SR22 vs C182: Need help deciding…

[-]

Nearby-Tea-8328@reddit

You're not going to ever take a Cirrus into a shorter unpaved strip... you will also never decide to put tundra tires, skis, or floats on the Cirrus.

[-]

NYPuppers@reddit

The thing that makes the SR22 a no brainer is the cost. You can just get a much newer / better equipped used SR22 vs a 182. Vanbortels has cornered the 182 market so prices are insane.

SR22 short field performance is fine. You have 1000 hours and will be landing on just fine on 99% of fields.

The chute is just an incredible thing. Anything but a "wife pleaser". It is a life line.

[-]

mild-blue-yonder@reddit

I’d rather own 100% of a 182 than share an sr22. I doubt the differences in capabilities will be a problem.

[-]

As someone who has owned four planes (Saratoga, C340, Aerostar) and currently owns a Cirrus . I will tell you it depends on how much you want to spend and what your mission is. Both planes are fine, but both planes are totally different planes. Are you looking for a plane that’s fun to fly and you can land on the grass or short runways or are you looking for a plane that’s going to get you from point A to point B in a reasonable amount of time. Personally, I think the 182 is a more fun plane to fly. It’s not as fast as the SR 22 but you can land on grass strips and you can have bigger tires for a rough terrain. The SR 22 is a faster plane but it isn’t fun to fly, I usually cruise about 165 kn at 65% but you could go faster if you want to beat up the motor. As for costs, I noticed someone on here say they get annuals for $1800. Don’t believe people who give you stupid numbers like that. Either his friend is doing the annual or he is assisting in the annual. I had my friend in the past do my annuals for $2000 but he was doing it as my friend and I was assisting. Most people on this forum who own real planes will tell you that just to have the A&P open up these type of planes and inspect them is going to be $2000 and up. It cost me $3000 just for the inspection on my SR 22 and here in Florida they’re so booked, I had to schedule it five months in advance. That was just the inspection that didn’t include any repairs, so when people give you ridiculous prices, there’s always some side story. As for the cost of maintenance I don’t think they’re too dissimilar. There really isn’t a lot on the SR 22 or the 182 that needs to be addressed Besides the motor, brakes, etc. they’re both fixed gear. I would anticipate that your annuals for either are probably going to be $5000 average, including the cost of inspection. You’re going have some years that are going to scare you though, as my annual last year was over $20,000. So just don’t think that you’re never going to be hit with a big bill for either plane. As for the parachute, I think it’s overkill. I just put in my second chute, which cost me $23,000 which is double what my first exchange was. I could only imagine what’s going to be the next time I have to replace it. I truly believe that probably most of the people who have pulled the parachute could’ve landed the plane. Nonetheless, it is a good selling point. Finally when people tell you to buy a G6 or G7, I’m assuming they think you have endless supply of money. If that’s true then just buy both. If I was going to waste the money on a G6 or G7 then I would get an older Malibu or bonanza. A bonanza can land on rough terrain and can go fast. They are also fun to fly. So that might be the plane you want to consider but again it is a retractable and costs go up. Finally, get your instrument rating. Your insurance will be significantly more without it. I would expect that your insurance is going to be about $4000 a year. My insurance on my Cirrus is $3500 and I have about 2000 hours total time along with an instrument rating and clean history.

[-]

Imaloserbabys@reddit

I just want to say that I was thinking about that bonanza, and I think that would be the perfect plane for you. You want something rugged that can land in rough terrain or turf but you also want something that can get you 500 nautical miles easily. I think the bonanza is what you should consider. An older A36 is probably in the price range that you would be looking at. Your annuals are probably going to be a few thousand dollars more and your insurance will be more as well but I don’t think anybody’s going to say anything negative about a bonanza.

[-]

wilstar_berry@reddit

I was able to take my elderly parents on airplane rides in my 182 RG.

There's no way they would've been able to climb up the wing and into the cabin.

For what it's worth, they're both gone now. So I cherish the memories of taking them flying.

[-]

K9pilot@reddit

As a 182 owner with zero Cirrus time, given the mission and requirements and the opportunity you have for a partnership I’d lean towards the Cirrus for: family comfort, speed and safety. The cirrus partnership sounds like my first partnership, older guy that pays his bills, is proud of his plane but hardly ever flies - which is the perfect model. A shared financial risk model for a very expensive machine is ideal.

If you want to do training with your son someday assuming this is a long term decision the 182 makes more sense. I’m not sure on luggage volume between the two but I’ve flown my 182 filled to the top of back window with four (2 adults / 2 teens) and happily flown to the beach.

