Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Cessna 152 vs. 172

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

oilcanbland

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
84
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.
 
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.:)
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
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.
 
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? :)
 
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. :)
 
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.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top