Beech F33A

Figure WOT, 2350RPM, 12.1GPH and 161 knots true. That's lean of peak.

Add in 4.5 GPH and 150 RPM, you get 170-173 (this is at altitude).

Burn more gas a little lower, you can cruise at 178 or so, but you'll be flogging a little.

F33A is a good bird, but I prefer the V-tail more. The F33A W&B graph shows available load in the top-right corner that the V35/V35A/V35B lacks, but it's illusory, because you burn yourself out of the envelope as you burn fuel.

At that price, if no surprises, it's a steal. Makes me want to cry. Only things I'd change would be (1) add an S-Tec PSS pitch system to the autopilot (the S-Tec 20 is roll only), and (2) replace the 89B and one of the 155s with a 430W or better.

You might pop your nose into BeechTalk, someone there might well know the plane personally.
 
SCCutler said:
Figure WOT, 2350RPM, 12.1GPH and 161 knots true. That's lean of peak.

Add in 4.5 GPH and 150 RPM, you get 170-173 (this is at altitude).

Burn more gas a little lower, you can cruise at 178 or so, but you'll be flogging a little.

F33A is a good bird, but I prefer the V-tail more. The F33A W&B graph shows available load in the top-right corner that the V35/V35A/V35B lacks, but it's illusory, because you burn yourself out of the envelope as you burn fuel.

At that price, if no surprises, it's a steal. Makes me want to cry. Only things I'd change would be (1) add an S-Tec PSS pitch system to the autopilot (the S-Tec 20 is roll only), and (2) replace the 89B and one of the 155s with a 430W or better.

You might pop your nose into BeechTalk, someone there might well know the plane personally.
Click to expand...

They were never in my market before but in this market????

Why do you like the "V" tail better?
 
Tom-D said:
They were never in my market before but in this market????

Why do you like the "V" tail better?
Click to expand...

Prettier. (grin)

Really, same plane. Some contend they can tell the difference in bumpy air, that the V has a little more waggle. Maybe so, but not much more.

If I'd found a plane like this when I was shopping, I'd have been all over it like stink on doo-doo.
 
I like the V tail better because a typical same year V35B will have 100 pounds more useful and fly 3 to 5 KTS faster on the same fuel GPH. Available CG range is the limiting factor for both, but the V tail has effectively greater loading flexibility. The F33A carries a price premium over the same year V tail, anywhere from a few thousand to 5 thousand, so the V tail is a better buy.
 
What's the big difference between a F33A and a Deb?
 
Tom-D said:
What's the big difference between a F33A and a Deb?
Click to expand...

60 HP. The F33A is factory fit with IO520BA or BB, while the Deb (C33) is IO470 (unless it's a C33A, which also had a 520).

Nearly all F33A had extended baggage area; no Debs did.

F33 had newer looking side window.
 
Tom-D said:
What's the big difference between a F33A and a Deb?
Click to expand...

The Debonair usually has a smaller engine and a lower GW. It was the Beechcraft low cost, strip down alternative to compete with the Comanche. Early Debs have a bench rear seat, the rear windows don't open, and it doesn't have cowl flaps, and initially had an IO470 with 225 HP. In 1966 it was upgraded to the C33A with an IO520, but had a max GW of 3300 verses the V35 of 3400. In 1968, the deb became a Bonanza and in 1970 it became the F33A, the same year the V tail became the V35B. From that point on the only difference between the airplanes was the tail configuration.
 
Got any soft spots in the F33A?

I know beech loves to use mag skins, corrosion a problem any more so than any other aircraft?
 
SCCutler said:
60 HP. The F33A is factory fit with IO520BA or BB, while the Deb (C33) is IO470 (unless it's a C33A, which also had a 520).

Nearly all F33A had extended baggage area; no Debs did.

F33 had newer looking side window.
Click to expand...
That extra 60HP sure would be nice sometimes. The IO470 Deb doesn't exactly climb quickly when loaded. But it'll still true 150 knots.
 
Tom-D said:
What's the big difference between a F33A and a Deb?
Click to expand...
Beech dropped the name "Debonair" and included the straight-tail 33 series in the "Bonanza" line beginning with the 1968 model year. So a '67 C33A Debonair and a '68 E33A Bonanza were just about the same except for the usual model year cosmetic changes. F33A was the model number from 1970 through the end of production in 1996.

