oh hell, gump. my 182 keeps me out of trouble all the time. a much better a/c than i am pilot...for sure!

Yep a 182 is the plane to get.Stable and honest.

I love my 182J, even if it isn't a straight tail.....just love it. Now if I can get to be just half the pilot it takes to get the good stol performance out of it which it is capable of......

Bob,
If you want information on a Maule I would got to maulepilot.org. Much of the information you hear about Maules is incorrect and given by many who have never owned or flew a Maule. I am biased as I chose a Maule and love it. I'm an ex military pilot and have time in Rotary wing, high and low. I chose the Maule for the same reason I believe the Marines would not let go of the Cobra Attack Helicopter. It is field tested, extremely durable, easy to maintain in the field and the parts are cheap (now that I think about it it kind of reminds me of an AK47). If you can fix an old tractor you can work on you Maule. The tri gear will take a lot of the bite out, but I do prefer the tail wheel.

Take care and good luck with what ever you choose, where're all good you just need to choose the right tool for the job.

Sorry about the above grammer errors. I should have proof read.

IMO the only negitive thing I will say about a 182 is no barn doors like the Maule. I camp and haul, those doors are worth there weight in gold. Bob since you didn't say $$ were in the equation, I like the Katmai 182 conversion from Peterson. Talk about performance.

http://www.katmai-260se.com/history.html

TomKatz wrote:Sorry about the above grammer errors. I should have proof read.

Did you know that you can edit your own posts? Click the pencil icon in the upper right corner of the post area.

Hi Bob,
Go with the 182 advice, put bigger tires on and head down to McCall Mtn Flying in Idaho for some backcountry instruction with their instructors. Check out C-FAOR back home at YBW with the 300hp conversion (Call me for the owners names). Since I expect you'll be flying solo or lightweight you probably don't even need the extra horsepower if you get one of the older models with lower empty weight. Bit hard to find as nice as your Seneca though!
Michael

(yes, you've got my number! Give me a call

If it's useful you are looking for you can't beat a 206. I know it's a lot more $ but if you can get the doors shut it will haul it! I know it dosn't have as good short field performance as the 182 when full, but just because you have the room dosn't mean you have to fill it. You could also consider a turbo 206 if you are operating a lot at high altitudes, although I personally don't like the turbo due to the higher maint. cost. Bottom line is a 206 with two people in it will take off just as short, or shorter, than a 182 but both are great planes.

I am one of the resident early 182 drivers here. I have over 1000 hrs in 182B. I have my second one of these now. I fly out of my ranch strip that is 2300 ft long fence to fence that sits at 2620 ft elevation. I only seem to use 800 ft of it so am considering coverting 1150 of it back to pasture.

I have a stock engine, stock wings, no vg's and I think that is the way it will stay. I do have a 310 nose fork with a 600 x 6 up front and 600's on the mains. The 700's will go on the mains this spring in time for summer play. That is the bigest tire combo I had on the first 182B and I am sure that will be just fine for my current plane.

I never intend to do big rocks long props flying. Any 182 is good but the 56 to the 61 are the best. 60 and 61 are a bit faster and it is not cus of the swept tail. The strait tail looks good on the 59's and earlier but I am not sure they fly better. Some say yes but I have never flown a 60 or 61 model so I cannot say one way or the other from experience.

If you want a bigger doore then just get smaller packages. The early 182's are a good buy at this time but that does no good if you bought a house three years ago with nothing down.

Tim

182 hands down for the money. 4" wider cabin than a 180, 170 or 172. and everything else everybody else said.

Zane, Thanks for the info! I found the pencil and wilco. Great stuff, have a great day!

X18 on the 182.

182 hands down for the money. 4" wider cabin than a 180, 170 or 172. and everything else everybody else said.

I think they started the wider cabins somewhere in the mid '60's. The earlier models will have the narrower cabin.

Gary

They went to the 4" wider cabin in 1962. That is also when they got rid of the trimable horizontal stabilizer. Do not buy a 182 tell you have flown one with the early stabilizer (1961 and earlier). I mean in slow flight. They are two diferent planes.

The early 182 and the 180 are the exact same plane in the air and on final.

The 4 extra inches is for you guys that like girls with bigger buts.

I am sure there is sombody with an early 182 close by that will let you fly it in slow flight.

Tim

I alwaus ASSUMED they were wider at the shoulder, just cuz that was where it mattered, unless of course, you like the girls wth the big butts

But, I just found this

According to the late Bill Thompson, former Cessna engineer and author of "Cessna Wings for the World", Cessna Chief Engineer Jerry Gerteis decided to completely redesign the 1962 C-182's fuselage to make the cabin floor four inches wider (than previous models) and 3/4 inch lower (more headroom), and the rear cabin was to be fitted with an omni-vision rear window. A four inch wider fuselage at the cabin floor does not necessarily translate to a four inch wider fuselage at the shoulders, which is where the extra width matters most to most folks.

