Cessna 172R and Cessna 172 SP

[airjets]

What's the difference between these two???

[JEP]

Originally Posted by airjets

What's the difference between these two???

One letter...

Seriously though that is a little vague. Can you be any more specific? It may help someone answer the question.

Engine?
radio stack?
etc.....

Listing all the differences could take some time.

Here is some basic info concerning the models, courtesy of wiki-pedia:

172R
The Skyhawk R was introduced in 1996 and is powered by a Lycoming IO-360L2A of 160 horsepower. This is the first Cessna Skyhawk to have a fuel-injected engine.

The 172R's maximum takeoff weight is 2,450 lbs (1,113kg). This model year introduced many improvements, including a new interior with soundproofing, an all new multi-level ventilation system, a standard four point intercom, contoured, energy absorbing, 26g front seats with vertical and reclining adjustments and inertia reel harnesses.


[edit] 172SP
The Skyhawk SP was introduced in 1998 and is powered by a Lycoming IO-360L2A producing 180 horsepower. The maximum engine rpm was increased from 2,400 rpm to 2,700 rpm resulting in a 20hp increase over the "R" model. As a result, the maximum takeoff weight was increased to 2,550 lbs (1,157kg).

The 172SP is built primarily for the private owner-operator and is offered with the Garmin G1000 avionics package as standard equipment and leather seats.

As of 2007, Cessna offers both the R and SP models.

[mojo6911]

The R doesn't have leather seats and is HORRIBLY underpowered. Same airframe.

[AirVenture]

I believe both R and SP models can have leather (or more correctly vynil) seats as an option. A fully loaded SP flies like an R model with about half tanks.

-Brett

[MidlifeFlyer]

The performance difference is that in the R, the engine is derated to produce 160 rather that 180 max HP.

[EDUC8-or]

R underpowered? Ever fly a 150 or 152?

The R is cheaper to rent and looks the same in your logbook.

[tprops4me]

If you think the R is underpowered, you should try one of the old F models. The ones with the O-300 which gives a scortching 145 hp. The SP has more horses, but is heavier to start with. I fly an R with a 180 hp upgrade that has a better useful load than the SP. A 172 is a 172. They all use the same speeds. They are all 3 person airplanes. They are all slow. I will say that the SP has the most comfortable seats.

[mojo6911]

Originally Posted by EDUC8-or

R underpowered? Ever fly a 150 or 152?

The R is cheaper to rent and looks the same in your logbook.

Yes, I have flown both for about 200 hours. I expect a 2 seat aircraft made 30 years ago to be underpowered. Have you flown an R model with two normal sized adults in August in Texas?

[EDUC8-or]

I flew an R in Florida for several summers. I really liked that airplane, but that was compared to a 150, 152, Alarus, and Grumman Tiger. If I remember correctly the 150 and Grumman wouldn't give much more than 500 FPM from sea level up.

[deadstick]

The R and the S are the same except for some standard equipment (ie leather seats). The engine is the same model. The power difference is from the prop -- the R has a cruise prop and the S has a climb prop. The difference is 2 kts. The cruise prop (more pitch) slows the engine to 2400 RPM for the 160hp, whereas the climb prop lets the S go to 2750RPM (or 2700..?) for the 180 hp. The ASI, fuel flow, and tach indicators have the different limits illustrated. Oh, the serial number of the R doesn't have an "S" after 172.