With regard to the 33 series Debonairs and Bonanzas, if there is no suffix after the '33' in the model number (e.g., B33, C33, E33, F33), the engine was a 225 hp IO-470-J/K with fixed cowl flaps. The one exception was the oddball 1972 G33, with 260 hp IO-470-N, but only about 50 of those were built. An 'A' suffix (e.g., C33A, E33A, F33A) means the airplane had a 285 hp IO-520 with adjustable cowl flaps.

A 'C' suffix (E33C, F33C) is the aerobatic model with 285 hp. There was also an E33B (aerobatic, 225 hp) in the 1968 catalog, but none were sold.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
What is the general consensus of opinion of these aircraft.

what is normal cruise speeds? fuel burn? loading?


this one in particular

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_563907_1970+F33A+Bonanza.html
Click to expand...

160-165 @ 12-13 gph comfortably LOP, loading isn't a major issue for most people. Some of the planes have aft drift of CG, I don't recall on this model, but you just work out where who has to sit. Usually around 1100lb useful; maybe a touch under if it has old generations of unused avionics. You can probably get it to near 1300 with a good cleaning up, fresh insulation and lightweight starter and alternator. I've gained over 200 pounds useful load and haven't changed the starters yet.
 
Long involved AD list as always on a Beech product.

including this scary one.

93-24-03 Rudder falls off.. ?
 
Yeah, that is the big issue with Beech planes. Thing is most of them are simple and quick to comply with. I did like finding out that I have no applicable ADs on my plane.
 
jesse said:
That extra 60HP sure would be nice sometimes. The IO470 Deb doesn't exactly climb quickly when loaded. But it'll still true 150 knots.
Click to expand...

It flew nicely.

20 knots faster or more in cruise on the same engine I have, basically. I'm not injected, but horsepower is within 5 HP.

It was interesting how it slowly sped up after you leveled off, but just kept speeding up slowly.
 
jesse said:
That extra 60HP sure would be nice sometimes. The IO470 Deb doesn't exactly climb quickly when loaded. But it'll still true 150 knots.
Click to expand...


The IO-470 goes to 260hp, in those versions the 33 does very nicely. The 520 gets you some better climb, and a bit better top speed but at a significant price. For 160 kts they will cost basically the same with a slight advantage to the $470 because the purchase and overhaul price is lower and the 470 is the better engine.
 
I love the F33A's, they are fast and handle great.

Depends on the mission, just like anything. If you will fly with passengers often I would try and find a 36. Really look at the CG, not useful, and make sure it will work for you.

The price seems very low, I would approach with extreme caution.
 
Tom - Straight tail or V, Bonanzas are the finest light airplanes ever built. Fly one, you'll see. Great big picture windows, you sit right above the wing leading edge, responsive ball-bearing flight controls and good performance. Consider this: Even aircraft made to compete with Bonanzas are pretty good airplanes. Plus, an outstanding owners group - The American Bonanza Society.
 
John Collins said:
The Debonair usually has a smaller engine and a lower GW. It was the Beechcraft low cost, strip down alternative to compete with the Comanche. Early Debs have a bench rear seat, the rear windows don't open, and it doesn't have cowl flaps, and initially had an IO470 with 225 HP. In 1966 it was upgraded to the C33A with an IO520, but had a max GW of 3300 verses the V35 of 3400. In 1968, the deb became a Bonanza and in 1970 it became the F33A, the same year the V tail became the V35B. From that point on the only difference between the airplanes was the tail configuration.
Click to expand...
I could be wrong but AFaIK none of the 33s have openable windows at the second row of seats.
 
I flew one with a 550 conversion. It's a nice handling plane. I'm one of those people who believes more power is more better, but the 520 version I couldn't imagine being too much slower. We did 168 KTAS @ 14 gph, but the owner liked flying 50 ROP. I explained to him why that was a bad idea, he didn't want to listen. His engine, that's fine.

Only thing I view as a negative with them is the fact that the A36 is pretty much the same speed with a much better cabin. However, it costs more.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I flew one with a 550 conversion. It's a nice handling plane. I'm one of those people who believes more power is more better, but the 520 version I couldn't imagine being too much slower. We did 168 KTAS @ 14 gph, but the owner liked flying 50 ROP. I explained to him why that was a bad idea, he didn't want to listen. His engine, that's fine.

Only thing I view as a negative with them is the fact that the A36 is pretty much the same speed with a much better cabin. However, it costs more.
Click to expand...
The A36's "much better cabin" isn't any different from the pilot's seat but those big double doors are very popular for the folks in back as well as anyone trying to load big packages into the plane.
 