As previous poster mentioned 100% ownership has its advantages and disadvantages. I love knowing exactly how things are maintained and used or abused before I put my family in my plane. The only thing I might model is total cost of ownership with the assumption both planes will have value when you decide to sell. I know you said you can afford either but would you take the extra vacation or do something else with your money if you went the 182 route.

I think you have two great options (1st world problem). Best of luck.

[-]

AdhesivenessFamous29@reddit

I have extensive experience two amazing planes: a Peterson Katmai 182 with a 350HP conversion, and a 2008 SR22TN. The SR22, with built in oxygen, 191 KTAS in the high teens, ice protection, G1000 with GFC700 autopilot make it more like a little jet. Flying the 182 I was mostly stuck below 13K because of performance, and that meant stuck flying in turbulence, and max 155 KTAS - which for a 182 is darn fast. The lower weight of the 182 was noticeable in turbulence as well. Don’t get me wrong, the 182 - particularly the Katmai, is a damn nice plane. But if I’m flying to Vail, over the Sierras, or anywhere more than 500 nm, I want the SR22.

[-]

182RG@reddit

As you can see from my username, I’m biased…

[-]

ArrowheadDZ@reddit

I’m with you. I have an ‘85 182 RG and it has been a perfect balance of all the factors.

[-]

x4457@reddit

Are you aware that there’s no such airplane as a Cessna 182RG?

It’s the Cessna R182 Skylane RG. My life, too, was worsened when I found that out. Fucking Cessna…

[-]

Sticks111162@reddit

I’d go for the 182 in the situation you described. If it was a G6 or G7 SR22 I’d roll with that but I’d definitely take the 182 over a G2

[-]

TerribleBuilder5831@reddit

What is the significant difference between a G6 and G2, they are basically the same plane

[-]

Sticks111162@reddit

Basically you are not wrong. The G2 had a hand full of issues that the later models don’t have. Notably the flaps failing on you, and like you can do a no flap landing, it’s just annoying. And the avionics are much nicer in the G6/G7. I instruct in cirrus aircraft for a bunch of privately owned ones so when I made that comment I was more touching on the fact that the buy in price to the G2 would be less of a return on investment compared to a 182. With everything dealing with the cirrus, the price point is absurd sometimes. My company has been trying to sell a G2 22 for like 13 months now, no takers because of the price

[-]

2-ball@reddit

What price are they looking to get?

[-]

2-ball@reddit

What price are they looking to get?

[-]

GryphonGuitar@reddit

To this day the Skylane is my favorite of the planes I've flown.

[-]

UsuckUnoob@reddit

SR22T… can do a 2200 ft runway at max gross weight

[-]

Final_Ad_5044@reddit

I would stick with 182 unless the Cirrus is at least a G3 with dual Avidyne screens or Garmin, and I'm a cirrus guy.

[-]

willycplane@reddit (OP)

The G2 we are considering has dual Avidyne screens and dual 430W with DFC90.

The 182 we are considering has dual G5s, GFC 500, Garmin 650xi GPS, etc.

Both are well equipped. That’s the issue.

[-]

Suitable-Common7992@reddit

That doesn't seem comparable at all in terms of avionics. I'd take the 500 and the 650 any day over a 430 and avidyne stuff.

[-]

12358132134@reddit

SR22 and it's not even close.

Speed, Climb Rate, Range, Useful Load, all significantly better in SR22
Much larger and more comfortable cabin in SR22
More advanced avionics, systems, redudancy, and generally more modern plane with SR22

Only advantage of the 182 over Cirrus is short field performance and cost. Everything else is on the SR22 side.

[-]

Suitable-Common7992@reddit

Maintenance cost also.

[-]

CaptMcMooney@reddit

man that's kinda hard,

hmm, I'd go cirrus you have someone to help pay the bills and to fly it, plus it's FASTER.

do you like the dr guy, partnerships are essentially a marriage of wallets

[-]

willycplane@reddit (OP)

He’s one of only two people I’d ever consider a partnership with. Never been interested in one, but he flies maybe 30hrs a year at most now, so availability would never be an issue

[-]

Equivalent-Web-1084@reddit

I own a gen 1 SR22 clean wing no turbo (320k).. I also have 600 hours in 172/182's.

The Cirrus is MUCH better if you plan on flying a lot of XC's.

