Pilots of America Message Board

Home Live Chat
Go Back   Pilots of America Message Board > Pilot's Lounge > Hangar Talk

Hangar Talk Open forum for discussion of any topic you like, aviation related or otherwise (but no spin zone material, see below).

Virtually all topics in this forum are permitted - so long as they are discussed in a civil manner.

NOTE: Politics and religion and any other topic likely to become highly charged must be posted in The Spin Zone. To gain access to the Spin Zone, click this link and join the Spin Zone group.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old May 12th, 2011, 01:22 AM   #1
Dave daviegrygg is offline
(User ID: daviegrygg)
Filing Flight Plan
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2
Cessna 177 vs 182

I had a scary density altitude moment today in my 1973 Cessna 172M and am parsing and searching and thinking about an upgrade. The cost of a 177 to own and fly are quite a bit less, but I worry about my capacity... I would like to be able to carry 4 adults with luggage.

Any advice would be very helpful.

Dave
daviegrygg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 02:03 AM
Posted in reply to daviegrygg's post "Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #2
Pilawt Pilawt is offline
(User ID: Pilawt)
Pattern Altitude
 
Pilawt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,342
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

A 180-hp C-177 would be a little better load-lifter than your 172, but probably not enough to justify the cost and hassle of selling one airplane and buying another.

A C-182 would be significantly better in the heavy-high-hot department. You might also consider an R172K Hawk XP (195 hp upgradable to 210 hp).
__________________
Jeff Jacobs
C172N-180
Vancouver, Washington USA / KVUO

Pilawt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 02:38 AM
Posted in reply to daviegrygg's post "Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #3
Dave Doggtyred is offline
(User ID: Doggtyred)
Pattern Altitude
 
Doggtyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston area, Texas
Posts: 2,157
The 177 wont give you that much extra, performance wise.

If you do go that route go with the 200 hp RG. And put a powerflow on it.

What the 177 appeals to me with is the wide doors and slightly lower posture. Remember, it was intended to replace the 172, so it's in the same league.
Doggtyred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 07:26 AM
Posted in reply to daviegrygg's post "Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #4
Eric Jensen ejensen is offline
(User ID: ejensen)
Cleared for Takeoff
 
ejensen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Posts: 1,458
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

I would choose a 180 hp 172 conversion or the Hawk XP over either Cardinal. I have a couple hundred hours in a 177RG and really like the plane. It just doesn't like altitude. Big, fat wing, underpowered or something. The 172 conversion with a 0-360 and constant speed prop did better in the mountains and at altitude. Never flew an XP. A 182 would be even better.
__________________
Eric

Last edited by ejensen; May 12th, 2011 at 07:32 AM.
ejensen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 07:27 AM
Posted in reply to Doggtyred's post starting "The 177 wont give you that much extra,..."
  #5
Adam Zucker AdamZ is offline
(User ID: AdamZ)
Touchdown! Greaser!
Pilots Of America Management
 
AdamZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Montgomery County PA
Posts: 14,216
Send a message via Skype™ to AdamZ
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

I agree with the above posters but have to ask about the "incident". What happened?Do you live in a high altitude location and fly out of shorter strips? Perhaps it was just a matter of poor or misplanning. Not trying to be critical of you no one here is perfect but buying a new plane due to one incident seems a bit drastic IMHO. We have members here that have flown high altitude in normally aspirated singles including the renound runway hog the Tiger ( Just a goof on Anthony) By chance is your 172 one of the older models with the 145hp Conti O-300?

By the way welcome to POA
__________________
Adam Zucker
www.mudrickzucker.com

With reasonable men I will reason, with humane men I will plead, with tyrants I will show no mercy. Thomas Jefferson (carved on the Jefferson Memorial at the Tidal Basin)
AdamZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 07:40 AM
Posted in reply to AdamZ's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #6
Freiburgfan31 flyersfan31 is offline
(User ID: flyersfan31)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
flyersfan31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 13,791
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

A 182 is a perfect plane. No excuses needed.
__________________
If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One!

States I have flown to:
flyersfan31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 07:47 AM
Posted in reply to daviegrygg's post "Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #7
iFlyTwins Ted DuPuis is offline
(User ID: Ted DuPuis)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
Ted DuPuis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hamilton, OH
Posts: 16,323
Send a message via AIM to Ted DuPuis
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

172M from the factory I believe should have a 160 HP O-320. The 180 HP O-360 by itself will really wake the plane up.

