Buying a plane to train in and beyond.

KeithASanford

KeithASanford

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
558
Location
Northern Virginia
Display Name
Display name:
MyTurnToFly
Jason Schappert from M0A recently did a pretty cool webinar on buying an airplane and it got me thinking...How would you decide what plane to buy to finish your training? I myself, loved the Cherokee 180 and the Warriors I trained in, but I'm wondering if I purchased one would it be enough plane for me going forward? I plan to get my instrument after I complete my PPL but not right away.

My wife doesn't fly at all and my boys have no interest so I'm on my own. I'd like to buy a plane for me that will give me the performance of the 180 with maybe a little more speed. I can't imagine flying beyond a 400 mile radius 99% of the time with an occasional trip to Missouri.
If you were going to buy an airplane to complete your training and say, you're fond of Cherokees, what would be a natural step up?
 
You can never go wrong with a Cherokee 180 ,well maintained and upgraded,you won't loose on your investment. I had an arrow for a time and liked it.
 
You may want to consider a Dakota, Pathfinder or 235. Little more horse, great load and a little faster.
 
I'd fly more types before I bought if I were you. Lots of options, Grummans, PA24, 170s, tailwind W10s, RVs, etc etc.
 
A pilot on a budget could buy a Piper Colt for $12,500 and get that back most likely when done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I bought a Cherokee, a PA-28-201T, after about 100 hours and got my instrument rating in it. Most of my trips are an hour or two with the occasional loooong one.

I don't mind the low speed on the short trips and dream about a slick E-AB two seater on the long trips. The fact remains that the Cherokee gets in and out of most places easily and op cost isn't horrible. Insurance is cheap. Parts are readily available. The potential maintenance problems are well known and a decent A&P can spot'em on the pre-buy without a lot of effort with the exception of inspecting the spar behind the fuel tanks.
 
KeithASanford said:
Jason Schappert from M0A recently did a pretty cool webinar on buying an airplane and it got me thinking...How would you decide what plane to buy to finish your training? I myself, loved the Cherokee 180 and the Warriors I trained in, but I'm wondering if I purchased one would it be enough plane for me going forward? I plan to get my instrument after I complete my PPL but not right away.

My wife doesn't fly at all and my boys have no interest so I'm on my own. I'd like to buy a plane for me that will give me the performance of the 180 with maybe a little more speed. I can't imagine flying beyond a 400 mile radius 99% of the time with an occasional trip to Missouri.
If you were going to buy an airplane to complete your training and say, you're fond of Cherokees, what would be a natural step up?
Click to expand...

225hp 33 series Beech. Gives you the extra speed you want and burns MoGas.
 
Depends on your budget. You can train in anything, not just a Cessna or a Piper.
 
After a lot of agonizing over RV-9s and such, I've decided on a certificated plane because I would imagine the safety standards are consistent from aircraft to aircraft. I don't trust myself to build or evaluate what's been built.

My budget is $60k and I may at some point, be able to convince one of my kids to fly with me. It's not likely, but I'd like to have the option for at least one passenger. I'd like to be able to carry stuff, as I would if I drove, maybe 50 lbs max. I favor fixed gear for simplicity and insurance purposes. Does that narrow it down a bit?
 
KeithASanford said:
After a lot of agonizing over RV-9s and such, I've decided on a certificated plane because I would imagine the safety standards are consistent from aircraft to aircraft. I don't trust myself to build or evaluate what's been built.

My budget is $60k and I may at some point, be able to convince one of my kids to fly with me. It's not likely, but I'd like to have the option for at least one passenger. I'd like to be able to carry stuff, as I would if I drove, maybe 50 lbs max. I favor fixed gear for simplicity and insurance purposes. Does that narrow it down a bit?
Click to expand...

Check out PA24s of you can handle a RG, not a big deal really.

Outside from that a PA28-180 is a nice little fixed gear cruiser, as is a Cessna 170, if you have the chops for a taildragger, also check out Grumman AA-5s, faster than the PA28, more nimble and they are quite nice with the sliding canopy, also can't go wrong with a Maule.

I'd say that's a good bit of range for you in the $60k arena.



Certified aircraft being safer is hogwash, after a plane has a few years on it, it just comes down to maintenance and pride of ownership, and that doesn't care if it's certified or exp.
 
Last edited:
The most common recommendations you will see for this are PA28-181 (Archer), and a Cessna 182. Maybe a PA32-236 (Dakota). If you can afford it. The Warriors and 172's are really more training planes, and the slightly higher performance, but still simple planes, will take you further after you PPL.
 