[-]

Suitable-Common7992@reddit

My buddy had a 182rg that he put about 300 hours a year on for like a decade, then rented an SR22, then eventually went partners on the SR22T. His comment was that the useful load was so limited on the SR22 than his 182rg would go further in a day, because it had a huge amount of fuel on board so he didn't need to land as often. Plus it had a turbo, so he could fly as high as he liked. He said the turbo on the SR22T was needed to outperform the 182rg for cross country flights. He is a big guy and usually flew with a few hundred pounds of testing equipment for his job, if that matters. So it kind of depends upon which SR22 and which 182 you are talking about. The turbonormalized lycoming probably has a cost advantage over a turbo 550 in terms of maintenance also.

[-]

MoreSpoiler@reddit

For the price difference between a older but low time 182 vs a SR with the initial cost and repack nonsense, I’d go 182 with a io550 swap.

[-]

RevolutionaryWear952@reddit

I fly both; 182 no question for me. Generally, I really dislike high wings but it’s hard to beat the 182 holistically.

[-]

PlanetMcFly@reddit

Unless you’re truly going to fly into shortish grass strips with some regularity, then buy into the SR22 partnership. Sounds ideal actually. Awesome plane with shared fixed costs. The parachute and AC are huge for wife approval.

[-]

kw10001@reddit

Recently took my parents in an arrow and they had a tough time getting in it easily. Also, a high wing in summer is very nice.

[-]

blame_lagg@reddit

I've flown in both 182 and SR22 - they're very different. Get what you like...

[-]

Sad-Umpire6000@reddit

182 every time. Easier access, more fields it can fly into, rock-solid engine (whether Continental or Lycoming) that will make it to TBO and beyond without drama.

[-]

LootenantTwiddlederp@reddit

Plus, you don’t have to spend an arm and leg overhauling the CAPS system every 10 years.

[-]

I-r0ck@reddit

While you can put a parachute in a 182; it’s not very easy, cheap, and you loose a lot of space and useful load. If you want a plane with a parachute, I would recommend getting one that was designed to have a parachute

[-]

PilotC150@reddit

With some 182 variants (P and Q) you actually get an increase in useful load with BRS. The BRS STC gets packaged with a separate STC that increases useful load. It gives you a 160lb increase in max weight which nets you 65 to 75 pounds of useful load increase.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2014/january/08/brs-cessna

[-]

equal2infinity@reddit

Does the Cirrus come with a hangar? If so then go with it.

[-]

willycplane@reddit (OP)

It would move into my hangar.

[-]

equal2infinity@reddit

I’ve never flown a Cirrus but have a decent amount of 182 time. They’re just all around great planes without many quirks. Better for sight seeing and cooler in the summer. Useful load on a 182 will undoubtedly be 1-200lbs higher than the Cirrus. 182’s are also probably one of the most modifiable planes on the market. Lots of STCs for them if you want a bigger motor, floats, STOL kits, etc.

Now that you’ll be flying IFR I’d make sure it has a modern autopilot and at least some G5’s and a WAAS navigator. This is well worth the money.

[-]

Skynet_lives@reddit

I am definitely a Cirrus guy but if you’re only going 500nm, go with a 182. Yes you can STC the chute in a 182.

The fuel burn and maintenance for a SR22 isn’t worth the time you would save on a 500nm. Between 140kts and 180kts you’re only talking about 45ish minutes and all the stuff you’re talking about flying for is recreational. But an SR22 running costs can easily be double a 182.

[-]

Anthem00@reddit

Not even close. Take the sr22. It’s easily a 170kn airplane while the 182 is closer to 145. On longer flights, you’ll like the speed. The parachute is standard on the sr22 for your wife’s peace of mind even if it’s rarely if ever gets used. The brs can be retrofitted to a 182 but almost no one ever gets it. Justification is that they will but it with the plane but not spend it as a separate item to add it to an existing plane. It’s about 20-25 if I remember correctly to install it in to a 182.

The sr22 g2 while an older unit is potentially still way ahead of most 182s. Both can be upgraded to more advanced avionics. But overall - the 22 is just a newer airframe

[-]

Equivalent-Web-1084@reddit

People say 182 all day but they have never been on a 4 hour flight in an SR22.. soooo comfy (not to mention faster)

[-]

Anthem00@reddit

Exactly. And air conditioning. The wide acceptance factor is just so much higher in a 22 than the c182.

[-]

Equivalent-Web-1084@reddit

Yep!

[-]

Quirky-Advisor9323@reddit

182 sole owner here so that’s my bias—though my “bias” is merely the decision I made for myself and my family. I’m not emotional about this choice and view Cirrus as a really cool plane too, with different characteristics, that you simply need to measure up for compatibility.

