Want To Buy Buying a C-150 or the “best airplane one can afford”?

steingar said:
Whatever aircraft the OP purchases should already be IFR capable when he purchases it. The premium for a nicely equipped aircraft is dwarfed by the price of installing avionics. Haven't seen too many IFR capable 150s. Oh they're out there, but there aren't that many.
Click to expand...
Very few. Found four of them with IFR, priced at $38\51\68\85k respectively depending on TTAF and other conditions.
 
Initial Fix said:
OP. Great advice above for planes in your budget. There is nothing wrong with a 152 but I think you will quickly get board with it. I’d look for a solid 172, older 182, 4 place pipers, 4 place Grumman or even a step into a bonanza once you have your instrument ticket (Insurance is the likely limiting factor without an ifr ticket).
Click to expand...

Got my instrument written done and was hoping to buy an IFR ready plane to practice. I haven't thought about the insurance part yet. Thanks for your kind reminder. I Will call AOPA tomorrow to sort out my opinion to get insured as a student pilot.
 
Chapel K. said:
Mark, As per your suggestion, I did spend some time looking at Van's RV-12 along with other models. From your logo picture, it seems you have an RV? I like the fact that most of Van's planes are newer, assuming with fewer maintenance expenses. Is that the case? My other concern is whether my CFI or examiner might have cold feet with an "experimental aircraft". Would appreciate input from everyone.
Click to expand...

I have a Grumman AA1C because I could not afford an RV. Experimentals are a lot more mainstream than they used to be, finding a CFI for instruction will likely not be difficult. With the RV-12, it will be even less of an issue, because the SLSAs are becoming rather popular trainers
 
The Grumman AA1A/B/C could be worth considering also. But one of the issues with mine is that I could not do a checkride in mine because once I'm in there I don't have enough remaining load for any DPEs I know.

I have trouble suggesting the the Tiger because they seem expensive on the used market (to me at least), but the Cheetah and the Traveler may be good options
 
What do you want to be flying in 3 years, when you are bringing along your family?
 
I suspect at the end of the day a Cherokee variant is going to be the most parsimonious for the training mission. Fixed gear and low parts count makes them relatively low-maintenance. Training in a retractable will raise insurance costs too markedly to be worth it. Cherokees are very benign, with a slight speed edge over Skyhawks. They can be had less expensively most days. There are lots available with some variant of an IFR panel.

Were it me I'd rent for training and save my money. Once I had the PPL I'd transition into what I thought my forever plane would be. For me it's a Mooney, but I'm me. Nothing at all wrong with a Bo that a fat wallet can't cure. Still, the faster retractables are also very stable and solid IFR platforms, and lots of them are already equipped with the instrumentation to fly IFR. Also, once I through the whole training process I think I knew better what my mission would be, and I've found my Mooney a very good platform for the kind of flying I do.
 
Chapel K. said:
Probably Bonanza
Click to expand...

I cannot comment on how good of an intermediate it is for a Bo, the Beechcraft Musketeer was literally designed for that.

It was intended to fill the market as a stepping stone to the Bonanza, with the goal of creating long term customers through a Skipper -> Musketeer -> Bonanza pipeline.

Its laminar flow wing makes it like a lot of runway (I would not plan on strips under 3000ft), and it's massive wing tanks make it easy to overload (this is an advantage if you actually do a weight and balance).

It has four seats, but it shines with only 2 in it, because the 60 gallon tanks will give almost 700nm range (with reserves). You may not last 6 hours in the seat, but having fuel that will means you can fly to airports without fuel on the field, or you fill up at a cheap airport and fly back if you base an airport with expensive gas.

Last, they trade for only slightly more than the good Cessna 150s. For 25% more, you get a more stable IFR platform, huge tanks, the option of carrying for people (with partial fuel), and much more spacous and comfortable interior.

Some warnings: Get a prebuy from a shop familiar with the Musketeer. Avoid the IO-346 engine, it's not a bad engine, but parts seem scarce if anything does break. Landing gear pucks are expensive, for a short term plane you don't want to have to do that job, pay extra to find one that has good gear. For the prices they trade at, it will be tough to get your money back on an IFR upgrade, so I would look for one that has already been upgraded (remember, you don't need to get your IFR rating). If I can't find that, I wouldn't upgrade past a GNX 175 or GNX375 (if it needs, adsb), because you will at least recover that cost in money saved on rentals in the 40 hours of hood time.

Keep in mind that this advice is coming from someone with 0 time logged in any Beechcraft product. I did some research when I was shopping for a plane, because I considered a couple Musketeers, but at the end of the day, this advice is likely worth less than you are paying for it.
 
Last edited:
MarkH said:
If I can't find that, I would upgrade past a GNX 175 or GNX375 (if it needs, adsb)
Click to expand...

3 things:

1) Thread creep alert
2) Upgrade past? What does that mean - skip the 2" navigators in favor of a GTN 650/750? (Maybe it's a typo and/or maybe I'm not picking up what you're laying down. I assume you mean put in a 2" navigator - ala the GPS 175 or GNX 375 (if it needs a GPS and ADS-B).
3) Here here on the GNX 375. I absolutely love it. I bought my plane in November with stock 1979 avionics. Alternatives were a GTN 650 and GTX 345 (ADS-B in and out, bluetoothed to an iPad to get traffic/weather on Garmin Pilot / ForeFlight). Granted, the GTN has a slightly larger screen and a NAV/COM. (And even the Nav and or Com is optional!). But, for comparison, I got quotes for a GTN 650 and GTX 345 for $18 - 20k installed, depending on labor. I had the GNX 375 installed for $11k which included a new transponder antenna, cables, encoder, etc. I wanted everything to do with the transponder replaced. We are based in the DC SFRA and having surveillance crap out on us would be more than an inconvenience :)

My point is - I love the 375. Hindsight, we may have been better served with a 650/345. It keeps the boxes separate, so if for example, one craps out, we wouldn't be down the other. IE - 650 goes down, we can use our backup comm and still have a working transponder while we wait for repairs. Then again, if the GTX goes down, we're out for the count anyway.

For comparison, if we were to replace one of our legacy nav/coms with the GNC 255, that alone would be $4k plus labor.

Rambling here :rolleyes: What did I say about thread creep? Okay, time to bounce off the walls elsewhere and let the coffee dissipate :goofy:

Cheers and again keep us posted.
 
Nathan Miller said:
3 things:

1) Thread creep alert
2) Upgrade past? What does that mean - skip the 2" navigators in favor of a GTN 650/750? (Maybe it's a typo and/or maybe I'm not picking up what you're laying down. I assume you mean put in a 2" navigator - ala the GPS 175 or GNX 375 (if it needs a GPS and ADS-B).
3) Here here on the GNX 375. I absolutely love it. I bought my plane in November with stock 1979 avionics. Alternatives were a GTN 650 and GTX 345 (ADS-B in and out, bluetoothed to an iPad to get traffic/weather on Garmin Pilot / ForeFlight). Granted, the GTN has a slightly larger screen and a NAV/COM. (And even the Nav and or Com is optional!). But, for comparison, I got quotes for a GTN 650 and GTX 345 for $18 - 20k installed, depending on labor. I had the GNX 375 installed for $11k which included a new transponder antenna, cables, encoder, etc. I wanted everything to do with the transponder replaced. We are based in the DC SFRA and having surveillance crap out on us would be more than an inconvenience :)

My point is - I love the 375. Hindsight, we may have been better served with a 650/345. It keeps the boxes separate, so if for example, one craps out, we wouldn't be down the other. IE - 650 goes down, we can use our backup comm and still have a working transponder while we wait for repairs. Then again, if the GTX goes down, we're out for the count anyway.

For comparison, if we were to replace one of our legacy nav/coms with the GNC 255, that alone would be $4k plus labor.

Rambling here :rolleyes: What did I say about thread creep? Okay, time to bounce off the walls elsewhere and let the coffee dissipate :goofy:

Cheers and again keep us posted.
Click to expand...

Actually you were right to point that out, that was an error on my part. It should have read "wouldn't".

My point being that with the low prices and less demand (compared to a 172 or Cherokee), spending more money to upgrade a Musketeer beyond absolute minimum LPV approach capability will not see returns.
 
Some of my IFR training was in a 150 in hot weather. Fighting the thermals and turbulence in that featherweight made the learning slower, since one spent a lot of time just trying to keep the wings level instead of learning to finesse the glideslope or maintain altitude tolerances in cruise. The 172 and its higher wing loading was easier and I made the switch. My students later found it better as well.
 
dmspilot said:
What? $85K for a 150?
Click to expand...
Cannot believe it. The owner loaded whole lot of avionics, Garmin GPS 400, Garmin GTX 327 TXPR, Garmin GDL 82 ADS-B Out, Garmin GMA 340 Audio Panel, King KN 53 NAV, King KY 196 Comm ... you name it. also, it has a low TTAF of 3000 hours... But it is still a C-152. My guess is that the owner fell in love with it... still so when trying to sell it.
 
Dan Thomas said:
Some of my IFR training was in a 150 in hot weather. Fighting the thermals and turbulence in that featherweight made the learning slower, since one spent a lot of time just trying to keep the wings level instead of learning to finesse the glideslope or maintain altitude tolerances in cruise. The 172 and its higher wing loading was easier and I made the switch. My students later found it better as well.
Click to expand...
You are right. it's getting hotter in Southern California... good point. Thanks.
 
I would make the call and inquire about Insurance costs, that may very well answer all your questions right there. When I started to fly my biplane I couldn't even get insurance so flew naked for 2 years. Research research research! Complex aircraft get expensive fast and right now you want to build hours, stay true to your mission while shopping.
 
Spotter626 said:
I would make the call and inquire about Insurance costs, that may very well answer all your questions right there.
Click to expand...

Give Mike Strombeck a call at Aviators Insurance. He's somewhat local to OP (near KVNY) and is really good at what he does. He'll give you the straight information to help you make your decision. www.aviatorsinsurance.com
 
SoCal 182 Driver said:
Give Mike Strombeck a call at Aviators Insurance. He's somewhat local to OP (near KVNY) and is really good at what he does. He'll give you the straight information to help you make your decision. www.aviatorsinsurance.com
Click to expand...
I called both AOPA and Mike. His son, Raynor answered my questions. A rather helpful conversation. An important finding is that if I were to insure the new purchase as a student pilot, a higher premium will stay until next year, say July 2021 to be lowered reflecting the PPL. He will give me a couple of quotes comparing the premium between a student pilot and PPL. Maybe, renting a c-152 from flight school for check-ride then buying after getting my PPL would save me some $. Thanks for the recommendation!
 
Spotter626 said:
I would make the call and inquire about Insurance costs, that may very well answer all your questions right there. When I started to fly my biplane I couldn't even get insurance so flew naked for 2 years. Research research research! Complex aircraft get expensive fast and right now you want to build hours, stay true to your mission while shopping.
Click to expand...
I doubt that I could fly w/o insurance...as I read the tie-down agreement at my local airport requiring proof of insurance. But I did make a couple of calls today regarding the insurance. Seems that I will have no problem getting insurance either with RV-7 or Bonanza or something else. but it will be more expensive for a student pilot.
 
MarkH said:
I cannot comment on how good of an intermediate it is for a Bo, the Beechcraft Musketeer was literally designed for that.

It was intended to fill the market as a stepping stone to the Bonanza, with the goal of creating long term customers through a Skipper -> Musketeer -> Bonanza pipeline.

Its laminar flow wing makes it like a lot of runway (I would not plan on strips under 3000ft), and it's massive wing tanks make it easy to overload (this is an advantage if you actually do a weight and balance).

It has four seats, but it shines with only 2 in it, because the 60 gallon tanks will give almost 700nm range (with reserves). You may not last 6 hours in the seat, but having fuel that will means you can fly to airports without fuel on the field, or you fill up at a cheap airport and fly back if you base an airport with expensive gas.

Last, they trade for only slightly more than the good Cessna 150s. For 25% more, you get a more stable IFR platform, huge tanks, the option of carrying for people (with partial fuel), and much more spacous and comfortable interior.

Some warnings: Get a prebuy from a shop familiar with the Musketeer. Avoid the IO-346 engine, it's not a bad engine, but parts seem scarce if anything does break. Landing gear pucks are expensive, for a short term plane you don't want to have to do that job, pay extra to find one that has good gear. For the prices they trade at, it will be tough to get your money back on an IFR upgrade, so I would look for one that has already been upgraded (remember, you don't need to get your IFR rating). If I can't find that, I wouldn't upgrade past a GNX 175 or GNX375 (if it needs, adsb), because you will at least recover that cost in money saved on rentals in the 40 hours of hood time.

Keep in mind that this advice is coming from someone with 0 time logged in any Beechcraft product. I did some research when I was shopping for a plane, because I considered a couple Musketeers, but at the end of the day, this advice is likely worth less than you are paying for it.
Click to expand...
I read your post a couple of times. Learned a ton of information and knowledge as well as the thinking process. Very helpful! Appreciated.
 
