitarian airplane. The TR182 is even better. One of the best things about the model is the derated Lycoming O-540-J. If flown very regularly, it should be without cam and lifter spalling. In that case, it will easily make beyond the 2000 hr. TBO. That will sure lower your per hour operating cost.

I'll just say a few things on the 182RG N/A Version.

I love it. Our club has one airplane, its a 182RG and its a great one. I have legit evidence of Flying 161kts TAS level at 8,000ft with 21"/2300rpm. Block time and fuel was 3.1 hours and 13gph. We had 2 people, luggage, 1/2 tanks. We started with full tanks and had room for another 250lbs to put in the cabin.

If you look at the aviation consumer articles about the 182RG, they always get great reviews.

I am not sure about the Turbo, but if you NEED it great! Otherwise the NA will still lift the same, and it will go faster below 10k, and less worry and expense. The Lycoming o-540 is a solid performer. Just make sure you monitor the Carb temp in high humidity conditions.

And they're just as easy as a 172 to fly. Just watch its a little nose heavy. Either little more nose up trim or just a touch of power on landing. Cruise 140KIAS and dirty stall 37KIAS, and make 6-8 hour drives in 2-3 hours, with everything you could stuff in your SUV.

Its a great choice.

Thanks!

I got used to the turbocharged Seneca II and I live out west and cross mountains regularly. Once you go turbo, well it is hard to go back. I like the FIKI and twin engines. But generally, these days, I don't really fly in a lot of conditions that require it. Mostly anymore, I avoid such flights.

I don't need the seats in the Seneca II anymore, 4 is plenty. Useful load is always nice to have.

The engine is a bit odd, carbureted and turbocharged with the linkage thing. It also has a dual mag. But I've been flying Continental TSIO360's with their non-wastegate turbos, so I'm used to weird turbos.

Heavy controls, especially pitch in landing configuration - I'm used to that too.

I'd also consider an A36TC, but it's a big chunk more money to buy and I don't need the seats. Usually, the number of seats increases the insurance rates. Like them well enough though.

A Turbo 210 would be much better. Take out the back seats and have a 4 seater with huge baggage. Probably run with your Seneca pretty easy.

We were having a pre-buy done on our 205 by a Cessna specialist that maintained a bunch of Government 182's. He told me ha hated the TR182's… said the turbo was the goofiest afterthought ever put on a GA Certified plane.

I think they had the dual mag/single drive if I'm not mistaken. The NTSB has identified it as a source of engine failures in more than a few crashes.

If you are not looking for a lot of payload (2 or 3 pax with bags), then you might want to look a a Cardinal RG with the TATI turbocharger. Mine is an earlier version without the intercooler. It will cruise at 160 knots in the mid teens on 8.5 gph LOP. Cost of ownership will be about half of a T182RG or T210. The Lycoming IO360 will easily go to 2000 TBO. The cabin is the widest in the class, 48", about 3 to 4" wider than a Bo, Mooney and T182. You can cruise climb at 105 knots and see 500 FPM all the way into the flight levels. Handling is much lighter than a Beech, Mooney or other Cessna. It can take off from any 3,000' strip regardless of altitude. I used to fly into/out of Coyote Flats that was 9989' and 2900'. I have Roy Sobchuck's wing tips and VGs. It will stall somewhere around 37 knots.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N4NV ... V/tracklog
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZxVtGcuMn8

Vince