The simplicity of the Cessna 172/182 platform is its beauty, as it relates to (1) cost and (2) safety. I CAN actually afford a Cirrus. My wife would likely murder me if I argued to get one, yes, but in theory I could possibly persuade her and we could do it. But, why? The 182 costs me about $2000 each annual. Last year it was $5000 because a small crack in the muffler showed up so I got that rewelded. Socking away $200 a month just for the annual each year is doable with my finances. Whats a Cirrus annual going to cost me? I havent done the math but the sophisticated complexity of a Cirrus is ipso facto going to multiply that 182’s cost, just for the annual. And then throw in day to day maintenance, fixing squawks, and the once-a-decade chute packing.

About that chute. You are correct that a BRS chute can be installed into a 182. I’ve considered it and have as yet not exercised the option. But you can. Viscerally, my pilots instinct thus far has been that I dont desire the chute as a boost to safety. Instead, I invested about 5K into installing an airbag safety harness system into my 182. My biggest fear—if we can all it a fear, I’d argue a healthy fear—is an engine failure over rough terrain causing me to “land safely” but not survive the subsequent on-ground collision with a tree, a rock, etc. I fly in mountainous terrain and even then, I virtually always spot short patches of ground that I believe can sustain an emergency landing given my bird’s superior stall characteristics and forgiving controllability. That thing floats like a goddamned balloon compared to other platforms. It’s really amazing. If you learn to stick spot landings very well, you can find a few hundred feet to drop it into. The plane might get mangled and destroyed while you slow down further to 30 mph or so (50 mph is stall), but the point is to keep your skull and body safe from the next impact. Thus, airbags.

In terms of speed, it’s hard to comment on this because every pilot feels differently about it as a priority. How much do you care about 170 knots versus 145? Your fun flying goals are pretty close to mine. Does it matter to you that when you depart home at 10am, you’ll reach your cousin’s barbecue at 1115am in a Cirrus but 1145am in a 182? This is a 100% non-factor for me. In fact I baby my engine and slow my speed down even further when flying, as I value saving gas and prolonging engine life over even that 1145 landing. 1155 is fine with me.

[-]

willycplane@reddit (OP)

Correct. Speed isn’t a huge dealbreaker for me. I’ve been puttering around at 85 knots the past three years going slow and low in the amphib. So 140 will feel like a rocket ship at this point haha.

Just trying to figure out if the cost share of the SR22 makes it worth it since I would have a partner that virtually never flies and is that comfort worth it to the family? I’ve been heavily leaning towards the C182 because of the lower costs and simplicity of flying and maintaining it. I also feel I can probably do more things with my son as he gets older in the 182 vs Cirrus. But, the SR22 is a nice nice and comfortable bird (which other family who flies often likes) 😂

[-]

Quirky-Advisor9323@reddit

The other deal breaker I see on your behalf is sole ownership. That’s almost literally priceless. Yeah the other guy presumably won’t fly often. You’re still having to share. I like to find my plane on day 2 in exactly the same configuration and condition as I left it on day 1. And my cockpit is plastered with obnoxious tourist stickers from every destination I’ve been to.

[-]

willycplane@reddit (OP)

I get that. I’ve owned 4 planes to date and all have been sole ownership. Would take some time getting used to for sure.

[-]

imlooking4agirl@reddit

I’d personally take the Sr22. I know my wife would feel a lot more comfortable having the parachute as a “just in case.” The Sr22 has a faster cruise speed and great avionics.

[-]

Equivalent-Web-1084@reddit

I love my Gen 1 SR22 no turbo

[-]

c9pilot@reddit

OMG the Super Petrel is my dream plane....

[-]

willycplane@reddit (OP)

It had been the most fun plane to own. I really hate to part with it but family needs prevail (sigh…) 😂

[-]

c9pilot@reddit

Well if we didn't already have a LongEZ and getting the Rotax for our new build S21 any day now, I'd be DM-ing you about her.

[-]

VanDenBroeck@reddit

A 182 on amphibious floats. Duh!

I flew a Super Petrel once. Fun little plane.

[-]

Wilder_Oats@reddit

I would think maintenance expenses would be much higher with the Cirrus vs. the 182, which nearly any AP can maintain at lower cost to you.