However, if you want 4 adults and baggage, it's hard to go wrong with a 182. It is easy to go wrong with a Cardinal. The only W&B scare (aft CG) I had was in a Cardinal with four adults and full fuel. Lesson learned: The guy who's been flying the plane for 20 years may not know what it's talking about when he says it's fine.

(I had 65 hours total time back when that happened)
__________________
-Ted
CP-ASEL & AMEL-IA, CFI, CFII, MEI

Plus Belize
http://www.cloudninerescueflights.org/
Ted DuPuis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 08:33 AM
Posted in reply to daviegrygg's post "Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #8
steingar steingar is offline
(User ID: steingar)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
steingar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 18,847
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

One of my good friends was trying to decide between a Cherokee 180 and a Cardinal. His mechanic told him to get the Skylane, as did I. He did, and was glad of it when he retired to Colorado.
steingar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 08:55 AM
Posted in reply to flyersfan31's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #9
Wayne wabower is offline
(User ID: wabower)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
wabower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,018
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Well, almost perfect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersfan31 View Post
A 182 is a perfect plane. No excuses needed.
wabower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 09:18 AM
Posted in reply to wabower's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #10
jhausch jhausch is online now
(User ID: jhausch)
Cleared for Takeoff
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,268
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by wabower View Post
Well, almost perfect.


+1
jhausch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 09:51 AM
Posted in reply to jhausch's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #11
Freiburgfan31 flyersfan31 is offline
(User ID: flyersfan31)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
flyersfan31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 13,791
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Forgot the turbo!!!!
__________________
If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One!

States I have flown to:
flyersfan31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 09:56 AM
Posted in reply to daviegrygg's post "Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #12
uHaveNoIdea CJones is online now
(User ID: CJones)
En-Route
 
CJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Jawjuh
Posts: 4,678
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

The main 'step-up' in going from a 172 to a 177 is the interior dimensions. As already mentioned, the doors are huge, which make getting into the back seats much easier. You *can* get 4 adults and some baggage in a 177RG, but you'll be draining fuel. My family used a 177RG regularly for our annual Thanksgiving trip for 3-4 years. We had 3 adults + my teenage sister and a lot of baggage. We would go with fuel to the tabs and had ~3.5 hr endurance IIRC with a cruise of around 135kts. The highest cruise altitude we were able was somewhere around 8-10k.

With that said, my scariest density-altitude event happened in the same 177RG with 4 adults, no bags, and full-minus-1-hr fuel on a hot day in May.

182RG, OTOH, is a beast. 4 adults, luggage, and 6 hrs of fuel (145kts) coming out of the mountains in TN were a non-event in December.

Edit:
I should also add that, in discussing my future career projection with my wife, she made the off-hand comment of "Well, we could probably get a plane someday, then."
Me (surprised that SHE brought it up): "Oh, ok. What do you want?" (Not expecting a response)
Her (without missing a beat): "182RG of course!"
__________________
States I have personally landed an aircraft in:

Last edited by CJones; May 12th, 2011 at 11:04 AM.
CJones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 10:00 AM
Posted in reply to flyersfan31's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #13
Duncan Skylane81E is offline
(User ID: Skylane81E)
Final Approach
 
Skylane81E's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 8,062
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersfan31 View Post
Forgot the turbo!!!!
Turbo?!

We don't need no stinking turbo!



177 is a great plane but if it's load carrying you're after get a 182.

Also consider a P,Q,R model. P and Q can have a paper STC appied and get an extra 150lbs takeoff weight for what is by aircraft standards chicken feed. The R (and the restart S and T) already have the 3100lb take off weight. Q and later planes do not have bladders but also require 100LL due to higher compression engines so no auto gas STC.

The "new" models, the S and T, are great planes but have bulked up with heavy interiors and the like and do not have the same UL of an older plane equipped for 3100lbs TOW. My 1983 can lift 1250lbs (and launched out of Leadville at a 13,000ft DA with 900) and still be within legal limmits.
__________________
Duncan L. A&P/IA Private S/MEL

'83 Skylane II

"Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me!"

