These two single-engine planes have been around for decades, each with unique features that make them popular choices among pilots. Let’s dive into the debate between the Cessna 172 vs 182 and find out the winner!
Aircraft: | Cessna 172 Skyhawk | Cessna 182 |
---|---|---|
Photo: | ||
Country: | United States | United States |
Manufactured: | from: 1956 to: Present | from: 1956 to: Present |
ICAO: | C172 | C182 |
Price: | $0.307 million | $0.515 million |
Avionics: | Garmin G1000 glass cockpit | Garmin G1000 glass cockpit |
Engine: | 1x Lycoming O-360 L2A | 1x Lycoming IO-540-AB1A5 |
Engine Type: | Piston | Piston |
Power: | 160 horsepower | 230 horsepower |
Max Cruise Speed: |
123 knots 228 Km/h |
150 knots 278 Km/h |
Approach Speed (Vref): | 47 knots | 49 knots |
Travel Range: |
687 Nautical Miles
1,272 Kilometers |
915 Nautical Miles
1,695 Kilometers |
Fuel Economy: |
26.4 nautical mile / gallon 12.916 kilometres / litre |
10.1 nautical mile / gallon 4.941 kilometres / litre |
Service Ceiling: | 13,500 feet | 18,100 feet |
Rate of Climb: |
730 feet / minute 3.71metre / second |
924 feet / minute 4.69metre / second |
Take Off Distance: |
497 metre 1,630.56 feet |
461 metre 1,512.45 feet |
Landing Distance: |
407 metre 1,335.29 feet |
411 metre 1,348.41 feet |
Max Take Off Weight: |
1,157 Kg 2,551 lbs |
1,406 Kg 3,100 lbs |
Max Landing Weight: |
1,157 Kg 2,551 lbs |
1,338 Kg 2,950 lbs |
Max Payload: |
398 Kg 877 lbs |
503 Kg 1,109 lbs |
Fuel Tank Capacity: |
56 gallon 212 litre |
92 gallon 348 litre |
Baggage Volume: |
0.85 m3 30 ft3 |
0.91 m3 32 ft3 |
Seats - Economy: | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Seats - Business Class: | - | - |
Seats - First Class: | - | - |
Cabin Height: |
1.2 metre 3.94 feet |
1.2 metre 3.94 feet |
Cabin Width: |
1 metre 3.28 feet |
1.07 metre 3.51 feet |
Cabin Length: |
3.6 metre 11.81 feet |
3.4 metre 11.15 feet |
Exterior Length: |
8.3 metre 27.23 feet |
8.8 metre 28.87 feet |
Tail Height: | 2.72 metre - 8.92 feet | 2.8 metre - 9.19 feet |
Fuselage Diameter: |
1.1 metre 3.61 feet |
1.1 metre 3.61 feet |
Wing Span / Rotor Diameter: |
11 metre 36.09 feet |
10.97 metre 35.99 feet |
Wing Tips: | No Winglets | No Winglets |
More Info: | Cessna 172 Skyhawk | Cessna 182 |
Data presented is for entertainment purposes and should not be used operationally.
|
Other Cessna 172 Skyhawk comparisons:
Other Cessna 182 comparisons:
About the Cessna 172
The Cessna 172 first took flight in 1955 and remains one of the most popular single-engine aircraft today. It offers a comfortable cabin with seating up to four passengers and generous storage space.
Why was it developed and built?
Cessna wanted to create an aircraft that was easy to fly, reliable, and affordable. The Cessna 172 is powered by a four-cylinder Lycoming O-320 engine, which produces up to 160 horsepower.
What purpose does it serve?
The Cessna 172 is great for recreational flying and basic flight training. With its large cabin, it’s also suitable for short business trips. Finally, its short takeoff and landing capabilities make it a great choice for pilots looking to explore the backcountry.
About the Cessna 182 Skylane
The Cessna 182 Skylane first flew in 1956 and has become one of the most beloved aircraft on the market. This plane is slightly larger than its predecessor, offering more room in the cabin and increased storage capacity.
Why was it developed and built?