KeithASanford said:
After a lot of agonizing over RV-9s and such, I've decided on a certificated plane because I would imagine the safety standards are consistent from aircraft to aircraft. I don't trust myself to build or evaluate what's been built.

My budget is $60k and I may at some point, be able to convince one of my kids to fly with me. It's not likely, but I'd like to have the option for at least one passenger. I'd like to be able to carry stuff, as I would if I drove, maybe 50 lbs max. I favor fixed gear for simplicity and insurance purposes. Does that narrow it down a bit?
Click to expand...

Well, if you want fixed gear and family versatility, at $60k you can get a pretty decent 182. It does pretty well at filling a lot of missions, including back country camping.
 
James331 said:
As to the certified aircraft being safer is hogwash, after a plane has a few years on it, it just comes down to maintenance and pride of ownership, and that doesn't care if it's certified or exp.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to take this conversation in this direction, but I would agree if RV was building every RV. Sometimes an RV is built by some half committed weekend warrior, and I don't trust myself to be able to tell the difference between the two.
 
Cherokee 180, 235, or archer are all good planes that suit the mission. Could also find a beech skipper, f33, or m20c will fill the role you're looking for. On the high wing side, anything from a 140 to 172 would be a good choice. There are also more obscure options like the short wing pipers.

You're looking for a bog standard 2-4 place entry level aircraft- there are a lot of choices out there.
 
Your story is basically the same as mine. I trained in a Cherokee and love the low wing. I had a $60K budget. 90% of the time I fly solo, but wanted four seats just on the off chance the family wants to ride along for lunch or something simple.

I also wanted something I can grow with, but was cheap enough to fly as much as I want to.

I now own an amazing Mooney M20C. I get 150 kts TAS at 8 gph. I've put 220 hours on it in a year and a half. And I've flown it all over the country. I got the IFR and will next pick up the Commercial. It's easy to fly, a solid IFR platform, efficient cross country machine.

220 hours and I wouldn't change a thing.
 
Gsxrpilot said:
Your story is basically the same as mine. I trained in a Cherokee and love the low wing. I had a $60K budget. 90% of the time I fly solo, but wanted four seats just on the off chance the family wants to ride along for lunch or something simple.

I also wanted something I can grow with, but was cheap enough to fly as much as I want to.

I now own an amazing Mooney M20C. I get 150 kts TAS at 8 gph. I've put 220 hours on it in a year and a half. And I've flown it all over the country. I got the IFR and will next pick up the Commercial. It's easy to fly, a solid IFR platform, efficient cross country machine.

220 hours and I wouldn't change a thing.
Click to expand...

I'm concerned with the retractable gear and what I've heard about Mooney annuals; they can be lengthy and expensive.
 
I looked at pretty much everything out there. Finally decided to just buy a Piper 140 to fiddle around in. Never though I would get a relic (the 35) from the past - but love it!

Seriously - beg, buy gas or whatever you can to get some right seat time in anything you can. Then buy a Beach! (Just kidding.) Seriously, there are some big differences in just a few model years for some of the production aircraft out there. Even mods on a give airframe may make you say "yes" to something you otherwise would not be interested in.

Seems the answer to most of the questions on these forums is simply "go fly"...
 
KeithASanford said:
I'm not trying to take this conversation in this direction, but I would agree if RV was building every RV. Sometimes an RV is built by some half committed weekend warrior, and I don't trust myself to be able to tell the difference between the two.
Click to expand...

That is why you hire someone to help you, and do a pre-buy inspection. If you are interested in RV's call up your local A&P and ask if they have experience working on them and could do a pre-buy. They are so common, the answer will very likely be yes.

You should absolutely consider one. Based on what you said about your flying habits. A 6 or 6a would fit your budget. It would be fastest way to fly 1 or maybe 2 people around with light carrying capacity. And the cost per mile in fuel/maintenance would be on par or even better than a 160hp cherokee
 
KeithASanford said:
I'm concerned with the retractable gear and what I've heard about Mooney annuals; they can be lengthy and expensive.
Click to expand...

The manual gear in my M20C is bullet proof. There's virtually no maintenance and nothing to fail. Of course, if you're concerned about your remembering to put the gear down, then fair enough, don't get a complex airplane until you have more experience. But eventually, you'll want a retract or a tail dragger. Fixed gear tricycles are for beginners.

