182 R owner looking at P 210 upgrade.

Loveair

Loveair

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
110
Location
Birmingham, AL
Display Name
Display name:
Loveair
Title says it all. I am a 500 hour IFR rated pilot. Looking for increased speed and ability to climb over small summer storms. Any P 210 advice would be useful. Positive or negative.
 
Turbo 182 rg perhaps? not pressurized but better engine :D
 
I'm surprised Cessna manufactures the 206 and not the 210. The 210 is a natural upgrade from the 182. Check the width of your current hangar, as the 210 has a broader wingspan. The pressurized versions add extra cost to the annuals, and something I'd look into before making the pressurized/non-pressurized decision.
 
NordicDave said:
I'm surprised Cessna manufactures the 206 and not the 210. The 210 is a natural upgrade from the 182. Check the width of your current hangar, as the 210 has a broader wind span. The pressurized versions add extra cost to the annuals, and something I'd look into before making the pressurized/non-pressurized decision.
Click to expand...

206 has a solid commercial user base. 210 as a step up is apparently not enough volume to justify the cost. I suspect folks who are stepping up are going turbine (not "tubing" autocorrect!) (Malibu, etc.) or cabin class.
 
Last edited:
jsstevens said:
... 210 as a step up is apparently not enough volume to justify the cost. I suspect folks who are stepping up are going tubing (Malibu, etc.) or cabin class.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. I bet the cost of a new pressurized 210 would approach an entry level turbine-prop. Even if the 210 was $300K less at that price level these are business users where the extra cost is nominal for a lot of additional performance and capacity.
 
I looked on Controller the other day. Seemed like there were a ton of P210's on there all of a sudden.
 
Yep. The ones I,m looking at are in the 175k to 225k range.
 
How’s the reliability/maintenance on the P210? Is parts availability becoming a problem?
 
They're complex planes, but nothing excessively so. With good pre-buy, a realistic expectation of the first year's annual, a realistic idea of running costs, it should be a good candidate. I've always loved the P210 from afar, they're good performers. I think they only have about 3.25psi cabin, so realistically anything above 20000ft is beyond its scope.
 
Kansas Flyer said:
Is parts availability a problem for Comanche's? I've always admired them and would like to have one someday.
Click to expand...

The comment was slightly tongue in cheek. BL, I'm not gonna derail the thread, but no, it's not a problem for the wear and tear type items (bladders et al). The gear components, and any kind of airframe (especially wing) repair otoh is where things get dicey. Best way to avoid an AOG nightmare on a Comanche is to have another one on retainer as a cannibal bird. Other than that, it's no different than the opportunity cost of owning a high parts count orphaned complex airplane from the 60s. The performance vs value ratio on the 250s is off the charts imo, much less so for the much higher priced B and later (all the injected) models.

I would also suggest it takes a more involved owner and relatively well-rehearsed AP on Comanches in order not to sour from owning the plane. This is not an indictment on the merits of the aircraft, but it does bear highlighting as those are not a requirement to be an aircraft owner at-large. I say that as a PA-28R owner for full disclosure.

Now back to the OPs topic.
 
GRG55 said:
I'll match your Vitatoe and raise you one Silver Eagle conversion. THAT'S the airplane it should have been. ;) :cool:

https://www.controller.com/listings...t/manufacturer/cessna/model/p210-silver-eagle
Click to expand...

Well yeah. I was trying to stay piston and in his price range. lol.

BUT, here is a quote from that article by Durden:

At this altitude (FL220), the TN P210 is within 10 knots of being as fast as the advertised speed of the Silver Eagle turboprop mod of the P210 while burning 7 fewer GPH. :D
 
Last edited:
My brother had a P210. I remember seeing 20 GPH at 15K.
 
BrianNC said:
Get a Vitatoe conversion. They put a turbo-normalized 550 in it and make it the plane it should have been from the beginning. Up to 215 KTAS at altitude.

Good write-up by Rick Durden:

https://www.avweb.com/news/features/Turbonormalized-P210-Fast-Efficient-Quieter-224019-1.html

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/25155837/1978-cessna-p210n

http://www.vitatoeaviation.com

Click to expand...

whoa, wait a minute, those "power reduction after 5 minutes" had to do with old noise certification standards?! Hmmm. :devil::devil::devil:
 
Have you also looked at earlier PA-46s? Just curious. Similar price range. Faster and better pressurization.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Eric Gleason said:
Have you also looked at earlier PA-46s? Just curious. Similar price range. Faster and better pressurization.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I have looked at them. My thoughts were. More plane than I need. How does it compare with the 210?
 
You are me...a few years from now. I always had in my mind a piston twin, possibly a 340. Any thoughts on a twin????
 
I don't know, I've just always thought the P210 was about the ugliest airplane on the ramp. 210s are okay because they have "normal" window. But P210s...well, they've just always reminded me of:

FE5D91D7-87A6-42AE-A96C-8EBFB6A0A76A.jpeg
 
Loveair said:
I have looked at them. My thoughts were. More plane than I need. How does it compare with the 210?
Click to expand...

They're direct competitors, but Piper started with a clean sheet design and executed it better, whereas Cessna modified an existing airframe.

What was it that made you think that it was more plane than you need but the P210 isn't?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Get a quote on insurance and see what you think. When I checked 6mos ago it was nearly double for 210 vs V35, I think the P210 is even more still.
 
Blatham489 said:
Get a quote on insurance and see what you think. When I checked 6mos ago it was nearly double for 210 vs V35, I think the P210 is even more still.
Click to expand...

I guess part of that would be the 6 vs 4 seats and with the P210, pressurization probably bumps it up even more.
 
timwinters said:
I don't know, I've just always thought the P210 was about the ugliest airplane on the ramp. 210s are okay because they have "normal" window. But P210s...well, they've just always reminded me of:

View attachment 62670
Click to expand...

Man, you was about to get on my bad side till I read that second sentence! But, yeah, P210’s look weird. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top