Later they used essentially the 205/206 Fuse with struts
The 205 came from the 210, not the other way around as was suggested. When the 205 was intially certified, it was done on the 210 type certificate as the 210-5. In fact the 205 was originally built on the 210 tooling. The 206 was simply a 205 with an IO-520 in place of the IO-470.
A 182 RG must be faster than that though, I once flew the mighty 172RG and it did 140kts
The 182RG I fly does 160/161 ktas with 2 POB and 200lts in the tanks. It drops back to 156 ktas with a full load. Fuel flow is 52 lt/hr. I had an oppotunity to fly another RG recently and it wound out to 163 ktas in the cruise with a light load. Some of the above have suggested that 182RG's are good for about 145 kts and not much more. If that's all your getting, your might want to locate and use the gear retract handle.
Cessna had a lot of trouble in marketing the 210 against the 182RG
It was the other way around. 182RG production ran to 2042 units (plus another 170 aircraft from the frogs). 80% of the RG fleet was manufactured in the first three years of production. After that, 182RG sales tapered off dramatically. Over the same period of time Cessna manufactured 2727 210's (not including the P210). The 210 outsold the RG in every year except 1979. Twice as many 210's were rolled out of the factory doors from '81 through '86 than the 182RG. In the last year of production (for both aircraft) for every one RG, there were six 210's. The RG became known as the poor man's 210. For not a lot more money, you could get yourself into a 210 instead of a 182RG and this was certianly reflected in the sales figures.
But, if your in the market for a true 4 seat retracable nothing else can touch them.