182T rental price

O

OU812

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Mar 13, 2021
Messages
18
Location
Middle Ga
Display Name
Display name:
OU812
Was wanting to know if $275 /hr wet for a 2004? 182T with G1000 is a reasonable price?

Also would this be a good plane to start instrument training in?
 
That price seems like a lot, but it's probably pretty reasonable.

If that's the plane you're going to fly after you get your ticket, then it's good to train in.
 
OU812 said:
Was wanting to know if $275 /hr wet for a 2004? 182T with G1000 is a reasonable price?

Also would this be a good plane to start instrument training in?
Click to expand...

Not way off the mark, think I paid $250 last time rented one. Does a 2004 have the KAP140 or the integrated GFC700 autopilot?

Excellent airplane to get an IR in - just fast enough to allow you to blend in at big airports, just slow enough that you aren't overwhelmed. If you can afford it, vastly better platform than a 172 series. Based on experience - owned and flew one for over 1600 hours.
 
KAP140.

Steamflyer said:
Not way off the mark, think I paid $250 last time rented one. Does a 2004 have the KAP140 or the integrated GFC700 autopilot?

Excellent airplane to get an IR in - just fast enough to allow you to blend in at big airports, just slow enough that you aren't overwhelmed. If you can afford it, vastly better platform than a 172 series. Based on experience - owned and flew one for over 1600 hours.
Click to expand...
 
Kelvin said:
KAP140.
Click to expand...
That's fine, not perfect (I had one in mine). However, my recollection is that there's a tiny bit more overhead - for example I think that while the KAP140 will receive heading and nav data from the settings on the G1000, the altitude preselector is only live on the KAP140 - you can (and should) set it on the G1000, but it's just a reminder. Don't believe it will change the value in the KAP140.

You'll need to set the altimeter in two or three places - the KAP140 via the BARO button, the backup AI if you are being thorough, and in the G1000. Not a big deal.

If you get comfortable flying the 182T in the system filing IFR, you'll easily be able to transition to any other high performance single - Bonanza, 210, Mooney, etc.

I probably still have a speed and power chart for various configurations somewhere for that airplane.
 
OU812 said:
Was wanting to know if $275 /hr wet for a 2004? 182T with G1000 is a reasonable price?

Also would this be a good plane to start instrument training in?
Click to expand...

182T is a very nice airplane for traveling, but renting one for your basic instrument rating makes no sense to me unless you enjoy spending money. For the majority of your training, you will be flying basic maneuvers and approaches. The turbo will make absolutely no difference for learning these procedures. In fact, you will most likely be flying with the throttle pulled way back so that the airplane doesn't get too far ahead of you. The G1000 is also very nice, but you can learn the majority of its features on a simulator instead of spending money for avgas. In other words, do the majority of your training in a simple cheap airplane without any bells and whistles (like a 172) and then transition to a 182T with a G1000 once you have mastered these procedures. But if you just don't care how much it will cost, then absolutely fly the 182T. In fact, why stop there - try a Turbo 210, or a Piper Malibu.
 
If it's a 2004 with KAP140 then there's a good chance that it's non-WAAS. If so, you'll miss out on LPV approaches.
 
sarangan said:
182T is a very nice airplane for traveling, but renting one for your basic instrument rating makes no sense to me unless you enjoy spending money. For the majority of your training, you will be flying basic maneuvers and approaches. The turbo will make absolutely no difference for learning these procedures. In fact, you will most likely be flying with the throttle pulled way back so that the airplane doesn't get too far ahead of you. The G1000 is also very nice, but you can learn the majority of its features on a simulator instead of spending money for avgas. In other words, do the majority of your training in a simple cheap airplane without any bells and whistles (like a 172) and then transition to a 182T with a G1000 once you have mastered these procedures. But if you just don't care how much it will cost, then absolutely fly the 182T. In fact, why stop there - try a Turbo 210, or a Piper Malibu.
Click to expand...

just a note the 182T is not turbo, it’s naturally aspirated. The T182T is the turbo bird
 
As long as everything works, that’s in line with the market. About 5 years ago I rented one (once) in Indy for $250, but the autopilot didn’t work and neither did the lean assist. Other things were broken.
 
There is a 100% chance. These birds do not have WAAS. WAAS was added when the G1000 came equipped with GFC700 right around either 06 or 07....

asicer said:
If it's a 2004 with KAP140 then there's a good chance that it's non-WAAS. If so, you'll miss out on LPV approaches.
Click to expand...
 
