Is the cabin width and leg room any better in a 1961 C182 than in a C172N? Or will me and my 6'4 buddy still be just as miserable in the 182?

I'm 6'-1". There's lots of leg and head room in a 172 for me. Shoulder room is the issue. The 172 and pre-1962 182 will be about the same.

If anything the 172N is wider than early 180/182. But I'm 5'-10 220 and wouldn't call it miserable. Cozy more like it

The 1970's - 172's - cabin width ranges from 40.25" to 39.50"
The early 182's cabin width starts at 40" in '56,'57, then 39.5" in '58, then 42" from '59 forward.
'

akgreg wrote:The early 182's cabin width starts at 40" in '56,'57, then 39.5" in '58, then 42" from '59 forward.
'

Nope. The '62 model got the 4" cabin width (different fuse altogether) and thereafter remained the same thru R model. The '56 thru '61 D model had the same cabin width - 40 inches.

If you want the big cabin, go with the 1962-present. The 62-64 still have the smaller tail which can be a handful if you arent used to it. They went to a wider horizontal stabilizer in 1965. I have flown the wide cabin with the small tail and i didnt really think it was a huge difference, but some people do.

Mike

FWIW, my 63 P172D is narrower by a smidge than the later 172s, but my CFII (about 6') and I (5'10") have no difficulty flying around in it. A couple of my buddies who are in the 6'2" 235-245 lb. range feel somewhat cramped initially, but once they settle in, they're OK, too.

Extra width is nice for lots of purposes, but it slows down an airplane--re: the Commander 112-114. The only benefit I can think of which a later 182's width has over my airplane's interior width is that I could put my 4" wide flight case (since relegated to some dump somewhere) between the 182's seats, whereas the room between my airplane's seats is only sufficient for the manual flap lever to come up. Since I've now gone for an EFB and smaller flight case, it's not an issue; my flight case fits behind my legs in front of my seat.

Cary