There’s a good reason the Cessna 182 has been the most-produced non-trainer, non-combat airplane in history. It’s aviation’s Swiss Army Knife. There are many faster flying machines. There are many that are more efficient. A few single-engine airplanes will carry more. Several have larger cabins. Others will take off and land shorter. Many are cheaper. But we aren’t aware of any that do all those things so well at a better price.
Want to buy a personal airplane that has the space to carry most of the stuff that you need, at a speed that doesn’t require you to time trips with a calendar, that will go in and out of backcountry strips as well as meld with the fast-movers at metro airports, has two big doors so you can get out easily if things go south, a fuel burn you can afford and endurance that doesn’t require stopping every 30 minutes? Yep, it’s going to be a 182.
Want to make it even better? Turbocharge the gem. That’s what Cessna did with its T182T model—which came back into production last year after a 10-year hiatus. We think it’s quite a flying machine, with some jarring shortcomings for an airplane built in this century. We’ll talk about the good and the bad and express our concerns over engine operating guidance in a moment. First we’ll focus on how the world arrived at this point on the Cessna 182 timeline.
A little history
In the early 1950s Cessna developed its first two nosewheel airplanes—the models 310 and 318. The latter is more commonly known by its military designation, T-37, a twin-engine jet trainer. The company knew the benefits of nosewheels for handling on takeoff and landing for less experienced pilots—the sort that might be persuaded to buy its aircraft.
Although word is that there was significant internal resistance—“real airplanes have tailwheels”—Cessna also began developing nosewheel versions of its models 170 and 180. The results, the 172 and 182, were offered for the 1956 model year.
What happened next was a marketing department’s dream come true—the airplanes sold and sold and sold. The 172 became the most popular general aviation airplane in history, with the 182 not far behind.
Almost immediately, Cessna dubbed the 182 the Skylane. Over the next few years Cessna deepened and widened the fuselage, making the cabin significantly more comfortable. The vertical tail was swept, a rear window was added and gross weight was steadily increased.
The original 182 design became the basis of the models 205, 206, 207 and 210 as well as a retractable-gear version of the 182.
By the 1980s, Cessna had had nearly 20 years of success turbosupercharging its airplanes. (A supercharger is an air compressor driven mechanically by the engine; a turbosupercharger is an air compressor driven by a turbine spun by engine exhaust. The full word is rarely used—it’s more commonly called a turbocharger or just turbo.) The turbo versions always outsold the normally aspirated models.
Cessna turbocharged the 182 for the 1981 model year, although the turbo system was a fairly high-workload, fixed wastegate affair that required careful tweaking of the throttle by the pilot. Nevertheless, it outsold the normally aspirated 182 handily through 1986 when Cessna stopped building piston-engine airplanes.
Cessna started making piston-powered flying machines again in 1996. That included bringing back the normally aspirated 182. It waited until the new century to introduce a Turbo Skylane with some significant improvements. The original T182T was offered in 2001 with aggressive corrosion-proofing, airframe cleanups and a more user-friendly turbo control system. The 235-HP, 2000-hour TBO, Lycoming TIO-540-AK1A engine was matched with a sloped controller in the turbo system that sensed manifold pressure and adjusted the wastegate to keep the correct amount of exhaust gases going through the turbine section of the turbocharger to maintain the desired manifold pressure. For background—the wastegate is a valve that directs exhaust gases through the turbine section of the turbocharger until the system decides the amount is appropriate and then it vents any excess into the overboard exhaust pipe.
Production Changes
A decade and change later—2013—Cessna shut down Turbo Skylane production as it sought to create a diesel-engine replacement. After years of trying, it simply didn’t work. Cessna then made what we consider a smart decision—reintroduce the T182T, after all, the turbo lets a 182 do all of its good stuff at higher altitude. Plus, the aerodynamic tweaks made it a surprisingly fast airplane—more on that shortly.
Deliveries of the new T182T began in 2023. The newest ones have the latest version of the Garmin NXi avionics suite installed along with a heated propeller and even nicer interior options. Max operating altitude is 20,000 feet. Cessna told us that the base price is currently $760,000.
