Early 185 hands down!

Yup, 185.

Sent from my SM-G870W using Tapatalk

I'm spent a lot of time in older M4's and 5's. What are the M6's interior dimensions like in comparison? How about companions to a 185?

Fixed gear Piper Saratoga.

Cessna 185 - those little kids are going to grow up fast. You can easily haul all four, plus all the stuff you need for a trip, plus go fast, plus long range fuel, plus land short once you’ve learned to fly her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

$150 will buy a reasonable 185, but will buy a spectacular 182 in comparison. The wider cabin will make everyone happier as the kids grow. Much more comfortable. I have my 185 for the glory and romance, but a 182 would likely make more sense. The 185 is a pilots choice. Passengers would chose the 182 every time.

Has everyone missed that this fellow has his aircraft listed as a '76 C-185 in his profile?

I got the impression he was switching gears. I don't blame him. As great a machine as the 185 is, it's still a Cessna, and years of Cessna flying can get...uh hemm... Boring.

Go take a test spin in a Bearhawk or even an RV-10. The feel of sticks between your legs, the higher roll rate, can spice up the cockpit again.

Try again.
The 185 will haul a phenomenal amount of gear. Surprises me how much and doesn’t develop any nasty attitudes about it.
Empty it is very docile and quick to respond. Fast in the air and slow enough for off airport ops.
But yes, the wider girth of the 182 is nice and noticeable in extra comfort in the cabin, but it carries the nose wheel. Pending your missionary whether that is an issue or not.

I’ve been a few places the 182 wouldn’t or shouldn’t have tried to go.
Having said that: It didn’t stop the high time pilot and my friend from doing as he pleased and pulling up beside me wherever we went in his 182!
Clarification: he was a very high time experienced pilot and knew his stuff. Taught me a lot. He has since gone west. His skills taught me that most of an airplanes ability lie in the hands of the pilot and not that of the design engineer who designed it. That was certainly true with Cliff and his 182.

Back to op: 185 for hauling peops and gear, 185 for rough terrian, 185 floats and skis, 185 for range, 185 for stable IFR platform..... what else? .... oh yeah... fun to fly!

No offense but a 185 is not all that fun.
Two planes is the route I would go,a cheap fixed gear cessna for the runway and a nasty two place to play in the river bottoms.

I don't plan to ever own another certified plane for personal use but if I did it would be a Cessna 180H. Since you already have a C185 you must be looking for something different. That rules out the Cyclone 180 also since it's basically a experimental Cessna.

A Bearhawk will certainly work but you won't be able to bring the kitchen sink with all 4 seats filled. Sill, there is a good amount of baggage space behind the rear seats.

The DreamAircraft Tundra may be another option. I haven't seen one in person but they sure look nice and the specs are good.

I chose between the Cyclone, Bearhawk and Tundra. Ended up building a Bearhawk.

I hadn't noticed the preexisting 185 equipment as others have now pointed out so why dip into the same gene pool. Non-certified airplanes afford a lot of latitude so that's the road I'd go down. Once the mission parameters have been defined the suitable options become much clearer. If four seats and a "need for speed" is the primary mission I'm not sure there is a "back country" option. Most of these airplanes by design fit more into the relativity "Low & Slow" play in weeds flight regime, a very different mission. There are some very capable contenders in the "get up and go" category that may slide in under $150K but out of fear for BCP excommunication will avoid naming any (Glasair maybe, ops sorry Zzz but it has a taildragger brother).

Just throwing out another Experimental in the mix...

Murphy Moose with the Lycoming... friend of mine has a Lyc powered Moose, that is a big airplane with a huge cargo area... the cabin is big with lots of shoulder room... and it has sticks... the Lycoming only because it is easier to work on than the Russian Radial...

Brian


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Brian, Have you worked on the Moose? There was a discussion on here a while back about them that turned me off if them. Sure seemed like a great family hauler to me though.

I find the Moose, Tundra and Cyclone 180 VERY intriguing and they are Canadian, just have to win the lottery I guess !!!!

Experimental

Cyclone, or Sportsman. Would most likely go with the Glasair Sportsman for the 2 weeks to taxi factory builder assist, also really like their folding wing option. Not sure if a new build falls within the stated budget though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A Cessna 180/185 that actually flew when purchased. Never again will I buy a barn find even if it went for a dollar.

Skalywag wrote:Experimental

Cyclone, or Sportsman. Would most likely go with the Glasair Sportsman for the 2 weeks to taxi factory builder assist, also really like their folding wing option. Not sure if a new build falls within the stated budget though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nope, about 100k more!

Cessna 205 with a 520 shoved in it.

formandfunction wrote:No offense but a 185 is not all that fun.

Really? Every time I fly one, I end up with a tent and a grin that makes others uncomfortable.
Buy a 180hp 170 and take all that saved cash and go see the world.

whee wrote:Brian, Have you worked on the Moose? There was a discussion on here a while back about them that turned me off if them. Sure seemed like a great family hauler to me though.

Only to get the breaks working right... have looked it over though to check on the build quality.. seems very robust and the build on this one is very good... he has not had it for very long so time will tell...

Brian



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk