Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Looking to buy a first airplane Cessna FR 182 RG. Would appreciate advice. Also N-reg versus G-reg.

Hi guys, so I’ve been looking at a C182 Rheims RG. As the name suggests it’s got a retractable gear and is fully deiced with TKS. The engine is at 1800 hours. They want £115k for it.

Mission: Fly around the nearby airports for lunch and occasional longer trips.

Being aware that RG is generally more expensive to maintain than the fixed gear version, what are people’s experiences with maintenance/fixed running costs?

The beautiful side of this aircraft is it can do 140-150 kts in cruise at 12 gal/h. Pretty hard to beat that I think.

United Kingdom

Non-turbo? I used to fly one, although only for a brief period. See here.

Being in the UK, mogas will likely not be much of an option for you. Therefore, if you really wannt capability, then consider the turbo. You want to fly airways IFR?

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

The engine is in effect at TBO and that doesn’t seem to be reflected in the price. The Cessna 182 line is close to blue chip in piston aircraft, given its swiss army knife qualities, however, this in part reflects older pilots having to trade their retractables for a practical fixed gear, general purpose, cross country machine. US insurance capacity for GA private retractables continues to shrink. You will have deduced, the TR doesn’t benefit from this trend. Also maintenance of the retractable undercarriage, in particular the saddles, requires reasonable experience by the engineers on type.

If you want a Cessna 182 for it’s ability to hold value, suggest buying fixed gear. On airways they deliver 140kTAS on 12 usgph. I don’t recall the TR182 being much faster.

Oxford (EGTK), United Kingdom

boscomantico wrote:

Non-turbo? I used to fly one, although only for a brief period. See here.

Being in the UK, mogas will likely not be much of an option for you. Therefore, if you really wannt capability, then consider the turbo. You want to fly airways IFR?

Yes that’s right, not a turbo. Would definitely be nice to have a turbo. It’s my first airplane though so want to start at something fairly reasonably priced.

United Kingdom

RobertL18C wrote:

The engine is in effect at TBO and that doesn’t seem to be reflected in the price. The Cessna 182 line is close to blue chip in piston aircraft, given its swiss army knife qualities, however, this in part reflects older pilots having to trade their retractables for a practical fixed gear, general purpose, cross country machine. US insurance capacity for GA private retractables continues to shrink. You will have deduced, the TR doesn’t benefit from this trend. Also maintenance of the retractable undercarriage, in particular the saddles, requires reasonable experience by the engineers on type.

If you want a Cessna 182 for it’s ability to hold value, suggest buying fixed gear. On airways they deliver 140kTAS on 12 usgph. I don’t recall the TR182 being much faster.

Forgot to mention that it’s on US register. Was told that US measures the hours from engine on to engine off so the hours are a bit more than they’d effectively be using the CAA method (so I was told by the seller).

It looks like most of the similar aircraft in the US go for between $140k-$220k in terms of the asking price so seems to be at the bottom end of the range. Would be interesting to see what VREF says if anybody has access to that.

United Kingdom

Mostly the hours record on N-registered aircraft is by Tach or Hobbs meter plus periodic maintenance logbook entries referencing either of those. The choice isn’t regulated and maintenance/overhaul is on condition so engine and prop hours are regardless a reference item if no ADs apply.

Lycomings will often go past TBO but I’d budget on an overhaul in the foreseeable future.

I agree with fixed gear being a better buy for the stated ‘Mission’ – which is BTW refreshingly honest Also IMHO if you miss a turbo it’ll be in a good way – on some types the addition of a turbo decreases market value and marketability.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 28 Feb 18:50

Silvaire wrote:

Also IMHO if you miss a turbo it’ll be in a good way – on some types the addition of a turbo decreases market value and marketability.

Surprising to hear that. Most of the 182s I have seen with a turbo go for £200k+ whereas without it can be half as much.

United Kingdom

If you want a Cessna 182 for it’s ability to hold value, suggest buying fixed gear

I only flown C177RG that we rented in US, the gear failed to retract and it end up like C172 dragging all the way from Exumas in Bahamas to Tampa in Florida (rental school refunded me 20h according to C172 discounted price )

I am not sure what is the user case for RG in C182? in US it may work with paved runways everywhere but then insurance is out of reach in “retracts”…as backcountry platform to airways? now idea if C182RG can go anywhere where Arrows can go? let alone Maules or FG Skylanes go?

Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Johnh in this forum had one, he could give you some more hints about it. Actually I thought all C182RG was turbo equipped..

LFMD, France

I dislike threads like these because no matter how genuine they start out, someone always ends up ‘dumping crap’ on someone else’s aircraft.
However I’ll say this in my best effort as non offensive.
The gear system on Cessna singles is slightly more complex than on many other types.
IMHO the best reason to get rid of the wheels is to get slippery, and possibly get high to go even faster. So it seems incompatible to me to not have a turbo, especially as the cessna singles are not necessarily the most slippery to begin with.
The main reason I’d buy a 182 (and I really would consider one) is to have a massively capable aircraft that still retains some simplicity……
Solid forgiving undercarriage, rugged spacious airframe, capable short field, and reasonable performance without turbo.
So a fast turbo retract or a slower less complex but rugged airframe. This particular aircraft appears to me, slightly in the middle of that scope.
From my window shopping experience, if the airframe and paint are good then that price is accurate in the current market. (Which is hugely elevates at the moment)

Last Edited by GA_Pete at 28 Feb 23:20
United Kingdom
66 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top