To wrap up the background discussion it’s appropriate to describe Cessna’s model nomenclature. The “T” at the beginning of a model number indicates that the airplane is turbocharged. The letter after the number designates the specific model as shown on the type certificate. The first model of any Cessna has a number without a letter suffix, for example, the 1956 Model 182. The first model of a Cessna is often called the “no letter.” For the 1957 model year Cessna made enough changes to the original 182 that it received type certification as the 182A. Subsequent model changes received a new letter, although the letters “I” and “O” were skipped. The current, normally aspirated 182 is the 182T.
Systems
For our review, we flew the first T182T that came off the assembly line in 2023. It was equipped with most available options, including air conditioning and a gorgeous interior—all of which, we discovered, is heavy. Empty weight of the airplane is 2191.5 pounds—77.5 pounds more than Cessna advertises on its website. Max ramp weight is 3112 pounds (max takeoff is 3100 pounds), giving a useful load of 920.5 pounds. Max landing weight is 2950 pounds—so 162 pounds of fuel (27 gallons) has to be burned off following a max weight takeoff. The wing integral fuel tanks hold 92 gallons, of which 87 gallons is usable—that’s a lot of fuel, in our opinion, for a piston single of this size. It gives a pilot significant loading options in turns of cabin load versus range.
Filling the tanks means carrying only 398.5 pounds in the cabin. That’s not even two large people. However, full fuel gives over five hours of endurance at 15 GPH. Nevertheless, the new T182T is heavy—it’s got big airplane equipment in it, sophisticated turbocharging, hot prop and air conditioning and those aren’t light. While the airplane we flew is 77 pounds heavier than Cessna advertises, being heavier than advertised isn’t unusual.
As it is, in the review airplane, were we to put four-200 pounders in the cabin it would be over its maximum landing weight with no fuel aboard. Um, oops. Juggling fuel and passengers will be required, and we recognize that few people ever fly four-place airplanes with the seats full.
We worked a hypothetical flight in which we would be landing with 10 gallons aboard, about 40 minutes of fuel at 15 GPH. Working backward, we added 27 gallons of fuel, the minimum necessary to burn off after a gross weight takeoff to land below max landing weight. That left the maximum possible cabin load for the review airplane of 698.5 pounds—or three large adults and baggage. Max allowable baggage is 200 pounds split between three zones.
We also ran through a series of cabin loading scenarios and found that Cessna’s reputation for long center of gravity ranges carries on with the T182T. We didn’t find a scenario that loaded the airplane out of CG forward or aft.
The fuel system is standard Cessna single—two tanks and a fuel selector that offers left, right, both and off positions. To avoid inadvertently shutting off the fuel, the selector valve must be pushed down before it can be rotated to the “off” position. We liked the accuracy of the fuel gauging system, something important when launching with partial fuel may be routine.
The electrical system is dual bus, 28-volt DC, powered by a 95-amp alternator with primary and standby batteries. The standby battery will power the equipment on the essential bus for about 45 minutes.
Up front, the T182T’s Lycoming engine is a “max continuous” engine—there is no time limit on full-power operation. It develops its full-rated 235-horsepower continuously at 32 inches of manifold pressure, 24 GPH fuel flow and a quiet 2400 RPM all the way to 20,000 feet.
Looking at the exterior, this new T182T revealed excellent fit and finish, a beautifully applied paint job and some of the aerodynamic tweaks made over recent years to maximize speed such as smaller steps, low-drag wheel fairings and a low-profile beacon.
The Cabin
Inside, it’s a 182 with modern appointments and very comfortable seats plus cup holders and USB outlets. The two cabin doors are big, one of the reasons for the popularity of the 182. It’s an easy step into the cabin for everyone, no climbing on a wing. If it’s raining, you stay dry while loading and unloading—one of the reasons this airplane was sold to its owner. We had flown a 1960s-era 182 a few days before our review and we were impressed by how easy the seats in the new T182T were to adjust in comparison—and how easily the airplane rolled when it came time to taxi. The seats were all equipped with AmSafe airbag seatbelts—Cessna has been a leader in crashworthiness and going with the top-of-the-line restraint system is the way to go in our opinion.
The clean panel is dominated by the Garmin NXi two-screen display with all controls, switches and knobs easily accessible to the left-seat pilot.
Flying It
We were surprised at the complications and time involved in starting the engine. The process, including system checks, takes nearly a minute before the starter switch is engaged. When finally commanded, the engine started easily on the first try, even though it was hot.
We spent a fair amount of time with the Garmin G1000 NXi integrated avionics system but only scratched the surface of its capabilities, including SurfaceWatch runway identification alerting, wireless database and flight plan loading from a tablet or smartphone, Safe Taxi guidance and HSI mapping on the PFD. In our opinion, Garmin and Cessna have worked well on a seamless integration between avionics and the T182T airframe.
It was a hot morning, so we’d activated the electric air conditioning immediately and were pleased at how fast it cooled the cabin. Moving out, the Turbo Skylane taxied almost effortlessly; there was no feeling of a heavy engine bogging down nosewheel steering. After flying older Skylanes, we had forgotten how easily a new airplane rolls.
Prior to flight, we’d looked over takeoff and landing performance data and were reminded that the T182T is one of the few production four-place airplanes that meet the Department of Defense’s definition of STOL aircraft right out of the box. It will take off and land over a 50-foot obstacle in less than 1,500 feet at sea level on a standard day. For that, 20 degrees of flaps are used on takeoff and full flaps on landing.
For a normal takeoff we used Cessna’s recommended 10 degrees of flap. Moving the throttle forward it’s necessary to monitor manifold pressure. While the turbo system controlling unit is designed to hold MP at a maximum of 32 inches, cold oil can make it sluggish, so it’s possible to overshoot on a cold day takeoff. If the MP hits 32 before full throttle travel, just stop pushing and wait for the system to catch up.
On our takeoff the system worked as advertised, holding 32 inches of manifold pressure and 24 GPH fuel flow. It stayed right there as we climbed out, not changing unless we moved the throttle. That’s what we expect from a good turbocharging system.
Acceleration is pleasantly rapid and right rudder is required, more so once the nosewheel lifts off.
Once the flaps were up we held Vy—84 KIAS—and watched the rate of climb approach 1000 FPM on a warmer than standard day while 200 pounds below gross. Book best rate is shown as 1015 FPM. We think that’s an accurate assessment.
Climb Procedures
The POH sets out procedures for a “normal” and “maximum performance” climb. Both are performed at 2400 RPM—which is max RPM for the engine, making the T182T one of the quieter general aviation airplanes on climbout. The “normal” climb calls for pulling power back to 25 inches of manifold pressure and 16 GPH fuel flow. When we did so, the rate of climb sagged off by nearly half, ranging between just over 400 FPM and 550 FPM.
That was proof positive, to us, that making a power reduction for climb in an airplane with a max continuous power engine makes no sense. It increases the time to altitude and burns slightly more fuel—according to the POH—than a climb at full power. In addition, in case of an engine failure after takeoff, the higher it happens, the better for radius of action for a forced landing.
Using full power and climbing at Vy, the time to 20,000 feet per the POH is only 23 minutes from sea level and burns 9.2 gallons. For a “normal” climb, it takes 24 minutes just to get to 12,000 feet and burns 6.3 gallons. Comparatively, at full power and Vy, it takes 13 minutes and 5.1 gallons of fuel to get to 12,000 feet.
We also saw high CHTs in the reduced power climb. We think Cessna should remove any reference to a reduced power climb from the POH.
Control forces are heavy; however, if you apply the necessary pressure, the Turbo Skylane is quite responsive with a fast roll rate. Trim is your friend in all flight conditions, making the airplane delightful to fly with positive stability. That’s one of the reasons for the popularity of the 182 series. With trim, steep turns and slow flight are easy and the airplane stays where it is put in slow flight, which is handy when going into short fields.
The Garmin Electronic Stability and Protection system kicked in during maneuvering (it can be disabled). It is a safeguard to protect the pilot while hand flying. Once the aircraft is rolled beyond a selected angle of bank or gets faster or slower than set speeds, it applies control forces to roll the airplane toward wings level or pitch up or down to control speed.
We like this system, especially because inflight loss of control is well up there when it comes to risk of fatal accidents.
Stalls are pure Cessna—no big deal. Gentle break, keep the ball centered, lower the nose, add power, pitch up and you’re climbing.