Last plane to depart KISZ 7:59AM 08/29/12
Skylane81E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 10:12 AM
Posted in reply to Ted DuPuis's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #14
3934V Tom-D is offline
(User ID: Tom-D)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
Tom-D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 15,881
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted DuPuis View Post
172M from the factory I believe should have a 160 HP O-320.
The "M" has a 0-320-E2D = 150 horse power
Tom-D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 10:42 AM
Posted in reply to daviegrygg's post "Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #15
harpo skylanerg is offline
(User ID: skylanerg)
Pre-takeoff checklist
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 188
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

You're kinda in my wheel house here. My first plane was a '68 177 (160 RAM) after renting 172s for a few years. My current ride of 8 years is a '78 182RG. Just confirming everything previously posted. Bazzinga!
skylanerg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 02:05 PM
Posted in reply to CJones's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #16
DJones DJones is offline
(User ID: DJones)
Filing Flight Plan
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by CJones View Post

Edit:
I should also add that, in discussing my future career projection with my wife, she made the off-hand comment of "Well, we could probably get a plane someday, then."
Me (surprised that SHE brought it up): "Oh, ok. What do you want?" (Not expecting a response)
Her (without missing a beat): "182RG of course!"

I'm certainly glad, the one day since 2008 that I log into the POA, I'm able to correct the miss-conceptions of my son and wonderful daughter-in-law.... The correct answer would be RV10..... 4 adults, no folding gear to not go down when my grand-kids are in the plane, 165kts easy (to be used to get my grand-kids to me).... and no, you're not getting mine!

Back to hibernation.
Doug
DJones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 02:21 PM
Posted in reply to DJones's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #17
Merf 45R Merf is offline
(User ID: Merf)
Pre-Flight
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 96
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

172M with airplanes conversion....789 lbs payload full fuel. Just make your 4 adults skinny.
Merf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 02:25 PM
Posted in reply to DJones's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #18
Tony tonycondon is offline
(User ID: tonycondon)
Gastons CRO (Chief Dinner Reservation Officer)
 
tonycondon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 15,149
Send a message via AIM to tonycondon Send a message via MSN to tonycondon
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJones View Post
I'm certainly glad, the one day since 2008 that I log into the POA, I'm able to correct the miss-conceptions of my son and wonderful daughter-in-law.... The correct answer would be RV10..... 4 adults, no folding gear to not go down when my grand-kids are in the plane, 165kts easy (to be used to get my grand-kids to me).... and no, you're not getting mine!

Back to hibernation.
Doug


stick around a while Doug!
__________________
Tony Condon
N373Y, N4653T, N6312
http://cherokeesailplanes.blogspot.com
http://www.letsgogliding.com
tonycondon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 02:56 PM
Posted in reply to DJones's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #19
uHaveNoIdea CJones is online now
(User ID: CJones)
En-Route
 
CJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Jawjuh
Posts: 4,678
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJones View Post
I'm certainly glad, the one day since 2008 that I log into the POA, I'm able to correct the miss-conceptions of my son and wonderful daughter-in-law.... The correct answer would be RV10..... 4 adults, no folding gear to not go down when my grand-kids are in the plane, 165kts easy (to be used to get my grand-kids to me)....

Back to hibernation.
Doug
Well, unfortunately, my wonderful wife has not had the pleasure of traveling in this miraculous RV-10.

Quote:
and no, you're not getting mine!
I'll trade ya an RV-7A for an RV-10! Oh wait....
__________________
States I have personally landed an aircraft in:
CJones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 03:02 PM
Posted in reply to CJones's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #20
Tony tonycondon is offline
(User ID: tonycondon)
Gastons CRO (Chief Dinner Reservation Officer)
 
tonycondon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 15,149
Send a message via AIM to tonycondon Send a message via MSN to tonycondon
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by CJones View Post
Well, unfortunately, my wonderful wife has not had the pleasure of traveling in this miraculous RV-10.



I'll trade ya an RV-7A for an RV-10! Oh wait....
actually, speaking of grandkids, he should trade you the 7 for the 10. that way you can bring the kid home next christmas. i've never seen a kiddie seat for the baggage area of a -7. and if the rugrat gets your genes instead of rachels god knows they won't fit back there for long anyway.
__________________
Tony Condon
N373Y, N4653T, N6312
http://cherokeesailplanes.blogspot.com
http://www.letsgogliding.com
tonycondon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 04:30 PM
Posted in reply to Tom-D's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #21
iFlyTwins Ted DuPuis is offline
(User ID: Ted DuPuis)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
Ted DuPuis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hamilton, OH
Posts: 16,323
Send a message via AIM to Ted DuPuis
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom-D View Post
The "M" has a 0-320-E2D = 150 horse power
Thanks for the correction. I knew it was an O-320, I forgot which one.

