200 HP fixed gear 177s

https://www.cardinalflyers.com/tech/info/200_1968.php

Personal Opinion / YMMV

I would personally avoid any Integrated Fuel Tank aka Wet Wing C182…. Search BT and elsewhere toward Cessna Wet Wing Issues, and the general inability to finitely resolve the issues, and, or the lack of any meaningful warranty after spending meaningful AMUs attempting a Fix

6 or 7 AMUs in Total to replace 2 Bladders will arguably look cheap compared to the cost an attempted Cessna 182 Wet Wing Leak Fix

Agree, I enjoyed 88 gallons usable in my 1979 C182 in the mid-1980’s

After adding the IO-550-D to my 1977 C182Q, I wanted more fuel / range and chose to add Flint Aero Internal Aux Tanks - 12.5 gallon added per wing / 23 gallon additional useable fuel - 7 AMUs Installed

I can now carry 97 gallons usable / 7 Hours to Exhaustion LOP

Your experience, thus far, with your 2 AMU Wet Wing repair sounds spectacular compared to what I’ve read over the last few years

My combined new bladders and added Flint Aero Internal Aux Tanks cost to get to 97 gallons usable was roundly 14 AMUs, and arguably 25 year fix

I’ve read about people spending as much as 14 AMUs per wing attempting to repair leaking Cessna Wet Wings

The newer ones are corrosion proofed, have more crash worthy seats, modern instrument panels, Lycoming engines and cylinders instead of Continental cylinders. Any 182 is a good airplane but if I were going to make the investment, I’d spend a bit more up-front and get a newer model.

The 177B Cardinal wins the entry / exit ease competition hands down.

My TN 182RG has RSTOL and does pretty well on short fields. The A/C is also a big bene here in hot country.

Restart 182’s are highly desirable.

Seats, panel, and electric system all much better.

Someone said they don’t produce more power. That is a not true. Look at service ceilings on models with same 3100 # GW. I have north of 1,000 hours in one. They carry a premium in the market.

R models came zinc chromated from the factory. Possibly the Q, but not sure.

I’m curious to know how 230hp in the new ones is more than 230hp in the old ones.

I’m curious to know how 230hp in the new ones is more than 230hp in the old ones.

I’m curious to know how 230hp in the new ones is more than 230hp in the old ones.

I’m curious to know how 230hp in the new ones is more than 230hp in the old ones.

Did someone say Cessna 182?

I’m curious to know how 230hp in the new ones is more than 230hp in the old ones.

I’m curious to know how 230hp in the new ones is more than 230hp in the old ones.

I see low-mid 140s at cruising altitudes with my -U. It’s livable, but XP470, or one of the others, is the way to go if you’re doing an all out upgrade from scratch.

I’ve always been interested to see what it would do if I turned it up to 2650rpm. That’s essentially what the John Jewell 252hp stc is, with a different carb and balance tube.