182 rg turbo or 182 with a IO-550 I live in Colo

K

kauaibobby

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
4
Location
gypsum, CO
Display Name
Display name:
kauaibobby
Looking to buy an airplane. Wondering what you think would be better
182 RG turbo or 182 with a IO-550. I like to fly around the mountains here in the rockies and into small Mountain strips.
Also want something for cross country Thousand mile trip's.
Been looking at 182s, 206, 210, bonanza's 33 and 35, bellanca Vikings with turbo, Piper Arrow IV with turbo
Not sure weather to get a plane with turbo with all the maintenance with it,
but it will fly at sea level up here and higher or just get something like and IO 550 in a 182.
Not sure what i would be happier with.
What do you think ?
 
Either the Katmai 182 with the 260hp IO-470 or King Katmai with 300hp IO-550. Good cruise speed, excellent short performance and low speed crash survivability. You put that sucker in at what feels like walking speed.
 
The RG will have more maintenance in the gear than the turbo. That waste gate system is pretty simple. The gear has some VERY expensive repair parts in it under Cessna's new "lifespan" parts prices and some parts are now showing up as STC replacements but they can charge quite a bit for them and still be lower than Cessna.

The IO-550 won't be 300 HP up here. It'll still scoot, but it won't be 300HP.

I wouldn't want the RG... I'm not a huge backcountry person (considering we pave most of even our high mountain airports here anyway) but even light backcountry dirt strips are going to beat up an RG pretty bad. If it's going to be backcountry in a tricycle gear, you want it to be fixed gear.
 
I'd go IO 550, great power plant.

I flew a older 182 with the conversion, it was notably nose heavy, but with the displacement and simplicity, I'd go 550.
 
If you look at total horsepower, both will be about the same in Denver on takeoff. The difference is the TR182 will maintain better climb power, and if you're in really high altitude back country strips the turbo will help more. 550 is going to be less MX and more efficient.

The RG vs straight leg is another question. I like retractable gear, but I like going fast, too.
 
The IO-550 would be less maintenance I would think.
That welded down gear stronger than the tractable gear for dirt strips.
Living at 6500 foot elevation not sure what I'd be happier with.
Most of the 206s too expensive and I don't think I need that big of a load carrying capacity.
Thank you for everybody's input
 
Is there a TSIO-470 STC for the 182 available? Get a salvage one out of a C-320...
 
The Turbo RG is really a high altitude cruiser. For bopping in and out of Colorado strips, the normally aspirated 182 is better, IMO. And Ive been to all of them (all of the charted public ones that is)
 
Sorry I don't have anything to give to the 182 discussion but I just thought it amusing to point out that username KauaiBobby who gives Santa Cruz, CA as the location in his profile is asking about an airplane for Colorado strips. Slowly making your way eastward, are you?
 
moving to Vail, colo in a week. i have three sons in hawaii. I like Kauai the island. Moving up from a C172.
sorry your right i don't live there yet ! but soon.
tired of california.
 
Henning said:
Is there a TSIO-470 STC for the 182 available? Get a salvage one out of a C-320...
Click to expand...

Why on earth would you ever want to do that? The TSIO-470 is an engine that even I wouldn't buy, and I'm someone dumb enough to want GTSIO-520s, TIO-541s, and TIGO-541s. :hairraise:
 
As a pilot I'd rather have the turbo. As an owner, I'd probably rather have the 550.
 
kauaibobby said:
Looking to buy an airplane. Wondering what you think would be better
182 RG turbo or 182 with a IO-550. I like to fly around the mountains here in the rockies and into small Mountain strips.
Also want something for cross country Thousand mile trip's.
Been looking at 182s, 206, 210, bonanza's 33 and 35, bellanca Vikings with turbo, Piper Arrow IV with turbo
Not sure weather to get a plane with turbo with all the maintenance with it,
but it will fly at sea level up here and higher or just get something like and IO 550 in a 182.
Not sure what i would be happier with.
What do you think ?
Click to expand...
You can get the turbo without the RG. Years ago I gave someone a checkout in his brand new Turbo 182 (fixed gear). He had just learned how to fly in a 172 so he needed about 10 hours of dual. It was a sweet airplane. We took it up to Granby since that's where he had his vacation home and where he intended to travel the most.
 
For the 1000-mile trips you'll want an RG no matter which one. The Turbo Arrow and the TR182 are great for that. The C210 is fast but may be a bit much in terms of size and price - dunno.

The gear on the TR182 is pretty stout but the wheels are teeny and can't be swapped for larger. Unsuited for poorly maintained dirt but fine for maintained grass.

As for flying in the mountains, the vast majority of airports you'll use are paved. But for performance you'll be happiest either a turbo or upgraded engine.

I guess it all depends on what you think you'll use it for most. For me, it's a cross-country family hauler that also allows us to drop into any mountain airport - and get out again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top