The second edition of "Standard Catalog of Cessna Single Engine Aircraft" has cabin width dimensions for all Cessna single engine airplanes. I can't vouch for the accuracy of the numbers since I haven't measured the cabin width of all models, but according to this book:

Since 1958, the 172 has had a cabin width of between 39 1/2" and 40 1/4" (varies with year and model). This 3/4" variation is probably due to changes in interior upholstery, not the external fuselage dimensions.

The 1958 182 had a cabin width of 39 1/2", but since 1959 the 182 cabin width has been 42 ". Even though the fuselage was widened by 4" at the cabin floor in 1962, the width at the shoulders remained the same 42".

Beginning in 1960, through the end of production, the 180 has had a cabin width of 40 1/4" .

Basically, what all this boils down to is that 182s since 1959 are about 2" wider than 172s. 180s have about the same cabin width as 172s.

Gary

I am quoting this from Diverdriver.com

Some points about 182s I'd like to add after years of exchanging information about 182s with different operators:

Some of the oldest models of 182 (circa 1958) have very high unusable fuel limitations during manuevering flight which is most of the time while flying skydivers. It can be as high as 5 gallons per tank! Make sure when you calculate your fuel load you account for this higher unusable fuel level. I have seen many accidents where the engine quit and everyone was surprised to learn this limitation. Get into your Pilot Operating Handbook and know your aircraft. I can't stress it enough.

I have also had conversations with operators who inexplicably had partial or intermitent engine failures on descent. First thing to check obviously was fuel amounts. Next was to check for wrinkled fuel tank bladders in some 182s. When that wasn't the cause we looked at airbox, carburator and intake manifold. Nothing was found wrong. And the problem persisted. But a good mechanic stayed on the job and it was found that the cross-vent (the one that goes between the two tanks through the headliner) had become blocked. During ascent the pressure would go out of the tanks and then on the subsequent rapid descent a vacuum would be created limiting the fuel flow.

shortfielder wrote:I alwaus ASSUMED they were wider at the shoulder, just cuz that was where it mattered, unless of course, you like the girls wth the big butts

But, I just found this

According to the late Bill Thompson, former Cessna engineer and author of "Cessna Wings for the World", Cessna Chief Engineer Jerry Gerteis decided to completely redesign the 1962 C-182's fuselage to make the cabin floor four inches wider (than previous models) and 3/4 inch lower (more headroom), and the rear cabin was to be fitted with an omni-vision rear window. A four inch wider fuselage at the cabin floor does not necessarily translate to a four inch wider fuselage at the shoulders, which is where the extra width matters most to most folks.

The second edition of "Standard Catalog of Cessna Single Engine Aircraft" has cabin width dimensions for all Cessna single engine airplanes. I can't vouch for the accuracy of the numbers since I haven't measured the cabin width of all models, but according to this book:

Since 1958, the 172 has had a cabin width of between 39 1/2" and 40 1/4" (varies with year and model). This 3/4" variation is probably due to changes in interior upholstery, not the external fuselage dimensions.

The 1958 182 had a cabin width of 39 1/2", but since 1959 the 182 cabin width has been 42 ". Even though the fuselage was widened by 4" at the cabin floor in 1962, the width at the shoulders remained the same 42".

Beginning in 1960, through the end of production, the 180 has had a cabin width of 40 1/4" .

Basically, what all this boils down to is that 182s since 1959 are about 2" wider than 172s. 180s have about the same cabin width as 172s.

Some of that info is correct, but there was no widening of the Fuse in 1959. This is from the official 182 buyers guide by the CPA. My buddy has a '59 and it is skinny but what a performer!!

1956 – 182 Gross weight 2550 pounds
1. Tricycle gear version of Cessna Model 180.
2. Nose cowl changed from Cessna 180 to accommodate nose gear.
3. 230 HP Continental O-470-L engine.

1957- 182A Gross weight 2650 pounds
1. Main landing gear lowered four inches, increasing gear track 5.4 inches.
2. Main gear strut material thickness increased from 11/1 6 inch to 3/4 inch.
3. Stronger seat frames.
4. Rear seat back support improved.
5. Upholstery rolled around door frame for better finish.
6. Flush door latches.
7. Redesigned instrument panel and fuel gauges.
8. Generator low voltage light standard.
9. Key lock baggage door.
10. Fuel tank capacity increased to 65 gallons.
11. Electric fuel gauges.
12. Gross weight increased from 2550 lbs. to 2650 lbs.

1958 - 182A Gross weight 2650 lbs.
1. Exhaust stack moved to right side to improve cylinder cooling.
2. Deluxe model 182 “Skylane” introduced, included upgraded interior, three color overall exterior paint, full instrument panel and wheel fairings standard.
3. Serial Number range changed from 34000’s to 51000’s to avoid conflicting with other models.
4. Bungee type rudder trim installed.
5. Improved instrument lighting.

