Cessna 182 vs Super 170

[motoadve]

 

[Deelee]

Which one won?

 

[motoadve]

Depends on the mission.
182 is more versatile, Super 170 more for off airport and more fun to fly.
182 can do more (IFR, travel faster, more room).

 

[steingar]

Seems like a poor comparison to me. Comparing a 182 to a 180 would seem more appropriate to my old bald fat self.

 

[Narwhal]

I've never flown a 170 although I've ogled and fondled quite a few. If I'm flying for recreation/fun/adventure I'd probably rather have the 170 especially if it's a super 170 with an O-360. If I'm flying for somewhat practical transportation between airports the 182 usually carries more weight, farther, faster. I actually wanted a 170 when I was shopping for airplanes but 180 HP 170's were considerably more expensive than 182's that were 10-20 years newer ($80k 170s vs $60k 182s). Personally I find 182's kind of boring and wish I had a 170, but alas I own a C182B. Part of the problem is that C170B are few in number and getting ancient. Purchasing the O-360 STC for them is also getting to be cost prohibitive, so you have to find one that's already had it done if you want the 180 HP motor.

 

[Southpaw]

I've never flown a 170 although I've ogled and fondled quite a few. If I'm flying for recreation/fun/adventure I'd probably rather have the 170 especially if it's a super 170 with an O-360. If I'm flying for somewhat practical transportation between airports the 182 usually carries more weight, farther, faster. I actually wanted a 170 when I was shopping for airplanes but 180 HP 170's were considerably more expensive than 182's that were 10-20 years newer ($80k 170s vs $60k 182s). Personally I find 182's kind of boring and wish I had a 170, but alas I own a C182B. Part of the problem is that C170B are few in number and getting ancient. Purchasing the O-360 STC for them is also getting to be cost prohibitive, so you have to find one that's already had it done if you want the 180 HP motor.

I looked at a 170B before buying my 172. It was a late 1956 model with 1950 hours TT . All original . Interior was a bit ratty but had been hangered all its life. Two old farmer buddies in their late 80's and early 90's. Both lost medicals , plane hadn't been flown in 5 years but was just annualed when I looked at it. They had owned it since nearly new.

 

[Narwhal]

I looked at a 170B before buying my 172. It was a late 1956 model with 1950 hours TT . All original . Interior was a bit ratty but had been hangered all its life. Two old farmer buddies in their late 80's and early 90's. Both lost medicals , plane hadn't been flown in 5 years but was just annualed when I looked at it. They had owned it since nearly new.

Yep, I looked at a few kind of like that except probably not as nice as the one you describe considering the low corrosion potential in Montana. Usually the barn finds that haven't flown for 5+ years are going to be megabuck maintenance problems unfortunately.

 

[motoadve]

Seems like a poor comparison to me. Comparing a 182 to a 180 would seem more appropriate to my old bald fat self.

Unfortunately all the C180 pilots I know wont take their planes off airport., so no 180 to compare to.

 

[EdFred]

Unfortunately all the C180 pilots I know wont take their planes off airport., so no 180 to compare to.

What's the point of a tail-dragger if you aren't going off-roading/off-airporting?

 

[Lowflynjack]

What's the point of a tail-dragger if you aren't going off-roading/off-airporting?

Still sexy as hell!

 

[idahoflier]

You should have titled this "Super 182 vs Super 170" as your C182 is hardly stock... ;-)