182 engine upgrades

Bluestreaker

Jo mamma
Joined
Feb 20, 2003
Posts
68
Total Time
1.3
Hey guys/gals, I'm part of a skydiving club with 2 182s. We are looking into upgrading one of the engines currently an 0-470. We're leaning towards P-ponk because of the price, but I wanted to see if anyone out there had done any upgrades. I'm looking for fuel burns, climb rates, tbos, prices and different companies. any information would help. Thanks.
 

Hand Commander

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Posts
118
Total Time
4600
I worked at dz that had two 182's with the P Ponk conversion. I'm not sure what the initial cost is, buts its a pretty dramatic increase in climb time versus the regular 0-470. "Dramatic" probably being 4-8 mins faster with a full load to 12500'. Basically .5 per full load. Full burn I think we figured 15 -16gal/hr. As far as I know, I think the dzo made TBO consistantly without having to replace cylinders. The planes also had wing extentions as well. I liked the configuration mostly because you're now within gross weight with 4 people plus pilot and fuel (the gross weight increase with the wing extensions). Throw in some speed brakes and you'd have a pretty efficient one dirty two. These were A model aircraft too without cowl flaps.
 

Bluestreaker

Jo mamma
Joined
Feb 20, 2003
Posts
68
Total Time
1.3
Thanks for the info, Right now we're only climbing to 10,000 and with a full load that takes us about 35 to 40 min wheels up to touchdown.
 

A Squared

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
3,006
Total Time
11000
It's a company that offers a couple of STCs for cessna 180/185 aircraft. The most common mod up here and the one that the name P-Ponk is generally associated with is a strengthing modification for the gear box on the C170/180/185 aircraft. The mod in question is the engine conversion. In short, you take an O-470 and install IO-520 cylinders, but retain the carburator which gives you an O-520.

P-Ponk is Knopp (Name of the guy who started it), backward.
 

A Squared

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
3,006
Total Time
11000
These were A model aircraft too without cowl flaps.
You sure the 182A didn't have cowl flaps? I'd be pretty surprised if it didn't. The 180 had cowl flaps from the beginning (I own a 180 as in the model before the 180A) and there really wasn't much difference between the 180 and 182 for the first few model years.
 

Hand Commander

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Posts
118
Total Time
4600
One of the planes had a short 3 bladed prop and the other had a longer two bladed. They ended up switching the 3 bladed to a two bladed because their wasn't any more performance with the 3 bladed (less noise for sure, though). The 2 bladed on that engine is EX tremely loud. You definitely get that same prop tip sonic "crack" on take off, like a 185 at full power take off. I think they list the pros and cons of each prop set up on the website.
 

Hand Commander

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Posts
118
Total Time
4600
You sure the 182A didn't have cowl flaps? I'd be pretty surprised if it didn't. The 180 had cowl flaps from the beginning (I own a 180 as in the model before the 180A) and there really wasn't much difference between the 180 and 182 for the first few model years.
Yup. Sounds strange and I haven't come across any like that since, but no cowl flaps. Just little louvre like slots on both sides of the cowl. Don't quite remember the years but I think around '59ish.
 

Seadogrun

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Posts
263
Total Time
1
You sure the 182A didn't have cowl flaps? I'd be pretty surprised if it didn't. The 180 had cowl flaps from the beginning (I own a 180 as in the model before the 180A) and there really wasn't much difference between the 180 and 182 for the first few model years.
I believe that only the first year didn't have cowl flaps. There's an article in a rescent AOPA mag about it.
 

flyalot

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Posts
132
Total Time
2700
P-Ponk conversion makes a big diffrence. How much? Not sure. But as a pilot I can tell the diffrence!
A former Boss switched to the three blade, Performance went down for climb, He went right back to the two blade.
In cruise, the three blade was worth 5 knots.
It's been a few years since my 182 time, so memory might be off a bit.
 

MauleSkinner

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 4, 2005
Posts
638
Total Time
10,000
I believe that only the first year didn't have cowl flaps. There's an article in a rescent AOPA mag about it.
Yup...according to the article, the changes to accomadate a nose gear didn't leave room for cowl flaps. 182B's were the first to have cowl flaps.
 

woutlaw

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Posts
85
Total Time
Medium
I ferried a 182 with a Texas Skyways conversion a year or two ago. What a wonderful machine.

It's a 285 hp O-550 with a big ol' three bladed prop hung on the nose. Super smooth, climbed like crazy and has a 2,500 hour TBO or something like that.

Dunno about drop zone ops, but if I ever own a straight-leg 182 I'd do it in a heartbeat. Cruise was ~150-160 knots true on 16 gph. (It was a new engine, around 25 hours, and I was just ferrying it to the new owner so I ran it on the rich side to keep everything nice and cool. I'm sure you can lean it down around 14 gph easily.)
 

A Squared

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
3,006
Total Time
11000
I believe that only the first year didn't have cowl flaps. There's an article in a rescent AOPA mag about it.
Oh, yeah, got my AOPA Pilot today, there it was right on the cover. Learn something new every day.
 
Top