172 SP cruise speed??

N747JB

N747JB

Final Approach
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
6,248
Location
Atlanta
Display Name
Display name:
John
I've got a buddy looking at a 172SP, nice airplane, but I'm trying to convince him for the same money he can get a nice 182 and go faster, haul more and be more comfortable.:D Obviously, I haven't been overly successful, but I wanted to get some real numbers to discuss cruise speed with him. :D
So, any actual numbers? I guess let's look at 100-200 under gross and 5-7000 feet to compare it to a 182. It's an SP, so it's the 180 HP model. ;)
Thanks!
 
At around 6K ft you will most likely be around 115 KTAS in the 172SP and 135 KTAS in a 182.
 
N747JB said:
I've got a buddy looking at a 172SP, nice airplane, but I'm trying to convince him for the same money he can get a nice 182 and go faster, haul more and be more comfortable.:D Obviously, I haven't been overly successful, but I wanted to get some real numbers to discuss cruise speed with him. :D
So, any actual numbers? I guess let's look at 100-200 under gross and 5-7000 feet to compare it to a 182. It's an SP, so it's the 180 HP model. ;)
Thanks!
Click to expand...

The 180hp SP I didn't note as any faster than the old 160hp N. it needs the extra power to pick up the extra weight and it did seem to have marginally better runway performance. Cruise speed is subjective to the pilot and how they manage the engine. I use 115kts for a 172, but I can't remember what I'd get that heavy or that high.
 
The 182 will get 15- 20 kts faster at cruise burning about 3 gpH more in fuel. More room and more load carrying capacity.
 
N747JB said:
I've got a buddy looking at a 172SP, nice airplane, but I'm trying to convince him for the same money he can get a nice 182 and go faster, haul more and be more comfortable.:D Obviously, I haven't been overly successful, but I wanted to get some real numbers to discuss cruise speed with him. :D
So, any actual numbers? I guess let's look at 100-200 under gross and 5-7000 feet to compare it to a 182. It's an SP, so it's the 180 HP model. ;)
Thanks!
Click to expand...

Here are the claimed cruise speed numbers from a POH with the KTAS at 4000 feet highlighted for different power levels. The comments say to add 1 knot for every 150 lbs below gross:

Cessna172S_Cruise_Speeds.jpg
 
I'd say you can get 120 KTAS out of a 172 SP without going nuts with the power.

I have a picture that shows 118 KTAS without being leaned fully, that was at 4,500 ft MSL about 120 under gross, around 70 F. That's what I usually expect to see out of the SP I fly.
 
Thanks, I was figuring 115-120 knots, I think he wanted me to drool over his choice of the 172 for him to fly and his wife to train in. I told him to make he sure he flies both of them, I think he'll be disappointed in the 172, he also ones a 421.;)
 
tehmightypirate said:
I'd say you can get 120 KTAS out of a 172 SP without going nuts with the power.

I have a picture that shows 118 KTAS without being leaned fully, that was at 4,500 ft MSL about 120 under gross, around 70 F. That's what I usually expect to see out of the SP I fly.
Click to expand...

I concur. Our club has 3 of them.


Edit - for the $$ I would go with an older 182 over the 172 SP.
 
Last edited:
Our club 172sp would get 120-125ktas @2500rpm. Engine only had a couple hundred hours. The 182 I rent gets about 130kts but climbs better and carries more weight.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    109.5 KB · Views: 64
Mike5250 said:
Our club 172sp would get 120-125ktas @2500rpm. Engine only had a couple hundred hours. The 182 I rent gets about 130kts but climbs better and carries more weight.
Click to expand...
What altitude are you getting 120-125 true?
 
I used to fly from VA to Chicago, MI, GA and the like in a couple 172SP's. I always burned 8.5 gal an hour and was usually about 120kts. I only planned for 115 kts True, but I was usually at 120. I typically went as high as I could depending on the weather. I was usually by myself, with light bags.

If I was doing a short flight I was closer to 10gal an hr on the fuel, but on a long trip I did a lot better. I also would usually time a decent for about a 200 fpm decent to trade altitude for airspeed. It usually put me in the green/yellow area without a whole lot of power reduction. From 11K of Alt, that helps a lot. Especially if you are doing 170GS before the decent.
 
Ron Levy said:
Don't know what you mean by "going nuts," but that's at least 75% power. 115-120 KTAS is a pretty good range to figure depending on altitude.
Click to expand...