Kelvin said:
There is a 100% chance. These birds do not have WAAS. WAAS was added when the G1000 came equipped with GFC700 right around either 06 or 07....
Click to expand...

You could update the LRUs to get WAAS. Was relatively expensive, but many did. Many did not, so checking whether WAAS is present is key - good catch Asicer. Without WAAS it makes no sense as that's the whole point nowadays - an approach to every runway.
 
OU812 said:
Was wanting to know if $275 /hr wet for a 2004? 182T with G1000 is a reasonable price?

Also would this be a good plane to start instrument training in?
Click to expand...
Here’s a $202 one in San Diego. No G1000 though. It’s a club so there are membership fees to factor in. I’m not seeing $275 as off the charts to high.
https://www.plusoneflyers.org/n811tw/
 
sarangan said:
Good point. I missed that. So why is it $275/hr?
Click to expand...

182T is NA
T182T is turbo restart
T182 is turbo, non restart (about '79-'82) with straight legs (fairly rare).

At $275 per hour seems on the higher side, but often you can get a block rate if that's of interest.
 
luvflyin said:
Here’s a $202 one in San Diego. No G1000 though. It’s a club so there are membership fees to factor in. I’m not seeing $275 as off the charts to high.
https://www.plusoneflyers.org/n811tw/
Click to expand...
I've flown this very plane many a time!

N7577N is a little nicer. Two G5s, WAAS 530, engine monitor, and GFC500. Attentive owner, nothing is inop'd, clean inside and out, solid 8/10 aesthetically. Rents for $215. Flew it yesterday to L35
https://www.plusoneflyers.org/n7577n/

For a g1000 to g1000 apples apples comparison we also have one of those, 182T, renting at $225

The club is a good supply/demand scenario as there are a lot of planes and you are renting directly from the owner. The club does not get any cut from the rent. Club lives off monthly dues

I would say $275 for a g1000 Skylane is not bad.
 
I would say depending on the area the price is high but not outrageous. There is a 2004 G1000 182T for rent at the airport I keep my 182T based at in Florida and they charge $245 an hour wet for it.

As a 182T owner, it's a fantastic airplane! However for training I still think you'd come out ahead monetarily if you did your IFR in a G1000 172 and then just did a few hours with an instructor to transition. They are so similar you should feel fairly comfortable after a few hours with a good instructor familiar with one.
 
Thanks for everyone's opinions I appreciate it. There just isn't a whole lot of choice close to me. I can fly this very nice plane with one business or fight with hoards of primary students for some rough 172's or extremely rough piper cherokees at the other. The other also has a 182 a "Q" model but I am growing ever skeptical of the place as the types of squawks I'm seeing are alarming. Coupled with a sudden announcement the business will no longer offer block rate discounts.

The business with the 182T offers a 5 and 10hr block rate with 10hrs dropping the price to $235/hr I believe.
 
M2C - don't use the glass 182 for IR training. Use the clunky 6 pack 172's. Not only cheaper, but learning to scan on the 6 pack will serve you well. Much easier to go 6 pack to glass vs the other direction as I've been told. When the check ride comes, take it in the simpler 6 pack as well.

BTW - with the price of fuel, our club's six pack 182 just dropped from $195/hour wet to $180/hour wet. The rental school across the airport usually runs 30% + higher on their rental rates.
 
Last edited:
We charge $178 for our G1000 172s, and that feels high to me.

But I think my mind just hasn’t caught up with the times. I’d never pay $275/hr for a 182 to instrument train in.
 
OU812 said:
…The business with the 182T offers a 5 and 10hr block rate with 10hrs dropping the price to $235/hr I believe.
Click to expand...
Get it in writing. Iron clad contract guaranteeing it regardless of tail #, similar or better aircraft.

Take the time and fly the syllabus 4 days a week and knock it out in a month.
 
Be prepared to spend as much - if not more - time getting IR as you did your PPL.
 
Steamflyer said:
You could update the LRUs to get WAAS. Was relatively expensive, but many did. Many did not, so checking whether WAAS is present is key - good catch Asicer. Without WAAS it makes no sense as that's the whole point nowadays - an approach to every runway.
Click to expand...
I think they discontinued the LRUs for the upgrade to WAAS so that window has closed.
 