So the 180 hp upgrade would be even better...
__________________
-Ted
CP-ASEL & AMEL-IA, CFI, CFII, MEI

Plus Belize
http://www.cloudninerescueflights.org/
Ted DuPuis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2011, 06:09 PM
Posted in reply to Ted DuPuis's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #22
Yellowbird Yellowbird is offline
(User ID: Yellowbird)
Pre-takeoff checklist
 
Yellowbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wooster, OH
Posts: 208
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted DuPuis View Post
...It is easy to go wrong with a Cardinal. The only W&B scare (aft CG) I had was in a Cardinal with four adults and full fuel. ...
How did you get a Cardinal loaded aft of the cg? I've run hypothetical loads on my Cardinal, and the only way I could get it out of bounds with an aft cg was to put 650+ pounds of passengers and cargo in the rear seats and baggage area, with a hypothetical 98 lb weakling alone in the front seats. (that was with 20 gallons of fuel)

With full tanks (60 gallons), I could load the baggage compartment to max capacity (120 lbs), fill the rear seats to bring the aircraft to max gross weight with no one up front, and still be forward of the aft limit.

Exceeding gross in a Cardinal is unfortunately easy, but I can't imagine a plausible loading scenario that would exceed the aft CG limits (unless you exceeded the 120 lb weight limit for the baggage compartment).
__________________
Scott

Visit Yellowbird at http://n34774.blogspot.com/!

Yellowbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2011, 01:24 PM
Posted in reply to Yellowbird's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #23
Bob Bement Bob Bement is offline
(User ID: Bob Bement)
Pattern Altitude
 
Bob Bement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vale, Oregon
Posts: 1,705
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

I have flown 54 November now for 16 years and about 1600 hours. I have had it overloaded a few times and in rough places, and in rough air. It has always been up to the task at hand. I think it is a great plane for the job it was designed for. It will haul 4 with some baggage and full fuel. I did that at Rock Springs last year on my way to Gastons. I don't think you can go wrong with a 182 Cessna. Even if it has a straight tail.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSC01061.JPG (90.7 KB, 29 views)
__________________
All I know is just what I read in the papers, and that's an alibi for my ignorance.
. Will Rogers 1879-1935
<><>
1959 Cessna 182 B skylane N9054N

www.youtube.com/skybobb -- My back country flt. videos.
http://share.findmespot.com/shared/f...iXnRFUeJGhiDa6

Follow my trip on my SPOT - PLB Personal Locator Beacon.
Bob Bement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2011, 01:54 PM
Posted in reply to Bob Bement's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #24
3934V Tom-D is offline
(User ID: Tom-D)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
Tom-D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 15,881
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

I believe in keeping the safety margin as wide as possible, So I'd recommend the PA-24 260C it's a better aircraft for the load. with the power to haul 1200# The 0-540 running at 260 horses is virtually bullet proof.
Tom-D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2011, 01:57 PM
Posted in reply to wabower's post "Re: Cessna 177 vs 182"
  #25
UP'er alaskaflyer is offline
(User ID: alaskaflyer)
Final Approach
 
alaskaflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Keewenaw Peninsula, Michigan
Posts: 7,544
Re: Cessna 177 vs 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by wabower View Post
Well, almost perfect.
__________________
"We the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much for so long with so little, we are now qualified to do anything with nothing."
alaskaflyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Home Register New Posts Today's Posts
Go Back   Pilots of America Message Board > Pilot's Lounge > Hangar Talk

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to Fly a Cessna 182 jason Pilot Training 63 May 9th, 2011 01:09 PM
Can an old Cessna 182 haul a load? Bob Bement Hangar Talk 18 June 16th, 2010 10:33 PM
cessna 182 electric trim stapler101 Maintenance Bay 14 May 25th, 2010 09:09 AM
A beautiful Cessna 182 Diana Hangar Talk 27 September 17th, 2008 10:02 AM
Cessna 182 questions Larry Liebscher Hangar Talk 14 July 5th, 2005 06:21 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) 2005 - Pilots of America