Whoops, that was from an edit. I had wrote 110 KTAS "without going nuts" and then put in my 120 KTAS that we got very rich of peak at 2480 RPM (top of the green band). I then figured that was not really necessary info and cut it down but the "going nuts" remained erroneously.

Yes, 120 KTAS is probably 75% power +/- some.
 
120 kts at what we jokingly referred to as "max flight school power". Kind of like a rental car can go anywhere...
 
Well heck, if its balls to the wall you want to know. I have seen 150 KTAS in my T182T at 6000. I was trying to realistic in my first post.
 
Last edited:
N747JB said:
Thanks, I was figuring 115-120 knots, I think he wanted me to drool over his choice of the 172 for him to fly and his wife to train in. I told him to make he sure he flies both of them, I think he'll be disappointed in the 172, he also ones a 421.;)
Click to expand...

OK, so he already owns a serious travel machine and wants a training plane for the wife. Great! Why not choose something that would be fun for him to fly as well? I'd personally pick a Citabria or similar, great training plane, and after the training they'd both have something fun with character for lazy weekend morning flights. Rent a 172 for 5hrs to transition her to tricycle gear after she gets the PPL.

JMHO.
 
Bill Jennings said:
OK, so he already owns a serious travel machine and wants a training plane for the wife. Great! Why not choose something that would be fun for him to fly as well? I'd personally pick a Citabria or similar, great training plane, and after the training they'd both have something fun with character for lazy weekend morning flights. Rent a 172 for 5hrs to transition her to tricycle gear after she gets the PPL.

JMHO.
Click to expand...

That is what our CFI/mechanic told him, if he wants something fun, get something FUN. He's all over the board, and asks for my advice, then goes off in a different direction. He started on older 182's P-Q models, after seeing the price and equipment, he moved to newer ones, then finally I found a G1000 equipped one at a pretty good price that is really nice. Last night I get an email about this 172.:mad2:
He's a pretty good size guy, not fat, but 6'1 or so, maybe 240, works out a lot, with broad shoulders etc. Not sure he'd be as comfortable in a 172 as a 182, but someone has told him it's "too heavy" for his wife.:dunno: She's 5'9 130-140 lbs and works out 5 days a week, I'm pretty sure she's strong enough to handle a 182.:rolleyes:
 
I see between 119 and 121 KTAS in our 172SP running 50-100 LOP at 5k-8k cruise (that's WOTLOP at 2500 rpm), but we have just about every speed mod you can get on it. Pressure recovery wheelpants, flap gap seals, exhaust fairing, matched injectors, you name it. A more realistic speed of 115 would be a good number to use for most 172-SP's.
 
Last edited:
And for comparison, a 1978 172N with the AirPlains conversion can do almost the same performance with some 250+ lb extra useful load.

I'm not impressed with the SPs. They have reasonably nice (but complex) autopilots and "interesting" nav receivers, but they aren't as capable as they should be given their price point.
 
He is wanting something "newer" so he's looking at Cessnas after they restarted production.;) I have been pushing him towards 182's but he went and looked at this SP today and liked it, but he seller is pretty firm on his number. For almost the same money he can buy a higher time 182S, but it ain't my money. :rolleyes:

MAKG1 said:
And for comparison, a 1978 172N with the AirPlains conversion can do almost the same performance with some 250+ lb extra useful load.

I'm not impressed with the SPs. They have reasonably nice (but complex) autopilots and "interesting" nav receivers, but they aren't as capable as they should be given their price point.
Click to expand...
 
N747JB said:
Not sure he'd be as comfortable in a 172 as a 182, but someone has told him it's "too heavy" for his wife.:dunno: She's 5'9 130-140 lbs and works out 5 days a week, I'm pretty sure she's strong enough to handle a 182.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Just land it flaps 20.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Henning said:
Heck, just use the trim and you can use flaps 40 with no great strength required.
Click to expand...

No doubt, but if you do a full power go around, it will require great strength until you can get back to the trim wheel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
dell30rb said:
No doubt, but if you do a full power go around, it will require great strength until you can get back to the trim wheel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Noticeable strength, not great strength. Full power go-arounds with full flaps are very often checkout requirements. It's definitely heavier than a 172, but it can be done.
 
dell30rb said:
No doubt, but if you do a full power go around, it will require great strength until you can get back to the trim wheel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Not really that difficult to hit the throttle and go straight to the trim. You can be trimmed for Vy before the plane accelerates to it, then clean up the flaps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top