1959 - 182B Gross weight 2650 lbs.
1. More streamlined cowling.
2. Cowl flaps.
3. Improved rear seat ventilation.
4. Royalite instrument panel cover redesigned.
5. Second chart box added to instrument panel.

1960 - 182C Gross weight
1. Tail changed to 35 degree swept design increasing overall length 25 inches to 27 feet four inches.
2. Larger rear seat windows.
3. Two additional side windows just aft of the rear seat area. The two additional windows add a ten percent increase in glass area.
4. New rear seat area bulkhead, which provides additional head room for rear seat passengers.
5. Flush fuel caps replaced “thermos bottle” caps
6. Headliner redesigned for increased headroom.
7. Control wheels changed from metal to plastic.
8. Redesigned seat cushions.
9. Smaller wingroot filets. With the new rear seat area bulkhead, small wing fillets allow a small fairing and blending between the wing and cabin top and fuselage contours. The new fillets allow a more simple assembly and elimination of two splice plates at the aft edge of the cabin top.
10. Elevator downspring added.
11. Rerouting of the main gear brake lines through the landing gear bulkhead and the same skin opening utilized by the landing gear. This allows brake line routing down the aft side of the gear, requiring fewer fittings and clamps as well as reducing drag.
12. Redesigned flap handle knob of molded plastic. A recess in the end of the knob accentuates the grip during flap operation.
13. Nose wheel fairing redesigned to provide ease of removal without disassembly of the nose gear strut to remove the fairing. Are movable plate on top of the fairing allows it to slip down over the nose gear fork when the wheel and tire are removed.
14. Visor support tube redesigned to allow visor to lie flat against the cabin roof when not in use.

1961- 182D Gross weight 2650 lbs.
1. Key operated start switch.
2. Cam-lock fasteners on cowling, identical to those used on 210 and 310 series aircraft.
3. Heavier reinforcements around the parting line between the upper and lower cowlings.
4. Gear height decreased an additional 4 inches, increases useful load 4 lbs., improves ground handling, more streamlined appearance.
5. ”182” added to serial number prefix.
6. Stronger nose wheel fork, similar to model 210.
7. Lower appearance, redesigned black Royalite instrument panel.
8. Lever-type cowl flap control provides more positive adjustment for full open, half open and full closed positions.
9. Radio selector switch console added to upper right center section of the panel.
10. Optional front seats with three-position hinged backs.

1962 - 182E Major Redesign (Anniversary Edition) Gross weight 2800 lbs.
1. Fuselage widened 4 inches.
2. “Omni-vision” rear window added.
3. Interior floor flat and lowered 3/4 inch.
4. Redesigned instrument panel with rocker switches.
5. Electric flaps.
6. New horizontal stabilizer with conventional trim tab replacing jack-screw adjusted stabilizer.
7. Redesigned rudder trim system.
8. Seamless wing tips with fared navigation lights and squared trailing edges.
9. 84 gallons fuel optional.
10. Dual fore and aft fuel feed ports with 25% increase in fuel line diameter to one half inch.
11. Stronger main landing gear and redesigned landing gear attachment.
12. Improved nose wheel steering.
13. Gross weight increased from 2650 lbs. to 2800 lbs., useful load increased approximately 100 lbs.
14. Engine changed from O-470-L to O470-R.
15. Aileron control system improved for smoother operation. Cable shave been rerouted for easier servicing and smoother operation.
16. Center stack radio installation.
17. Improved radio cooling at rate of 5 cubic feet per minute air flow.
18. Redesigned tailcone is lighter yet stronger and incorporates a radio rack immediately aft of the baggage compartment.
19. Sharp nosed speed fairings on landing gear.
20. Extruded neoprene rubber “P-type” door seals for increased soundproofing.
21. Radio speaker relocated to the left ceiling of the cabin above the pilot.
22. Dual dome lights above the rear side windows.
23. Optional courtesy lights located in the under side of the wing.
24. Optional six-position adjustable front seats.
25. Longer, pointed prop spinner.
26. Optional Cessna Nav-O-Matic 200 autopilot available

Did they widen the gear again in the 60's? My first plane was a '64 182. At the time, seems like I was told that a couple years after that, they widened the cabin(obviously wrong) and the gear.
Based on this, '56 was the only year for the taller gear on a 182.??? I had also heard that, but thought it might have carried through for a few more years.

'56 must have been Cessnas best year.

Gary

56 had the tallest gear, Lowered it in 57 but still much taller than the Wide body 62. 56s seem to have the lightest empty weights. No frills airplane, no extra rivits or screws either. The useable fuel problem on early model 182s with only 1 fuel pickup at the rear of the tank is really a skydiver driver problem in a steep decent. Fly the plane at normal attitudes and it will meet book figures. The 62-63 widebodys had a small horizontal stab making empty short field landings difficult. You need to keep a case of oil in the baggage compartment to stay in CG. ( I used to strap my small tool box to the O2 rack aft of the baggage compartment ) Even a stripped down wide body (plane for plane) wont climb as fast as a narrow body. I tried.