Chapel K. said:
I called both AOPA and Mike. His son, Raynor answered my questions. A rather helpful conversation. An important finding is that if I were to insure the new purchase as a student pilot, a higher premium will stay until next year, say July 2021 to be lowered reflecting the PPL. He will give me a couple of quotes comparing the premium between a student pilot and PPL. Maybe, renting a c-152 from flight school for check-ride then buying after getting my PPL would save me some $. Thanks for the recommendation!
Click to expand...

Mike and Raynor are good guys! I'm glad you were able to get more information to help you make your decision.
 
Chapel K. said:
I called both AOPA and Mike. His son, Raynor answered my questions. A rather helpful conversation. An important finding is that if I were to insure the new purchase as a student pilot, a higher premium will stay until next year, say July 2021 to be lowered reflecting the PPL. He will give me a couple of quotes comparing the premium between a student pilot and PPL. Maybe, renting a c-152 from flight school for check-ride then buying after getting my PPL would save me some $. Thanks for the recommendation!
Click to expand...
I would recommend finishing the PPL especially if you're so close. There are a lot of "distractions" (even headaches) that suddenly come up when you own. I would not want to be in the position of owning/maintaining a bird while also trying to get my PPL over the finish line - especially if you're going to start training in it before your checkride. Get the PPL done with the planes you already know and then be ready to pounce. The good birds go fast.

If you are truly interested in a Bo, HIGHLY recommend joining ABS (American Bonanza Society). The dues are worth it - trust me. I wanted a Bo, but did a bunch of research on ABS and decided my pocketbook wasn't quite ready.
 
3 in the green said:
I would recommend finishing the PPL especially if you're so close. There are a lot of "distractions" (even headaches) that suddenly come up when you own. I would not want to be in the position of owning/maintaining a bird while also trying to get my PPL over the finish line - especially if you're going to start training in it before your check-ride. Get the PPL done with the planes you already know and then be ready to pounce. The good birds go fast.

If you are truly interested in a Bo, HIGHLY recommend joining ABS (American Bonanza Society). The dues are worth it - trust me. I wanted a Bo, but did a bunch of research on ABS and decided my pocketbook wasn't quite ready.
Click to expand...
American Bonanza Society ！ Great suggestion. Haven't heard of them...alas, how much I know about aviation stuff...lol...but keep learning every day. At least, I will be able to find out if I could really afford a Bo. Also, I almost made up my mind to continue through the checkride with a rental for PPL. Will use my own plane for IFR training and check-ride. Thanks man for your kind recommendation!
 
Good thought on renting during this phase. I bought in to a Tri-Pacer about where you are. I was so proud, and loving flying my own plane! Then while in for routine maintenance, new oil line to the oio presure gauge, the maintenance hagar blew down around and on top of the Tri-Pacer! Long story short it set me back at least a year, however it was a great learning process.
 
Spotter626 said:
Good thought on renting during this phase. I bought in to a Tri-Pacer about where you are. I was so proud, and loving flying my own plane! Then while in for routine maintenance, new oil line to the oio presure gauge, the maintenance hagar blew down around and on top of the Tri-Pacer! Long story short it set me back at least a year, however it was a great learning process.
Click to expand...
I appreciated sharing your experience and offering your kind recommendation. I have decided to take the check-ride an independent project from buying a plane. Will reschedule my check-ride with DPE asap while researching for the right aircraft. For now, I have RV-6/7, 172 or Bo (for the longterm goal ) on a shortlist.
 
CEFJ mooney depending on your useful load. Jump right in. You’ll be able to be insured. Go far / fast on little gas. Enough useful load for a three or four depending on how much gas you put in.

If you want to put more in it and go slower, skip the 15x/172 and find a 182. They all fly the same.
 
As the insurance agent told me that it would be hard and expensive to get my new plane insured with a Student status. Given I am so close to getting the PPL done, I resumed checkride preparation this past Monday. Shooting for the end of July. Then make the purchase. Thanks all for your kind suggestion and input. Happy Flying!
 
If you are up for an Experimental, I have a Vans RV-6A for sale which is completely built with engine but needs some updating and sent to DAR.

My friend who flies my RV6a was a student last year and we were able to get him insured with minimal issue.

If you want a cheap flying machine where you can do conditional inspections as owner assist and can do upgraded and minor updates yourself, Vans aircraft is your best bet.

It will be cheap to own/operate and will give you some legit travel ability and useful load.
 
Last edited:
DMat47N said:
If you are up for an Experimental, I have a Vans RV-6A for sale which is completely built with engine but needs some updating and sent to DAR.

My friend who flies my RV6a was a student last year and we were able to get him insured with minimal issue.

If you want a cheap flying machine where you can do conditional inspections as owner assist and can do upgraded and minor updates yourself, Vans aircraft is your best bet.