WDD said:
M2C - don't use the glass 182 for IR training. Use the clunky 6 pack 172's. Not only cheaper, but learning to scan on the 6 pack will serve you well. Much easier to go 6 pack to glass vs the other direction as I've been told. When the check ride comes, take it in the simpler 6 pack as well.

BTW - with the price of fuel, our club's six pack 182 just dropped from $195/hour wet to $180/hour wet. The rental school across the airport usually runs 30% + higher on their rental rates.
Click to expand...

Our club six pack 182 is $65 dry, tach. But clubs are hit or miss. Shop around if options exist. If the turbo is the best option out of the bunch then buy those blocks of time and do that.
 
Steamflyer said:
That's fine, not perfect (I had one in mine). However, my recollection is that there's a tiny bit more overhead - for example I think that while the KAP140 will receive heading and nav data from the settings on the G1000, the altitude preselector is only live on the KAP140 - you can (and should) set it on the G1000, but it's just a reminder. Don't believe it will change the value in the KAP140.

You'll need to set the altimeter in two or three places - the KAP140 via the BARO button, the backup AI if you are being thorough, and in the G1000. Not a big deal.
Click to expand...
Correct recollection
Steamflyer said:
You could update the LRUs to get WAAS. Was relatively expensive, but many did. Many did not, so checking whether WAAS is present is key - good catch Asicer. Without WAAS it makes no sense as that's the whole point nowadays - an approach to every runway.
Click to expand...
You can still do all the same approaches, but only to LNAV minimums instead of all the way down to LPV minimums (and no vertical guidance so you need to use step down fixes)
FPK1 said:
I think they discontinued the LRUs for the upgrade to WAAS so that window has closed.
Click to expand...
Correct
 
Steamflyer said:
182T is NA
T182T is turbo restart
T182 is turbo, non restart (about '79-'82) with straight legs (fairly rare).

At $275 per hour seems on the higher side, but often you can get a block rate if that's of interest.
Click to expand...

I saw the price per hour and the "T" and automatically assumed it must be turbo. Our club R182 (which is a retract, but otherwise identical to 182T) is half the above price, per tach hour, wet.
 
Looking for consistency in Cessna's model number protocol will drive you nuts.

A retractable 172 is a Model 172RG. A retractable Cardinal is a Model 177RG. So of course a retractable 182 is a ... nope, it's a Model R182. But a Model R172 is a fixed-gear 172 with a bigger engine. And don't confuse the Model R182 with the Model 182R (or an R172 with a 172R). Or the Model 182T, or a turbocharged Model T182. You could also have a fixed gear Model T182R, but the turbo'ed retractable is the Model TR182. Still with me?

A Model P172 was a 172 with more horsepower, but a Model P206 had the same engine as the other 206's but with nicer seats and no cargo door. And a Model P210 was a 210 with pressurization.

Put an 'A' in front of a Model 150 or 152 (A150/A152) and you've made it aerobatic. Put an 'A' in front of a 185 Skywagon or 188 Agwagon and you've made it with a bigger engine. Put an 'A' in front of a 182 and you've made it ... in Argentina!
 
Rgbeard said:
Are you trying to make sense out of Cessna model numbers?

@Pilawt to the Courtesy phone, please.
Click to expand...

Not really, but I was trying to make sense out of the $275/hr for a fixed gear 182.
 
Pilawt said:
Looking for consistency in Cessna's model number protocol will drive you nuts.

A retractable 172 is a Model 172RG. A retractable Cardinal is a Model 177RG. So of course a retractable 182 is a ... nope, it's a Model R182. But a Model R172 is a fixed-gear 172 with a bigger engine. And don't confuse the Model R182 with the Model 182R (or an R172 with a 172R). Or the Model 182T, or a turbocharged Model T182. You could also have a fixed gear Model T182R, but the turbo'ed retractable is the Model TR182. Still with me?

A Model P172 was a 172 with more horsepower, but a Model P206 had the same engine as the other 206's but with nicer seats and no cargo door. And a Model P210 was a 210 with pressurization.

Put an 'A' in front of a Model 150 or 152 (A150/A152) and you've made it aerobatic. Put an 'A' in front of a 185 Skywagon or 188 Agwagon and you've made it with a bigger engine. Put an 'A' in front of a 182 and you've made it ... in Argentina!
Click to expand...
Let's not forget about the Frenchie Cessnas made by Reims, for example the F172 (not to be confused with the 172F of course)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top