Primarily, the Cessna 182 Skylane was designed as a touring aircraft. It has the long-distance capability, meaning it can fly longer distances with fewer stops.
What purpose does it serve?
Starting with its more powerful engine, the Cessna 182 Skylane is a great option for flying longer distances. The increased power also makes it ideal for flying in higher altitudes. Additionally, its large cabin makes it suitable for long trips with larger groups of passengers or cargo.
How are the Cessna 172 and Cessna 182 Skylane different?
Although similar in design, the Cessna 172 and Cessna 182 Skylane offer different advantages for pilots. Let’s compare the two and find out.
Size
The Cessna 172 is slightly smaller than its counterpart, measuring 27ft in length versus 29ft for the Cessna 182 Skylane. This means that the cargo capacity of the Cessna 172 is slightly lower than that of the Cessna 182 Skylane.
Engines
The Cessna 172 has an engine rated at 160 horsepower, while the Cessna 182 Skylane has an engine rated at 230 horsepower—a significant power boost! This additional power allows the Cessna 182 Skylane to cruise at higher speeds and climb faster than its counterpart.
Range
The Cessna 172 has a range of about 800 miles, while the Cessna 182 Skylane can fly up to 1,070 miles. This makes it the perfect aircraft for longer trips and sightseeing adventures!
The comfort level for passengers
The cabin space of both planes is similar. Still, because of its larger size, passengers typically find it easier to move around inside a Cessna 182 Skylane versus inside a Cessna 172 due to increased legroom and headroom.
Also, because of its larger size and higher weight capacity, pilots typically find it easier to fly in turbulence with less stress in a Cessna 182 Skylane than with a Cessna 172 due to its increased stability during air disturbances.
Performance
Because of higher power ratings and greater load capacity, pilots typically find it easier to take off and land with heavier loads using a Cessna 182 Skylane, mainly due to reduced takeoff distances and improved rate-of-climb characteristics.
In addition, the Cessna 182 Skylane has better performance at high altitudes due to its more powerful engine.
How are the Cessna 172 and Cessna 182 Skylane similar?
They come from the same manufacturer, have been around for decades, and offer excellent performance capabilities. But how similar are these two planes? Let’s take a look at their similarities to find out.
- Design: Both are single-engine, high-wing aircraft with fixed tricycle landing gear, a full cowling, and a semi-monocoque fuselage.
- Avionics: Both are equipped with modern avionics suites, including an electronic attitude director indicator and an autopilot system.
- Cost: Both planes are relatively affordable and offer great value for the money, making them perfect for recreational and commercial pilots.
- Safety: Both planes have a great safety record and feature multiple redundancies designed to keep passengers safe.
What’s better about the Cessna 172?
Cessna 172s have stood the test of time – and with good cause. Affordability, aesthetics, and low operating costs continue to make them popular for weekend getaways or small-scale regional transports.
Advanced avionics systems paired with large cabin space make the Cessna 172 a smart choice for even further-reaching flights. It’s hard to beat the tremendous value this aircraft offers to those needing a reliable or recreational plane.
Not to mention its long-standing reputation as an excellent training aircraft across the globe! For decades, Cessna 172s have been the go-to aircraft of choice – and it doesn’t seem they’re going out of style anytime soon.
What’s better about the Cessna 182 Skylane?
The Cessna 182 Skylane is an impressive single-engine aircraft that truly provides a luxurious flying experience. With more power and excellent handling, it is perfect for pilots who desire a roomy, comfortable ride with plenty of power.
The airplane is equipped with advanced technologies and includes features like a newly enlarged and redesigned cabin interior.
Perfect for leisurely cruises or high-speed adventures, the Cessna 182 Skylane ensures ease of mind for its passengers through its reliability, comfort, and performance. All these features make it clear why it’s one of the most admired aircraft among recreational flyers.
In Summary
When it comes down to it, both aircraft have their pros and cons; however, if you want something with greater range, altitude capabilities, comfort level, or payload capacity, then the Cessna 182 Skylane might be your best bet.
That said, if you don’t need those additional features or don’t want to pay extra for them, then a Cessna 172 could still offer everything you need at a lower price point.