On March 5, 1994, at 0935 eastern standard time, a Cessna 182RG, N738CK, collided with terrain during an aborted takeoff near Concord, North Carolina. The aircraft was substantially damaged. The private pilot and one passenger were not injured. The aircraft was operated under 14 CFR Part 91 by the pilot. Visual meteorological conditions existed at the time, and no flight plan was filed for the personal flight to Erwin, North Carolina. The flight was originating at the time of the accident. The pilot reported the following: All preflight operations were normal, and the aircraft was loaded with about 450 pounds of occupants and baggage, plus about 70 gallons of fuel. An engine runup was performed in front of the hangar on the north side of the airstrip, and all engine indications were normal. His normal procedure when departing to the south is to initiate a rolling takeoff from the hangar area, instead of from a dead stop at the north end of the runway. He recalled that the winds were calm, the temperature was cool, and the runway was "damp" from recent rain. During the takeoff roll, he felt a "sluggishness" in acceleration, but a scan of the engine instruments indicated normal readings. He passed a point where he checks his airspeed, and noticed a reading of 40 knots, where he expected 60 knots. During the next 500 to 600 feet of takeoff roll, the aircraft accelerated about 10 knots, and he elected to abort the takeoff. He closed the throttle, pushed forward on the yoke, and applied the brakes. Despite pumping the brakes, the field was too wet to provide adequate friction for stopping. In an effort to avoid a deep creek located past the departure end of the runway, he attempted to ground loop the aircraft. The aircraft turned 90 degrees to the west and came to rest on the west side of the runway. An inspector from the Federal Aviation Administration visited the accident site and inspected the aircraft. She reported that the pilot did not have a current biennial flight review, however he had been flying with an instructor within the previous 8 months in preparation for an instrument rating. She discussed takeoff techniques with the accident pilot, and the pilot reported that he did not consider the effects of a wet runway on an aborted takeoff, or on normal takeoff performance. The propeller from the aircraft was removed and repaired so that a test run of the engine could be performed. Once the propeller was reinstalled, the nose gear was secured so that the engine could be tested. The engine started immediately, and idled smoothly. The engine rpm was increased to 2,000, and a magneto check was performed, with satisfactory results. The engine speed was then increased to the red line limit. The engine again ran smoothly, with no hesitation or roughness. Oil pressure indications were within normal limits at all power settings. Engine compression was satisfactory on all cylinders. The mechanic who performed the inspection did note that there were no baffles installed in the muffler. The engine examination was then concluded.