It will be cheap to own/operate and will give you some legit travel ability and useful load.
Click to expand...
What airport is the RV-6A based?
 
The 6A is disassembled and in my hangar at 47N. I'm on the east coast in NJ.
 
My RV9a is about 60 bucks an hour to operate, stalls at 42 knots, and cruises at 150. It’s my first plane and I was a brand new pilot when I bought it. I have absolutely zero regrets. Insurance was 1100 for a low time pilot on it too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Staying on the van's RV topic and hoping it will add some insight for the OP, I flew an RV-7A for the first time yesterday.
It was a great plane in all respects. The main thing I didn't like about it was on takeoff and landing... it's a bit squirrely. Winds were 5G15kts. Also lots of thermals at 3pm and those were noticeable, but manageable.
The instructor had me crossing the numbers at 80 knots which seemed fast to me... and surprising...seeing such low stall speeds on the spec sheet.
What do you other RV flyers cross the numbers at?
 
In my 9 I cross at 65. Touchdown is usually around 55. 80 knots seems speedy for a 7. 80mph is prob right on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
DMat47N said:
The 6A is disassembled and in my hangar at 47N. I'm on the east coast in NJ.
Click to expand...
I am afarid that I don't have what it takes to put them together ... as I have zero mechanic experience, at least for now. It would make more sense if I could buy Van's aircraft in one piece. On the other hand, your project could be the best thing for someone with that talents and experience, to put it together and bring it back to the sky.
 
Skyrys62 said:
Staying on the van's RV topic and hoping it will add some insight for the OP, I flew an RV-7A for the first time yesterday.
It was a great plane in all respects. The main thing I didn't like about it was on takeoff and landing... it's a bit squirrely. Winds were 5G15kts. Also lots of thermals at 3pm and those were noticeable, but manageable.
The instructor had me crossing the numbers at 80 knots which seemed fast to me... and surprising...seeing such low stall speeds on the spec sheet.
What do you other RV flyers cross the numbers at?
Click to expand...
I would love to hear more about Van's or Sling or anyother experimental aircrafts. Thanks
 
I have a friend in S. Africa who deals with Vans and Slings and he likes them both. I haven't flown a sling but they do look like nice aircraft.

There are a lot of RV's on the used market already built. I would push you in that direction as I went to Vans and will never look back. They offer such a wide array of planes to suit all sorts of missions and they are a blast to fly! The "RV Grin" is a real thing.
 
Last edited:
Caution flag for @Chapel K. -- You may have issues finding a CFI to finish your PPL in an RV-7. Transition training also requires turning over a few rocks. And throw in the "learn in someone ELSE's plane!" adage.

But, for IR and commercial you can (and should) use a well equipped RV6/7/9, which will blow the wings off every C150, even the $85k ones.

Of course, the RV will cost you $60-100k, (for MOST of the two place) or if you want 4 up you're talking, IMHO, $160k minimum for a well built and outfitted 10.
 
Good call Ravioli. PPL will be tough to find someone for training.
 
Ravioli said:
Caution flag for @Chapel K. -- You may have issues finding a CFI to finish your PPL in an RV-7. Transition training also requires turning over a few rocks. And throw in the "learn in someone ELSE's plane!" adage.

But, for IR and commercial you can (and should) use a well equipped RV6/7/9, which will blow the wings off every C150, even the $85k ones.

Of course, the RV will cost you $60-100k, (for MOST of the two place) or if you want 4 up you're talking, IMHO, $160k minimum for a well built and outfitted 10.
Click to expand...
That is 100% true. The LSA is different from C-150 or C-172. I recently tried Sling 2 and found my landing was back to day 1 of my training. But I will learn to fly Sling as I heard from other pilots saying that the two, Van's and Sling, share a lot more similiarities. Also, Sling Club has a lots of CFI ready to teach me. Thanks a lot Rob!
 
Chapel K. said:
172 is on my short list. Checked out your previous plane, really nice one. Good for you! How long have you had your Zodiac? What's your experience when compare an experimental vs. a certified one?
Click to expand...
Sorry about the delayed response. I bought the Zodiac in May, 2016 and converted it to experimental through a DAR in November, 2016. It's perfect for the kind of flying I do, and economical to operate and maintain. It burns about five and a half gallons/hour in cruise and because it's experimental I can perform my own maintenance and minor modifications. I have my FAA Light Sport Repairman - Inspection certificate and can perform and sign off my annual condition inspections.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top