Annuals can run $500 for the local guy to do it or $1200 if I want to take it to a specialist Mooney shop.
 
dell30rb said:
That is why you hire someone to help you, and do a pre-buy inspection. If you are interested in RV's call up your local A&P and ask if they have experience working on them and could do a pre-buy. They are so common, the answer will very likely be yes.

You should absolutely consider one. Based on what you said about your flying habits. A 6 or 6a would fit your budget. It would be fastest way to fly 1 or maybe 2 people around with light carrying capacity. And the cost per mile in fuel/maintenance would be on par or even better than a 160hp cherokee
Click to expand...

I saw an RV6 in person once. I was a little freaked out by how small it was. I hear their lightning fast, though.

docmirror said:
http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_1027730_76+Grumman+AA5B+Tiger-Low+time.html

/thread
Click to expand...

Does the Grumman Tiger actually meet the standards of it's legend? I've heard pretty special things about them.
 
KeithASanford said:
Does the Grumman Tiger actually meet the standards of it's legend? I've heard pretty special things about them.
Click to expand...
They are lots of fun to fly, have excellent performance for the power, unexcelled visibility in their class, and are simple airframes, not expensive to maintain. The AA-5B Tiger is 180 hp; the similar AA-5A Cheetah and its predecessor AA-5 Traveler are 150 hp.
 
Gsxrpilot said:
The manual gear in my M20C is bullet proof. There's virtually no maintenance and nothing to fail. Of course, if you're concerned about your remembering to put the gear down, then fair enough, don't get a complex airplane until you have more experience. But eventually, you'll want a retract or a tail dragger. Fixed gear tricycles are for beginners.

Annuals can run $500 for the local guy to do it or $1200 if I want to take it to a specialist Mooney shop.
Click to expand...

I agree with the first part of your post. I would say, not necessarily to the bolded and the underlined is not really true, there are plenty of fixed gear tricycle birds that are quite nice and not "beginner" airplanes. Cherokee Six for example.
 
The plane I bought was bought to train in as well. I intend on using it probably as far as my CFI. It's not complex, but I don't really care about that, you only need 10 hours in a complex for commercial anyway plus the checkride from what I understand.

No real reason to buy a complex and deal with the higher annual costs, etc unless you really find a good one at a really good price. I looked at Mooney's as well..but they have so little space, would be no good for the wife and kid.

I went with a Cherokee 180-C (1965). Was only missing a GPS and had some minor fixes here and there. Bought it with 600 hours SMOH on the engine and about 400 STOH. Airframe time is important, this plane had about 3700 TTAF at purchase which is pretty phenomenal for its age.

Top requirements for me were:

Engine Time
Airframe Time
Cost (Had to be less than 50K, bought mine for 38K)
IFR Certified (came with a fresh annual and all IFR checks current)

Everything else was a "nice to have". A GPS would have been nice, but didn't work out that way.

I can cruise at around 115-120 Knots comfortably, 10 GPH burn, 50 Gal tanks, about 970 lbs useful load before fuel, etc. All in all, a very nice plane and very capable of transporting me and my family AND our luggage. But more importantly (for me) it's a solid trainer.

I haven't decided if I'm keeping it after Commercial/CFI, but now that I've spend a good deal of cash putting some stuff in it, I may keep it around for a few years. Added a GTN 650, BAS Harnesses, new VOR/GS and I'm upgrading the DG/Compass and putting in a fuel flow. All in, I've probably got a 60K airplane now "as-equipped".
 
Did you fly a Mooney? Did you take the family for a ride in the Mooney? My Mooney M20C (the small one) has more cabin room than your Cherokee. Your cabin is 42" wide and mine is 43.5" wide. I have 52 gal tanks and 1015lbs. useful load. I also cruise at 145kts on 8gal per hour.

The "cramped/small/tight" Mooney cabin is really a misconception. It does have less head room which is mitigated by the low seating position.
 
KeithASanford said:
I saw an RV6 in person once. I was a little freaked out by how small it was. I hear their lightning fast, though.
Click to expand...

Sit in one and see if it fits. 160-170 knots on 8gph is nice, they handle well and are easy to fly. Fixed gear and cheap to maintain. The trade off is in cockpit space, but it sounds like you are flying yourself around most of the time.
 
dell30rb said:
Sit in one and see if it fits. 160-170 knots on 8gph is nice, they handle well and are easy to fly. Fixed gear and cheap to maintain. The trade off is in cockpit space, but it sounds like you are flying yourself around most of the time.
Click to expand...

