I bought a M5-235 last spring and i leave it on floats for the season and park it for the winter. The plane is great - 1000 lbs useful load (upgross kit added this year). The only minor complaints I have are the cabin is a little crowded sometimes - depending on the size of my passengers, and that the plane is fabric. I'm really happy with the performance - i can put the 1000 lbs in the plane and get off the water usually in 3-4000 feet, depending on wind. Performance at cruise (21 squared) is 11 gph, 100 knots which seems pretty good for a 235 HP engine.
I've been wondering lately about a 182 on floats. From my limited research so far, if i get one with the seaplanes west kit, I would get a similar useful load, same HP (230 with the 0-470). The cabin size appears to be a lot larger and i assume insurance may be a little less. I assume i would not have to worry as much about the frame / skin as it is aluminum.
I've been told that I will not be happy with the performance. I like my performance and don't want to give anything up, but I do not see why I would loose much performance. The HP's are basically the same. My basic empty weight is in the 1750 lb range, the 182 looks only to be 100 lbs or so more. By putting an 88" prop on it (compared to my 78"), i don't see how I would loose much performance.
Can anyone comment on this? Anyone fly both? Opinions on my thoughts?

thx.

garth

Don't know if this will help but, a good buddy had a 182 on straight floats but with a 520 in it. He was a commercial operator and traded it for a 185 because he could carry a bigger LEGAL load. The 182 would do everything a 185 would do and had a wider cabin. As far as comparing it to a Maule, can't say. I have heard that Maule parts can vary a lot between when a batch of vendor parts were bought for production and trying to match them up for a particular model. I know that a wider cabin is certainly nice and the older you get the nicer it gets. Good luck. FF

The Maule has a better baggage door, but its on the wrong side

Garth, I had a 182 on wheels and the 185 on floats, at the same time. Eventurally I sold the 182, as it was not being flown enough to justify. In retrospect, I wish I had kept the 182 upgraded to the 520 or a 550 and put it on floats, just because of the extra cabin width. The only reason I did not, was I wanted to go on skis in the winter, and I liked the johnson bar flaps. The 182 is a nice plane, as many on this forum will attest too. Steve

Garth,

Are you comparing apples to apples here? You say your Maule empty weight is 1750 pounds...is that ON FLOATS? Seems pretty light to me for a Maule on floats, but is possible.

Unless the 182 is modified with a bigger engine and/or wing extensions, I think you are going to lose some performance from what you'll see with the Maule. I don't think that performance difference will be huge, but I'd bet you'll see a little poorer performance. Some of this depends on the floats installed as well.

Bigger cabin in the 182, and as you suggest, more durable skin. As someone noted, it is nice to have that big door on the side of the Maule, but unless you are hauling a lot of really bulky stuff, the 182 isn't that ugly to load/unload.

The M-5 Maule has really short wings, so tends to glide sorta like a brick. The 182 floats a lot better.

Power is nowhere near the only parameter that dictates performance. The airfoil design, wing area, the prop, etc etc all have a significant influence on the performance of a particular airplane.

MTV

When my M5-235 is on floats I really appreciate the ability to open the entire back side of the plane for loading and unloading. I have wrestled drums and other gear into a C-180 and that really brings the Maule loading into perspective.

I don't know much about the C-182, but I do know that on high lakes the longer M-6 or M-7 wing would be nice to have.

TD

I fly a 2000 Maule M7 235. I have flown with a friend who has a 182 straight tail on 8:50s.

When my plane was on 8:50s we flew the same speed fire walled. I can take off in 300 feet at sea level. I don't know about 182. I can land in 300' at sea level I don't know about the 182. The wider cabin is nice and I like the way you sit in a 182.

I can not live with out the barn doors. I haul 2 bikes and lots of camping gear. I like the TW configuration.

I like the steel tube cage of the Maule around me.

Now the biggie, price. Can you buy the same year of 182 for the same price as a Maule??

Maule insurance sucks!

If I had 75K to 150K for a 182 or a Maule. I like the Maule.

If money is no object. A king Katmai with 206 doors and 29" Bush wheel's. And a Turbo.

Cheers

I went above 550 this last year in my 2006 MX7-180C and
my insurance dropped from $3900 to $2400 for 1 million
liability, 120K hull. That was a very pleasant surprise.

-Dick

I have a 1998 MX7-180C and insure it with Falcon Ins. Co. My hours in the Maule are 525 over 6 years and have never paid more than $1800.00 insurance per. year. I carry $1million liability and $80,000.00 hull. This year my bill was $1646.00.Perhaps a little shopping is in order.

Guys - thanks a lot for taking the time to repond. I'll comment on a few of the responses.

Steve - a 182 with a 520 or 550 would be a great performer but may be a little pricy with that engin combo - i'll investigate that
MTV - 1750 empty weight is on EDO 2448's - i think this is why this plane performs - the power to weight has a lot to do with it. You're right about gliding like a brick though,.....
Tom - I agree - you cannot beat the loading characteristics of the Maule doors on the passenger side, especially when going camping
Rob - price definately not the same. My '78 M-5 was in the $85K range, a comprable 182 on floats with a seaplanes west kit on it - I'm guessing would be $150K? I might spend the difference, but at this point, I'm not convinced (nor is my wife,...... )
Thanks to the other guys as well for the input.
I'm not in any rush, but just want to understand the pro's and cons. Definately happy overall with the M-5, although I'm depressed right now as I put it away for the winter this past Sunday

garth

I put it away for the winter this past Sunday

Gee, I don't understand that. Manitoba has such wonderful flying weather in the winter.

If your only complaints on your Maule are a little crowded and fabric, then I say keep what you have. There is no perfect plane, and it sounds like you have a nice performing machine. The 182 does make a very nice float plane, and the main reason is the cabin size and excellent rear seat visibility. The Seaplanes West kit is $15,000 installed at Park Rapids Aviation - at least it was a year ago. That includes all the float fittings, beefing up fire wall, the heavy duty mount, etc- it is complete and a nice kit. 182's can be had for $40--$70K for 73 and newer. The upgross requires 73 and newer if I recall. You would go to 3160 with the 470, and to 3360 gross with bigger motors - but only on aerocet 3500 floats, which run from $20,000 used to $35,000 new generally. So if you find a suitable post 72 machine for $50,000, add $15,000 for the kit, and $35,000 for new floats, you are at $100K. You may need to put a prop on also so that could easily be another $5 to $10K. There are so many variables for the 182 performance, motor(470/520/550) props, wing extensions, floats, etc its just hard to assign a performance to all 182's. Set up right with motor prop etc, you can end up with 1300 pounds of legal load on aerocet floats and fantastic performance. Loading is not a problem with the standard Cessna baggage door. And actually with the huge float lockers on the Aerocets you end up putting lots of stuff in those.

I'm really leaning towards keeping the maule - overall, i'm pretty happy. I guess with whatever you have, there is always something out there that has something you want.

garth

ps - Tom - the winters are really nice here, why don't you come visit, say in mid-january, where we'll likely see -35F