172 to 182Q upgrade question

P

PilotMedic865

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jun 24, 2019
Messages
31
Display Name
FlyBoy913
We’re in the process of adding a Cessna 182Q to our club fleet. Currently, we operate a 172G, which I’ve been using for IFR cross-country flights. Typically, I cruise around 95 KIAS and can reach about 6,000 feet on a cool day. While the 172G is a solid aircraft, it’s somewhat limited in cross-country capability.

I’m a commercial helicopter pilot with experience flying twin turbine helicopters professionally, though my fixed-wing time is limited, with the Cherokee 180 being the most capable airplane I’ve flown to date. I understand that every aircraft has its own characteristics, but I’m looking to get a general idea of what to expect in terms of performance from the 182Q compared to the 172G.

Specifically, I’d like to know:

  • Typical cruise speed and fuel burn for the 182Q
  • What altitude does the 182 seem to like the best for performance
  • General performance differences we can expect
We have a CFI available who is willing to provide high performance endorsements for those in the club transitioning to the 182Q.
 
PilotMedic865 said:
I’d like to know:

  • Typical cruise speed and fuel burn for the 182Q
  • What altitude does the 182 seem to like the best for performance
  • General performance differences we can expect
Click to expand...
1. 140kts-ish, 13gph-ish
2. Same as a 172
3. Be prepared for a different sight picture and control pressures.
 
3. A little more right rudder on takeoff. Cowl-flaps and prop control, with manifold pressure gauge. A little nose-heavy with tendency to land flat; use trim and yoke. Rudder trim. Uneven fuel feed left to right.
 
Not sure of the range in the 172, but 182Q with the long range tanks will easily do 600nm. It can do more if you don't push the speed and can fly at 6-10K.
 
1. 133 - 135 kts at 10-12k on 10-11 gph
2. I like 8-12 k but I'm near the Rockies, our 182Q climbs quite good to 10k, I plan on 12.5k for a comfortable ceiling but have been to 14k a few times without issues but not much performance left at that altitude.
3. Only major difference between them is in the flare with the extra weight on the nose of the 182, everything else is very minor
 
Sweet spot for my 182R seems to be 7000 - 9000.
 
Everybody above covered it. Our club is in the same process. About half our members have also been flying a 182 outside the club as well.

If you can fly a 172, you can fly a 182. 7K -9K at 135kts & 12-13gph. You’ll need to empty your bladder before getting into IFR reserve gas limits.
 
What's wrong with your 172 that it tops out at 6000 feet? My father had a 172N Skyhawk, which has 10 more hp and wheel pants. When he bought it, he sent me to Oklahoma to bring it back to Georgia, and it gladly climbed to 9500 feet and was going around 110 kts at 65% power.
 
What everybody else said, plus, slightly different glide picture, be sure to practice engine-out landings.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
A little nose-heavy with tendency to land flat
Click to expand...
I'm going to say more "than a little." The 182 is very nose heavy. Pulling power to idle in the flare has been a major factor in 182 firewall damage as the airplane drops onto it's nose. That's a prebuy concern, but beyond that something easily dealt with with proper transition training.
 
I've never flown a 182, but I went from a 172 to a 206 with no big learning curve. Stomp on the right pedal harder on takeoff, carry in a touch of power until the flare. The nose is going to be noticeably heavier. Heavier than you expect even after everyone says it.

Most of all enjoy !!
 
IMO, having flown them all and owned many of them, excluding the ground handling uniquenesses of the taildraggers, the Cessna line from 172 to 206 is basically the same plane with different engines (this is literally true in terms of the evolutions of the type certificates). As you go up, you get a few more complexities like prop control and cowl flaps and they’re a little heavier in feel and tend to go faster and climb better, but the reality is if you can fly a 172, you can fly a 206. 182 is an extremely easy step up from 172, and so much more of a useful plane.

I’ve never flown one that does 140 knots as a prior poster suggested, but maybe they exist. It’s been a while since I’ve owned one or flown one regularly, but I’d conservatively expect something like 125-135 knots depending on engine settings and altitude, and 12-14gph. Nose heaviness is a real thing, but easily overcome with a little weight in the back (leave your emergency gear and a couple gallons of water in the very back and you’re good).
 
