New Aerotrek A240 vs 2020 Vashon Ranger

K

killerfish72

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
May 24, 2017
Messages
27
Display Name
Display name:
John
Hello PoA,

I'm seeking to see if anyone has some insight between these 2 aircraft (ideally flown both). I've owned a few airplanes (Beech Sundowner, C152, Cherokee 180, and a RV12) and trained on Cessna 150. So I'm pretty versed on Continental, Lycoming, and Rotax. Engine wise, I'm good with either -> With exception of wondering if the Continental O-200D will need a mid-time top overhaul pretty much no matter what (that's a big cost impact).

I have a deposit on the Aerotrek, but recently became a bit more interested in the Ranger. What's drawing me to it is almost exclusively because of the interior (cabin width, Avionics, baggage space). I realize the baggage area is pretty useless now b/c of weight, but if Mosiac happens this year, a gross weight increase to 1450 for the Ranger will do wonders. I really don't find the Ranger a looker at all. In fact, it's pretty ugly :) But that's not a factor for me.

I'm looking for more nuanced opinions folks may have (control harmony, visibility, fun factor, build quality, maintenance headaches, etc.). Any insight folks have that are willing to share?

Thanks!
 
No experience, but I read one report of difficulty insuring the ranger. Even at the time I couldn’t figure out why. So check with your ins com before you be either.
 
rhkennerly said:
No experience, but I read one report of difficulty insuring the ranger. Even at the time I couldn’t figure out why. So check with your ins com before you be either.
Click to expand...
That's interesting for sure. Wonder if it was an 'hours' thing? I have ~255hrs and a PP and am 52. Thinking I should be fine, but worth a double check. Good advice
 
Surprisingly, there’s 101 A240s on the registry and 103 Rangers.

That’s all I know about the two.
 
TCABM said:
Surprisingly, there’s 101 A240s on the registry and 103 Rangers.

That’s all I know about the two.
Click to expand...
Maybe. But it might also be the fact that unlike regular aircraft, the VR relies on a vinyl wrap for water tightness. I liked the VR, but the power plant is primitive. I absolutely love the rotax 912. Btw, I wanted a 240 myself. But was put off by the wait. So I got the Bushcat.
 

Vashon is held back by its engine. It weighs too much and isn't as long lived as the Rotax​

 
I loved my Rotax in the RV-12 too, but am just as fine with the Continental (other then a potential Top being needed). I'd really love a 'fun to fly' type of comparison between the 2. My flying is mostly local with occasional ~100-200 NM x-country. The RV12 was a blast to fly. Things like roll rate, control harmony, slow flight/sight seeing, etc.
 
After careful consideration and input from my CFO (wife), I'll be sticking with the Aerotrek for all the original reasons why I picked it out first. Thank you all for humoring me :) Reasons: New, Rotax w/ MoGas, 'Flickable'/fun flying, visibility (with full clear doors, roof, turtledeck), aesthetics... In the end, the extra baggage area for my needs I guess doesn't really matter.
 
I believe our EAA president is selling his Ranger. DM me if you want me to connect you.
 
Thank you, but I'm committed to the Aerotrek now. I had a great lead on a 2020 Ranger that hasn't been advertised yet so aquition wasn't going to be an issue. It's a Redwood Model with the basic white wrap, 340hrs. Was more about which airplane in my case though.
 
It's amazing how 10-15 years ago I heard so often that Rotax is "unreliable junk". I know builders that specifically avoided them. And now, Rotax is preferred over The LyCosaurus.

Either disrupt yourself or watch yourself get disrupted.
 
MountainDude said:
It's amazing how 10-15 years ago I heard so often that Rotax is "unreliable junk". I know builders that specifically avoided them. And now, Rotax is preferred over The LyCosaurus.

Either disrupt yourself or watch yourself get disrupted.
Click to expand...
Rotax is designed to avoid heat related issues that plague legacy engines and , when maintained properly, the engine hardly shows any typical heat related damage even after 1000+ hours but it does require more and different type of maintenance than legacy engines and it looks like that is not always an easy tradeoff given that overall failure rate is somewhat similar to that of legacy engines.
I remember reading somewhere that statistically Rotax engine failures tend to be more of improper maintenance type vs wear and tear related failures on legacy engines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top