We did some speed runs and found that the airplane met or beat book numbers. The fact that the big Lycoming can be run at as much as 87 percent power got our attention. At 10,000 feet that’s good for a book speed of 155 KTAS at 17.8 GPH. At 20,000 the engine can be run as high as 82 percent giving 165 KTAS at 16.3 GPH. Being able to get there in 23 minutes and then hustle along that fast is some impressive performance.
Turning flight control over to the Garmin NXi proved smooth and easy. Even now that we’re used to the capabilities of the automation, it’s still impressive and worked flawlessly in the T182T.
As we let down toward landing, ATC asked us to keep our speed up as long as possible. That let us take advantage of another capability of the T182T. You can go fast until close in, then power back and take advantage of the high flap speeds—10 degrees at 140 KIAS, 20 at 120 KIAS and all of them at 100 KIAS. It allowed us to easily be stabilized at a final approach speed of 60 KIAS at a comfortable position on final.
The frequent claims that 182s are nose heavy aren’t true, it’s just near its forward CG limit with two aboard so it takes a hefty pull to flare for landing, because the pilot is working against the downspring in the elevator system and the airplane wants to return to its trim speed. Power off prior to the flare and making the effort to raise the nose rewarded us with a pleasant, low-speed touchdown.
Conclusion
The T182T continues the tradition of the Skylane doing almost everything well, while adding impressive performance at altitude. The downside is the empty weight of the airplane combined with Lycoming’s odd resistance to lean of peak engine operation that handicaps useful load, range and endurance.
During our review of the Turbo Skylane we were struck by pair of issues that, in our opinion, markedly decrease the utility of an otherwise very capable airplane and potentially adversely affect safety of flight: the unexpectedly small useful load combined with Lycoming’s (www.lycoming.com) engine operating instructions. Lycoming certificated the engine, so Cessna must follow Lycoming operating protocols.
Lycoming’s recommended lean mixture setting is 50 degrees rich of peak turbine inlet temperature (TIT). That’s point 1 on the chart below—taken from the Lycoming Operator’s Manual for its TIO-540 series engines. The red and green annotations were added by George Braly of General Aviation Modifications Inc. (GAMI) (www.gami.com), well known for operating the most sophisticated general aviation engine test facility in the world.
With what has been known from published test data over the last 40 years, 50 degrees rich of peak is not a good place to run an engine. It is the power setting for the highest combination of heat, internal cylinder pressure and minimum detonation protection—and may necessitate cylinder replacement prior to engine overhaul.
For best power, Lycoming calls for running at 125 degrees rich of peak TIT, point 3 on the chart. It is better for detonation protection but still in the detonation risk envelope.
For best economy, Lycoming recommends a power setting at peak TIT, point 2 on the chart. Note that it is still within the detonation risk area and just barely into what Lycoming itself shows as the best economy range on its chart.
The actual best economy power setting, according to Lycoming’s own chart, is 25 degrees lean of peak, point 4 on the chart. It is dead center in Lycoming’s best economy range and at the lowest point on Lycoming’s specific fuel consumption curve on the chart.
Point 4 provides the full detonation protection and cylinder head temperatures (CHT) are 15-20 degrees Celsius cooler than operating at points 1, 2 or 3—increasing cylinder life.
However, lean of peak (LOP) operation is not “approved” by Lycoming. That does not appear to be a limitation, just a recommendation. It also makes no sense from the standpoints of safety (cooler temperatures, increased detonation protection), economy and payload on a heavy airplane. Plus, we’ve run Lycoming engines LOP for decades. They have a reputation for excellent mixture distribution between cylinders and, in our experience, run beautifully LOP.
Not operating the engine lean of peak means being required to carry additional fuel—2 to 3 gallons for each hour of operation—adversely affecting the airplane’s payload. For a four-hour flight, that’s 48 to 72 pounds wasted on an airplane where every pound of payload counts. For a five-hour flight, the fuel saved could add up to an additional hour of flight time flushed out of the exhaust pipe.
When we reached out to Cessna with questions on engine operation of the T182T, the spokesperson declined to answer, noting that it must follow Lycoming’s procedures.
With the constant fight for every pound of useful load in aircraft design, having to tanker extra fuel is foolish, in our opinion. When it comes to weight and payload of the T182T, we hope that Cessna will manage to convince Lycoming to come into this century when it comes to engine operating procedures and substantially increase the utility of the T182T.