AA5Bman said:
I’ve never flown one that does 140 knots as a prior poster suggested, but maybe they exist.
Click to expand...
I've typically seen 130-135 unless I was flying a turbo model. The fixed gear turbos ones will get you about 140. Find a nice 182RG and you'll see more, up into the 150s, but it's still limited by the airframe. These are, after all, carriers not speedsters.
 
AA5Bman said:
I’ve never flown one that does 140 knots as a prior poster suggested, but maybe they exist. It’s been a while since I’ve owned one or flown one regularly, but I’d conservatively expect something like 125-135 knots depending on engine settings and altitude, and 12-14gph. Nose heaviness is a real thing, but easily overcome with a little weight in the back (leave your emergency gear and a couple gallons of water in the very back and you’re good).
Click to expand...

I’ve regularly flown a 182Q that cruises easily at 140 kts and can true at 145 kts most of the time. When I used to fly a bunch of different 172s I remember that each one was a little bit different than the other. A little rigging difference here and there or some other reason and the speeds were different. I’m sure that 182s are the same. Also, the speeds that I mentioned above are when it’s not topped off and there is 1 POB. Loaded up with more fuel and passengers, and it surely will fly slower.
 
Last edited:
Just echoing others, more nose heavy than you are used to for landing. A few landings with the instructor should get you used to it.

For take offs, more right rudder. When the elevator trim is set correctly for take off the plane will tell you when it is ready to fly.

Also plan one training flight near MGW just to get used to the feel.
 
We’ve had a 77 182Q for 15 years, very good aircraft, I plan 130 knots at 13 GPH. Depending on load I’ve seen 135 a few times. Throwing a case of oil or water in the baggage area helps a little when flying without rear passengers. My son has flown it since he was 15, soloed in it on his 16th birthday, 15 years ago. There are simple enough for a primary student, but fast enough to be a decent cross country machine. I recommend get a fuel stick, the tanks do not burn equally! I use 15 GPH for flight planning and I’m never disappointed with my fuel reserves.
Pay attention if you ever need ground power, most Q models are 28 volt, the 77’s are 14! It’ll burn up some stuff quickly, but man that prop turns fast!!
 
N747JB said:
Pay attention if you ever need ground power, most Q models are 28 volt, the 77’s are 14! It’ll burn up some stuff quickly, but man that prop turns fast!!
Click to expand...
And vice-versa, trying to jump a 24V ship with 12v can damage components as well.
 
PilotMedic865 said:
We’re in the process of adding a Cessna 182Q to our club fleet.
Click to expand...
Congrats. It's a great plane for a club *IF* you can get people good transition training. It is not just a more powerful 172, and there's a lot of bent firewalls and props to prove it.

Don't ever let it bounce more than once. If you bounce again, go around. Third bounce is the prop strike.

PilotMedic865 said:
Typical cruise speed and fuel burn for the 182Q
Click to expand...
130-135 knots and 13 gph.

PilotMedic865 said:
  • What altitude does the 182 seem to like the best for performance
Click to expand...
Like any other normally aspirated single, 9,000 feet or so is the sweet spot for longer flights if you're running 65%.

PilotMedic865 said:
  • General performance differences we can expect
Click to expand...
It'll climb much better, cruise better, and ride the bumps better. It'll haul more and burn more (fuel). But it's a great plane to get into, as it's significantly faster than the trainer class airplanes like the 172, but not so much so that it'll get you into trouble.

When landing, get in the habit of holding the amount of back pressure you had at touchdown all the way until the yoke hits the aft stop.

AA5Bman said:
I’ve never flown one that does 140 knots as a prior poster suggested, but maybe they exist.
Click to expand...
I've flown new ones (182T - Not T182) that did 140, but I wouldn't expect most 182s to do that. 130-135 is much more common, and some of the oldest ones only go 125.
 
TrueCourse said:
I’ve regularly flown a 182Q that cruises easily at 140 kts and can true at 145 kts most of the time. When I used to fly a bunch of different 172s I remember that each one was a little bit different than the other. A little rigging difference here and there or some other reason and the speeds were different. I’m sure that 182s are the same. Also, the speeds that I mentioned above are when it’s not topped off and there is 1 POB. Loaded up with more fuel and passengers, and it surely will fly slower.
Click to expand...
You honestly might want to have your airspeed indicator calibrated, but maybe so - that strikes me as an extremely fast 182. I owned a 182Q as well and it had an aftermarket turbo to boot, and only did 130 knots. I had it rigged and everything and never got it to go any faster which was always a disappointment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top