Barring any surprises, that would be a fantastic airplane. I've only flown the IO470 Deb. Very stable. A lot of fun to fly. I wish that I could fly it more often.
 
For those of you with a weight and balance for the F33A,

If I place 320# worth of Pax in the front row, and 400# of Pax in the second row, how much fuel and bags can I carry?
 
Last edited:
Pilawt said:
Openable center windows were optional from 1968 (E33/E33A), and standard on the F33A from 1971 on.
Click to expand...


FWIW, I believe the center opening windows are ground operation only but their primary value is as emergency exits. One pulls a pin in the latch mechanism and the window may be flipped fully open for egress. The center windows are restricted against opening for in-flight ventilation.
 
The book Flying The Beech Bonanza by John C. Eckalbar is highly recommended for anyone considering a Bonanza. It discusses performance, handling, systems, aerodynamics and W&B issues for the whole line.
 
Tom-D said:
For those of you with a weight and balance for the F33A,

If I place 320# worth of Pax in the front row, and 400# of Pax in the second row, how much fuel and bags can I carry?
Click to expand...

Here is a starting point, each aircraft is different
http://www.tolerfamily.net/WB/W_B.htm

That chart is for a/c with tip tanks. Adjust accordingly
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
For those of you with a weight and balance for the F33A,

If I place 320# worth of Pax in the front row, and 400# of Pax in the second row, how much fuel and bags can I carry?
Click to expand...

The vast majority of V35B and F33A's would be very CG challenged with the cabin load you suggest. It is best to consider them three person airplanes with baggage. They rarely run over the Max GW limit, but the aft CG is a challenge with four. If you require this type of loading, you should be looking at an A36 in the Bonanza line. I have a spreadsheet that has the W&B data for 234 Bonanza and Baron aircraft organized by model and year. It has data on 40 F33A's with the average CG location of 81.96 inches, empty weight of 2329 lbs, useful load of 1113 lbs. Some of the aircraft in the data have increased maximum GW (usually an IO550 upgrade). The equivalent average numbers for the same year range V tails are: on 49 V35B's with the average CG location of 79.43 inches, empty weight of 2240 lbs, useful load of 1185 lbs. The aft CG limit on the F33A is located at a fixed value of 86.7 inches whereas the V35B starts at 84.4 inches at max GW (3400) and moves aft to 85.7 inches at 3000 lbs where it remains fixed for weights below that value. One might think that the F33A offers a greater range on the aft CG, but it is an illusion because the empty CG location starts out further aft (in my average data it is (81.96 - 79.43) 2.53 inches further aft to begin with whereas the initial aft CG at maximum GW is (86.7 - 84.4) 2.3 inches. The loading of passengers, fuel, and baggage are identical (same stations) for both aircraft, so if a loading fits in the V35B at the aft CG limit and maximum GW, it will be over the maximum GW in a typical F33A and outside its aft CG limit. Even if a particular loading fits within the limits, as fuel is burned off, the CG shifts aft. This means you can take off and be within the limits on a F33A, but as you burn off fuel, exit the aft CG limit. On the V35B, the aft CG limit moves to the rear at the same rate as the burning of fuel shifts the CG aft, so if you start out at Max aft CG and Max GW, you can burn off 400 pounds of fuel (444 pounds for full fuel) before you will exit the aft CG limit. In the F33A under the same conditions, you will exit the aft CG limit as soon as you burn any gas.

All this said, each airplane is different and some have better starting points, so it is the particulars that matter, not the averages. Some can do what you ask, most can't. An F33A with the Tornado Alley TN IO550 upgrade, puts enough weight up front and adds substantial useful load and is effectively a totally different airplane in regard CG and useful load issues.
 
gismo said:
The A36's "much better cabin" isn't any different from the pilot's seat but those big double doors are very popular for the folks in back as well as anyone trying to load big packages into the plane.
Click to expand...

Correct, the pilot and copilot's seats are no different.

I suppose I think of everything in terms of "How many dog crates can I fit in this thing?" :)
 
For speed even the 550 is a poor trade for the 470. Where it pays off is climb performance. Speed beyond 165ktas in that airframe at NA altitudes <12,500' are very costly in fuel. If you want to go faster efficiently I'd look at a big bore Mooney. If I could have one with a 230hp SMA Diesel I'd be happy enough for now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top