[-]

Vegetable-Row2310@reddit

If you NEED true (imo under 2000') short field capabilities then it answers itself it's the 182. I am based out of a 2400' strip and flying in and out with my sr22 is not a problem at all. If you NEED easy egress then it's also the 182. The low wing requires a step. Besides those 2 points the sr22 is the better performing plane. I went through the same dilemma a few years back and landed on a g1 sr22 (pun intended). I can't go back. It's the flight characteristics, the docility in turbulence, the sheer bang for your buck in terms of performance. It's not just the parachute but the full dual redundancy across electrical systems and other areas that make flying a 182 with my family instead of a sr22 a difficult choice to justify in hindsight. There are so many crash stories I try to learn from where I honestly ask myself how can I motivate this in my flying. In the sr22 I almost always have 2 or 3 additional safety breakers that I can take advantage of that many other planes can't. And I'm not just talking about the parachute. The repack is about 23k every 10 years. I'm sure in 10 years it'll be more. Retrofitting a brs negates the cost difference a lot. To give my wife and son one additional out in the event of a catastrophic event during a night fight for example? 100% worth it.

I'd argue the 182 is more of a "pilots plane" while the sr22 is a true family transport machine. If you are considering an NA engine, those last WELL beyond tbo if you take care of them. The turbo, not so much (still solid).

Per how you described your mission to me it's not even close, it's the sr22. One big caveat: the sr22 requires you to be a disciplined pilot. For example if you aren't disciplined with your speeds you're going to pay. I think the 182 is more forgiving. Regardless i would fly both with 2 uninterested parties. Also do not let your wife fly in either because she will pick the cirrus for you out of comfort alone.

[-]

sablerock7@reddit

Do you do a lot of night flying? The parachute adds a lot of comforts factor, should the need arise.

[-]

willycplane@reddit (OP)

Good question. We used to do a ton of night flying after lunch at the beach, returning home. Not as much with the LSA amphib we have now, but anticipate night flights returning. Good point there!

[-]

cazzipropri@reddit

Personally, unless you need high wings for specific reasons (sightseeing & picture taking), I'd rather take the Cirrus.

It's a much younger platform and it's a plane that is actively manufactured. That offers so many advantages.

There's a bunch of 182s around and parts are not hard to find (and are cheaper), but it's easier to get a new or factory reman IO-550 than an IO-540. I don't know what's the exact lead time for an IO-540 but it's probably 2 years. A factory reman 550 can be had with a 12-14 weeks of lead time. Factory reman 540s are simply no longer available.

[-]

woop_woop_pull_upp@reddit

Did they stop making 182s?

[-]

cazzipropri@reddit

I stand corrected. I thought it was stopped.

[-]

oh_helloghost@reddit

182 for me.

[-]

Conscious_Peace_9138@reddit

Sr22

[-]

UNDR08@reddit

C182. All day.

If the parachute is a requirement, get one with it, or add it with BRS’s STC.

[-]

Any_Cod2505@reddit

I’d go 22 only if you can swing a G5 or newer, also the non turbo will have a far better useful load unless you need to get over the Rockies etc

[-]

rFlyingTower@reddit

This is a copy of the original post body for posterity:

The title says it all. We are in the process of selling our beloved 2020 Scoda Aeronautica Super Petrel LS, LSA amphib, to once again move to an airplane with more seats (now a family of 3). Need help deciding on the what that next aircraft should be.

Little background on me: * PPL ASEL / ASES * High Performance / Complex * High Altitude * Almost finished with IFR * 1,100hrs Total Time * 600 retract / 500 Seaplane

I have previously owned or flown the following: * PA28-180 (owned) * PA32-260 (owned) * PA28R - 200 * C172 * C210D * PETR (Owned)

Mission: Primarily for family and friends travel on trips within 500nm or less. * Weekend collegiate football games * Trips to gulf coast for beach * Trips to Smokey Mountains to see family * 100hr hamburger runs * Occasional trips to places like Gaston’s for fishing getaway.

Obviously the SR22 has the better performance for speed, safety, and comfort over longer distance. The C182 has the advantage for short/soft field operations like Gaston’s and are cheaper and easier to maintain. (Wife likes idea of parachute for her and little guy, but not 100% deciding factor as I believe you can put a BRS in a C182)?

If we go with a C182 we would own it outright and consider leasing to a friend or two that has double my hours and experience.

If we go with the SR22, we have an older retired doctor friend who wants us to buy in half on a G2 with mid time engine and fresh repack, as he’s just not flying it much anymore but isn’t ready to give it up.

Just curious what people’s thoughts are between these aircraft and which you enjoy/prefer from your own experiences? This will be the family plane for years to come, so would like to try and get it right (😂) the first time and ensure I’ve thought through everything.

Thanks for your time if you’ve made it this far. I’ve seen a few posts about this comparison but nothing too recent. This is a great community and looking forward to seeing the responses and you guys/gals making me think!

Please downvote this comment until it collapses.

Questions about this comment? Please see this wiki post before contacting the mods.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. If you have any questions, please contact the mods of this subreddit.