• This site moved from forums.flightinfo.com to flightinfo.com. Please update your bookmarks.

Cessna 152 vs. 172

oilcanbland

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
84
Total Time
400
Made the choice today to start my training in the 152 over the 172. Just wondering what the main differences were between the two, as far as how they handle in the air.

Thanks.
 

list2002

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Posts
323
Total Time
***
They are both very similar, only the 152 gets rocked around a bit more than a 172. Chances are you will end up flying a 172 eventually, when you get your private license and want to take up more than one passenger. Consistency is good during the beginning, but I actually started in a 152 as well, then switched. 152's are a little easier to spin, they break harder on a power-off stall... as far as learning though, it is more the instructor than the plane.:)
 

ShawnC

Skirts Will Rise
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Posts
1,481
Total Time
-5Z
152:
Pros:
Cheaper
Slightly more agile

Cons:
Slower
Most cases real basic panel
Only carries two

Pro/Con:
You get real close with you instructor

172:
Pros:
Faster
Most cases good panels (ie IFR)
Carries three

Cons:
More expensive
Not as agile (at least to me)

Pro/Con:
You're not as close to your instructor

Either way that you go they are both excellent training planes. Though the C152 won't take as hard of a nosewheel landing :) then again you aren't supposed to land it on the nose wheel.

Give them both a try and decide which you like better.

Edited because my mind thinks faster than my fingers move.
 

tarp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2002
Posts
539
Total Time
Lots
More of the same........

Cessna 172: Four seats, configured with anything from a 150HP to a 180HP engine, gross weight from 2300 to 2400 lbs. Top speed 115-125 kts. (at sea level). Stall speed approximately 46 kts. in landing configuration.

Cessna 152: Two seats, 110HP, gross weight of 1670, top speed of 110 at sea level and a stall speed of 43 kts in landing configuration.

The biggest difference will be the way you sit in the plane and comfort. The C-152 reminds me of British sports cars like MG-B’s and Triumph’s where you sit on the floor and move the pedals. The C-172 is opposite in that it reminds me of a Chrysler mini-van where you sit like you are in a kitchen chair.

The C-152 has bare bones instrumentation and controls and is truly a training aircraft. The C-172 can have enough bells and whistles added to make the instrument panel look confusing at first glance, but most do not.

As to flying and noted above, you will be flying a slightly slower but lighter airplane. It responds quickly to inputs. It will seem underpowered on hot days and it will be a bit “roady” making the bumps or winds seem bigger than they are.

I love all things that have wings – every airplane should be flown for enjoyment and learning. Each has its own personality. If you are second guessing your decision – don’t. The C-152 is a delightful trainer and will adequately prepare you for the Private Pilot’s license. The only draw backs are the aforementioned lack of power and the tight space in the cockpit with the inability to carry much weight. The advantage is that it is cheaper to fly.

If in the future you become tired of the plane or you just have more money to burn, fly the C-172 instead. You will have no problem flying the bigger Cessnas – in fact they were designed so that you could make the natural progression from 152 to 172 to 182 to C-210. All you have to do is respect the power and weight of each bigger sized airplane.

C-152 Likes: Nimble, beautiful little plane that I can teach students every single maneuver including spin training without a thought.

C-152 Dislikes: At my own weight of 200lbs I have to be concerned about weight and balance with the student customer and the fuel that I can carry on the flight. In our area, the practice area is pretty far from the airport and the slower speed can make for a long trip.
 

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
I prefer the full EFIS and Honeywell Primus Suite in the Cessna 152, over the basic steam gage setup in the 172. Further, the convenience and reliability of the turbojet engine makes it a far superior mount. Plus, it comes with it's own complimentary monkey...

The 172 offers standup convenience (for those too proud to sit on the lav), and the sex appeal of a larger, more stately ride at the FBO ramp.

For both, the executive appointment and reclining bucket seats with built in shiatzu massage fingers makes extended flights most enjoyable, while preserving one's look and attire for the inevitable worshippers waiting breathlessly at rampside upon one's return.

I'd give both a thumbs up.
 
T

TDTURBO

avbug said:
I prefer the full EFIS and Honeywell Primus Suite in the Cessna 152, over the basic steam gage setup in the 172. Further, the convenience and reliability of the turbojet engine makes it a far superior mount. Plus, it comes with it's own complimentary monkey...

The 172 offers standup convenience (for those too proud to sit on the lav), and the sex appeal of a larger, more stately ride at the FBO ramp.

For both, the executive appointment and reclining bucket seats with built in shiatzu massage fingers makes extended flights most enjoyable, while preserving one's look and attire for the inevitable worshippers waiting breathlessly at rampside upon one's return.

I'd give both a thumbs up.

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

dmspilot00

Independent
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Posts
712
Total Time
300
tarp said:

The biggest difference will be the way you sit in the plane and comfort. The C-152 reminds me of British sports cars like MG-B’s and Triumph’s where you sit on the floor and move the pedals. The C-172 is opposite in that it reminds me of a Chrysler mini-van where you sit like you are in a kitchen chair.
I agree, and you are the first person who has mentioned that. When I went from 152 to 172, it felt like I was sitting on a bar stool. I tried lowering the seat but then I couldn't see over the nose. Why did they make the floor so low? Also, with the way you sit the visibility during turns is a bit better in the 152, at least compared to 172, I know it is still a high-wing airplane. The cons of the 152 are the lack of space and weight problems mentioned. However they almost disappear when you fly solo (then it fits like a glove).

However, both airplanes are great.
 

Timebuilder

Entrepreneur
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,625
Total Time
1634
EFIS display. I like that!

I'd go with the 172 for comfort, the (usually) better instrumentation, power, and a usable rear seat. One of my flight students liked the 172 SP for the leather seats, but complained it didn't have power windows and locks like her car.

Truly, unless you like to think of yourself nestled in that MGB or Healy 3000, you will apreciate the added room of the 172 on a hot day. I have met few female instructors with whom I'd like to be "152 close", but you'll have to decide that for yourself. It can be a tight fit.

Now, for solo flying in day VFR a 152 can be fun. For spin training, it has to be held in the stall with the yoke pulled back, or it will quickly recover on its own. It's an inherently stable flying machine.

Do you have more than enough info for now? :)
 

ShawnC

Skirts Will Rise
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Posts
1,481
Total Time
-5Z
OMG that is the funnuest thing that I have ever read. Avbug you need to stop drinking on Mondays. :)

On a side note I will finally be able to fly a plane with EFIS, were doing a total project T-28, all that is left is the panel (which is going to be an EFIS), and painting pretty much.

It should be done, in say five years. :)
 

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
You're putting EFIS in a T-28? Blasphemy!

Come back into the light and repent, Shawn. It's not too late.

I did get to check out the last T-6's to come out of South Africa last year, and they had modern instrumentation with flight directors, and the works. Training aircraft for the military, reoutfitted with all the goodies. I have to admit, it looked pretty good in there, but I can't imagine slinging the instrumentation they had around very much.
 

bobbysamd

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
5,710
Total Time
4565
172 v. 152

I learned to fly in a 172. I got my instrument and commercial in a 172 (I got an Arrow to demonstrate the high-performance/complex stuff). Then, I trained a number of students in 172s. I don't think I have even 50 hours in 152s, but I've flown them enough to evaluate them as a training airplane.

Both aircraft will do the job. Both aircraft have trained thousands of pilots. Both are used at the name-brand schools and the lesser-knowns. Both are very basic aircraft. I'd go with a 172 because you do have more power, which is an advantage in the summer. You can practice the full range of commercial maneuvers in a 172. I remember I tried lazy 8s and chandelles in a 152, without success. Also, a 172 is more comfortable. If you can find an IFR-equipped 172, that's fine, because you can stay in that same airplane all the way through your Instrument. The others are correct about the (non)spin characteristics of a 172 v. a 152. But if you load a 172 right and the one in question is certificated in the Utility category, you can get it to spin. We had an instructor at Riddle who took our CFI students up for spin training. He could get a 172 wound up really tight.

You''ll be very happy if you can get in a Pen-Yan-modified 180 hp 172. The others are fine, but still underpowered. The 180-hp airplane is a 172 the way it was meant to be.

Good luck with your choice.

PS-I highly recommend that you do not change airplane types during your Private training. In other words, if you choose 152 stay with 152. You don't want to contend with different control characteristics while you're trying to learn how to fly. You want everything to stay as consisten as possible. After you get your Private, you can check out in different types.
 
Last edited:

ShawnC

Skirts Will Rise
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Posts
1,481
Total Time
-5Z
Its not my plane, I know nothing of the owner, but I am told at best it will do light aerobatics with this guy. Its going to have an EFIS, engine monitor, Garmin 430, and back up alt, and ASI.

The paint job hopefully will look good (its a test orange scheme), right now we have to figure out whats wrong with a fitting on the oil cooler. Its leaking more than it normally does.

Oh the best part its a Big engine model (T-28B) 1425 hp, that will be a joy to fly. Though I believe its post mort. so its expiermental with all those d@mn restirctions.
 

Geigo

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
94
Total Time
2900
Personally I prefer the 150/152. I have about the same time in the 150/152 as I do the 172, but more time instructing in the 150.

One thing I like for beginners is the 150 uses a larger attitude change to get a climb. In the 172 a slight change would give a 500ft/min climb and I would say "Did you see that change in attitude?" No. So what I ended up doing is putting the aircraft in level flight and having them make a mark on the windscreen with a pencil. If the mark moved, so would they. The 150 being "underpowered" made the pitch changes easier to see. Once they got used to it, it didn't matter what plane they were in.

Another thing about the 150 is 40 degrees of flaps. (The 152 only has 30.) This really made the student more aware the power curve and getting every bit of performance . Those big 'ol barn doors really provide allot of drag! One of my students ended up going to a big FL school and had a runway incursion followed by stuck flaps on a 172. He was glad he had some experience with "stuck" flaps on go-arounds!

As far as comfort, yes the 172 is bigger. I'm 6 ft and 210 lbs, but after I get in I don't think the 150 is that cramped. But I've always preferred aircraft that I sit in rather than up to. Now, if I'm with a student my size or bigger I will point out that with a useful load of 496 that doesn't leave any room for fuel. Many of my students are teenagers, so size isn't a problem.

It all depends on what your priorities are. Some want a brand new leather seat, IFR, GPS equipped 172 at $100-110/hr. Personally I've always had to work multiple jobs to earn my ratings. So to me I would rather save the $30/hr by using the 150/152 and then at the end take 3-5 hrs to transition to the 172. They won't even use the GPS until later anyway. Just my $.02 for what ever it's worth.

In any case your going to love flying. Just make sure to find a good instructor that will challenge you and allow yourself to have fun once in a while rather than train all the time. Make it your goal to become a safe pilot, not a good pilot. Being a good pilot will come with time and experience.

Geigo
 

troy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2002
Posts
528
Total Time
~500
I got my private in a C-152. I think that it makes a person a better pilot because of being kinda "too agile" and requires someone to be "on the ball" faster. Also, with the simple avionics pannel, come a simple ride at the end. You can't be asked to track the NDB when there is none in the A/C. (As an example) You can get checked out in the C-172 when you can carry passengers. No need to spend the money when pre-private, unless you want to.

Just my thoughts.
 
Top