Bonanza vs. everything else?

50k Tiger vs. 50k N35: round one... fight!
 
GeorgeC said:
50k Tiger vs. 50k N35: round one... fight!
Click to expand...
Worthy competitors. Choice depends on the mission. If most trips are under 300 nm, Tiger. Over 300 nm, N35.

N35 and P35 are the sweet spot in the Bonanza line, IMHO. Lighter MGW, good engine-airframe match, better fuel system; and the P finally has a rational panel.
 
Malibu won't fit in my hangar, but the C400 is an intriguing possibility.
 
Mooney Ovation again is the perfect choice...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
GeorgeC said:
50k Tiger vs. 50k N35: round one... fight!
Click to expand...

50k for a Tiger buys a mid time engine with a pretty nice panel, usually including a 430W or better. What's in the N35?
 
I own a 1979 Tiger with a 1490 SMOH, 430W, KX-170, DME, AT150, and C-1 Autopilot worth right at $48-$50K. Insurance that I just paid is $600 per year, and the fixed part of the annual inspection is $800. I have looked at 1958-1960 Bo's in that $45-60K range. You won't find many with a mid-time engine AND 430W,and/or a decent AP for that price range. They can be found, but expect about $1200 for insurance, and about $1200 for the annual. $1000 per year at $5/gal buys me 200 gals of gas or an additional 20 hours of flight time. Costs me 30 mins on a 400NM trip which I can do in 3 hrs with 900#'s of useful load (fuel, passengers, and bags). So what is not to like, unless your mission is routinely 700NM plus?
 
Whoops, OP said $250k budget, not $50k, on a 900nm mission. Sorry for the threadjack.
 
Yep that's why a Mooney Ovation is perfect.... can find a nice one for that, even with FIKI, that's easy range, and the Ovation is as fast as you get without turbos and O2... to go faster up high at that budget, a M20M would also work. Or a M20K if you want to spend less money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
White Elephant standing in front of this thread: maintenance. The Malibu i saw at my mechanic the other day needed a magneto filter (required every 100 hours). Cost? $300. FOR THE FILTER. So what? Well, the Malibu is a) pressurized b) retractable c) constant speed d)FIKI e)shall I stop? Basically every known thing you can put in an airplane... waiting to break. Requiring 100 hour replacement etc...

How you people can afford this complex stuff is worth a few threads I think...
 
I've been watching some videos on youtube of guys and their RV-10s and I'm wondering why they don't get more play from guys with budgets like the OPer.

For under 200k you can get a built, already decked out RV-10 that will cost you less on maintenance long term, have the latest and greatest tech, and go 170kts on a relatively economical fuel burn. Not having to deal with all the red-tape of having a certified plane is enticing as well.
 
Because theyre just as expensive as a certified hp single but were built by amateurs that have the legal allowance to introduce fabrication liberties or quality control problems you may not be kosher for a 150-200k resale purchase price. Other than the shooting, id say the play was rather fine mrs lincoln.

Joking aside, theres a lot of good things about exAB, but it requires accepting some very critical opportunity costs, especially for nom builders. For the rest, certified hell it is.
 
JohnAJohnson said:
The Cardinal RG is the only single engine Cessna without any gear ADs, so it's probably a safe bet for a retract.
Click to expand...
Not having ADs doesn't mean the gear system is reliable or free from maintenance problems. Our flight school had both of their 177RG's bellied after mechanical failures.

Not long ago someone was reading me an accident report about a plane that crashed because the pilot's little girl was flying while he attempted to urinate into the hydraulic reservoir. I said "That's got to be a Cardinal." And it was.
 
bnt83 said:
Because they can afford to pay someone else to fix it. Because they are 20% harder to work on (engines crammed in there) for 5% gain in efficiency.

:rolleyes: :D
Click to expand...

Lol old wives tale that doesn't apply to modern ones at all. I fly the same IO550 as the Cirrus and TTx, I just go faster for less money ;)

My flat rate annual is actually cheaper than a SR22 at my shop for whatever reason. I think that tells the story....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
flyingron said:
Not having ADs doesn't mean the gear system is reliable or free from maintenance problems. Our flight school had both of their 177RG's bellied after mechanical failures.

Not long ago someone was reading me an accident report about a plane that crashed because the pilot's little girl was flying while he attempted to urinate into the hydraulic reservoir. I said "That's got to be a Cardinal." And it was.
Click to expand...

177RG have known problems just like the rest. AD or not, none are immune from failures.

You would have to climb over the back seat into the baggage compartment to do that.
 
Last edited:
Bonchie said:
I've been watching some videos on youtube of guys and their RV-10s and I'm wondering why they don't get more play from guys with budgets like the OPer.
Click to expand...
With a $250k budget, I would be looking at RV-10 for sure. However, it's very difficult to find one with avionics that match the buyer's expectations. Every builder has his ideas, sometimes very strange. Actually, belay that, it's hard to find an RV-10 on the market, period. People aren't building many 4-seaters in general. But suppose you obtained your list of candidates and started going down it. How do you know if the airplane is assembled correctly? An RV-10 presented a sample of how not to attach a tail, a couple of issues of Kitplanes ago. A DAR missed it. At least if you're buying a Cirrus, you know that tail isn't going to flutter below the Vd.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
In this case.....it didn't work. :frown2::no::frown2:
Click to expand...
Most times when the reservoir is empty, its empty for a reason, adding more fluid just allows it to go the way the rest of it did.

But ya Gotta try right ?
 
Tom-D said:
Most times when the reservoir is empty, its empty for a reason, adding more fluid just allows it to go the way the rest of it did.

But ya Gotta try right ?
Click to expand...
well....you never cease to amaze Tom. o_O
 
Tom-D said:
Most times when the reservoir is empty, its empty for a reason, adding more fluid just allows it to go the way the rest of it did.

But ya Gotta try right ?
Click to expand...

Don't know about Cardinal failure modes, but there are a number of reasons the hydraulic fluid can go in the Navion. Most of them are pretty slow events (especially if you pull the emergency knob and stop the flow of hydraulic fluid from the reservoir ... the Navion pump is engine driven and runs constantly. I suspect the Cardinal only runs it's pump when it's raising or lowering). Sure you want to figure out where the fluid is going as soon as practicable, but that doesn't say that topping off the reservoir can't get the gear down one last time.

Of course in the Navion, the fluid reservoir on the hot side of the firewall.
 
I carry about a pint of hydraulic fluid in a ketchup squeeze bottle in the cabin. I can squirt it into the reservoir with the tip of the bottle if necessary. Hopefully it would be enough to get the gear down in an emergency. I think it's less corrosive than pee, and certainly easier to access...:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top