1967 Cessna 182K

[Donnie Long]

I messed up on year. It's a 1967 not 64. New to the forum and just wanted to get some opinions on this model I might be purchasing. Pro's and Con's. Thanks in advance.

 

[Pilawt]

1964 model was the 182G (s/n 18255059-18255844 -- some 1965 model 182Hs were built in calendar year 1964, as well). 182K was the 1967 model (s/n 18257626-18258505). Major differences between the two were the 182K's updated instrument panel, one-piece windshield and restyled cowl and spinner.

When new they were very capable, comfortable airplanes. The 182 is the third-most-popular lightplane ever built (behind C-172 and C-150/152), so it had a lot going for it. 55 years later, however, it's safe to say that no two airplanes are exactly alike, even if they came off the same production line. Each individual airplane should be judged on its own merits for equipment, condition, general TLC, history, etc., etc.

 

[Donnie Long]

1964 model was the 182G (s/n 18255059-18255844 -- some 1965 model 182Hs were built in calendar year 1964, as well). 182K was the 1967 model (s/n 18257626-18258505). Major differences between the two were the 182K's updated instrument panel, one-piece windshield and restyled cowl and spinner.

When new they were very capable, comfortable airplanes. The 182 is the third-most-popular lightplane ever built (behind C-172 and C-150/152), so it had a lot going for it. 55 years later, however, it's safe to say that no two airplanes are exactly alike, even if they came off the same production line. Each individual airplane should be judged on its own merits for equipment, condition, general TLC, history, etc., etc.

Crap, I meant 1967

 

[midwestpa24]

Crap, I meant 1967

Even better! Its three years newer than a 1964!

I don't think there is anything that really stands out bad about any of the 60s model 182s. There were minor changes from year to year, but they are all still a 182 at heart.

After 50-60 years, those year to year differences may mean even less as panels have probably been updated, perhaps STCs have been added. You really have to just look at the airplane individually to ensure it is in good condition. Try to eliminate expensive surprises after purchase.

 

[brcase]

Pretty hard to go wrong with any of the C-182 model Line as long has it has been well maintained.
It is not really excellent at anything in particular, but it will do more things well than just about any other airplane.
It is a good cross country plane
It is a good load hauler ( you can fill all 4 seats)
It is a good backcountry/camping plane
It is a good skydiving plane
It is a good Glider/Banner Tug
It is a good IFR platform
It is a good Training airplane
It is reasonably economical to fly and maintain.

you can find a lot of planes that will do any of those things better, but not m(any) that will do them all as well.
and I probably missed a few things.

as far as models the major changes that come to mind to me are the early models had lighter controls.
By 1962 they had shorter landing gear and a wider cabin.
They made some changes over the years in fuel capacity.

I haven't flown the restart models 1990's and later much. but I personally seem to prefer the 1962-1980's models, although I know a lot of pilot prefer the Pre-1962 models especially the A and B models.

Brian
CFIIIG/ASEL

 

[GeorgeC]

Flew one for 5 years, good plane. The extended baggage STC would have been nice.

 

[ktup-flyer]

PM me your email

 

[MountainDude]

Pros - it's an awesome plane
Cons - it's a sellers' market