You are mixing mph with knots. the RV6 is a 140ktas cruiser.
 
d5by5 said:
You are mixing mph with knots. the RV6 is a 140ktas cruiser.
Click to expand...

That would depend if it has the O320 or an IO360. If I didn't need a back seat, I'd have an RV7. That aircraft seems to be the sweet spot for speed and efficiency.
 
mikeinbama said:
I agree with the first part of your post. I would say, not necessarily to the bolded and the underlined is not really true, there are plenty of fixed gear tricycle birds that are quite nice and not "beginner" airplanes. Cherokee Six for example.
Click to expand...


I couldn't imagine owning a trike, where's the fun in that?
 
Gsxrpilot said:
Did you fly a Mooney? Did you take the family for a ride in the Mooney? My Mooney M20C (the small one) has more cabin room than your Cherokee. Your cabin is 42" wide and mine is 43.5" wide. I have 52 gal tanks and 1015lbs. useful load. I also cruise at 145kts on 8gal per hour.

The "cramped/small/tight" Mooney cabin is really a misconception. It does have less head room which is mitigated by the low seating position.
Click to expand...

You are correct, I did not fly in a Mooney, but I've heard them described as the Porsche's of the air. That is, slippery fast with very small areas for pax. That is perhaps incorrect.

1.5" isn't much of a difference for my mission and the useful load is mostly determined by the instrumentation/mods. If I went with stock instruments/mods, my plane has 1100 useful, but I don't use stock.

I will definitely agree the speed and GPH are superior to the Cherokee but neither was a consideration for my mission. This purchase was for a trainer, not for a high speed point-to-point aircraft for carrying family. In fact, most of my time I spend doing approaches at 90 knots so, 140 + doesn't help me much. I've gotten to around 135, but that was with a significant tailwind. When I do travel with my family, the extra 10-20 minutes that a Mooney would give me is really no big deal.

I'm not debating the awesomeness of Mooney's or other types of aircraft, merely saying that most of the benefits you mention are really non-applicable in my case.
 
KeithASanford said:
Does the Grumman Tiger actually meet the standards of it's legend? I've heard pretty special things about them.
Click to expand...

Well, look at all the other comparisons of the 4 place, fixed gear/prop, Lyc 360 engine planes and it ranks at the top in almost every category. Sure, it may not have the gross weight of the Piper but the Tiger is going to be close to the same load out. The thing is, the Tiger is faster on the same gas than all the others. Or, you can throttle back and save fuel, either way it's at the top of efficiency compared to all the other platforms.

Someone should restart production on the AG5B, but this time cut out the extra weight added. Go back to basic simple stuff, and just use the right prop. I wish I had a few mil lying around doing nothing I'd try to buy the TC and have a go at it.

I don't know if it's the perfect GA plane, I think the flaps are almost a joke, and ground handling can be a chore to get used to, but planes are meant to be in the air - doing their thing with the wind in your hair. That's where the Tiger excels.
 
docmirror said:
I don't know if it's the perfect GA plane, I think the flaps are almost a joke, and ground handling can be a chore to get used to, but planes are meant to be in the air - doing their thing with the wind in your hair. That's where the Tiger excels.
Click to expand...

The flaps are just attitude adjusters, and add a bit of drag. That's it, but it allows a better sight picture when landing, and slightly slower speed. I found the ground handling wtiht the Tiger better than my old Cherokee, and the Cessnas I used to fly. The castoring nose wheel allows a tighter turning radius.
 
Your family may not have any interest in the kind of flying that pilots enjoy (like bopping around patterns or going for $100 burgers or fly-ins), but if you present to your family what kinds of activities can be reached with an airplane you may just get them in the plane with you.

In my case, my wife and kids don't care about flying at all - they look at it as transportation (and we hate endure airline travel). But my wife and kids love what the plane puts within reach - family and tons of national parks and other cool resorts and fun places plus mountain airports, etc.

Maybe you can get your family up there with you if you buy an airplane that can do missions they'll enjoy.
 
KeithASanford said:
Does the Grumman Tiger actually meet the standards of it's legend? I've heard pretty special things about them.
Click to expand...

The tigers are about 135kts. Simple carb engine, fixed pitch prop, fixed gear. 900-950lb useful load. Handles well and the cockpit visibility is great, sliding canopy like the RV.

If you like the RV but need a bigger 4 seat airplane, tiger is a good option over a 172 or Pa28.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top