Cost to Own

[Henning]

Got it. So you are taking inot consideration, taxi, decent, pattern, etc. Makes sense. I was thinking that was a little low as an in flight fuel burn because I use 10 GPH for the Tiger, which also has an O-360 Lyc.

I'd block 17.5gph running 2 of them 62% power and leaned (climbed at 80%). I was turbo so altitude was irrelevant but it got me an IAS of 150 @4500'.

 

[wabower]

.

I ran some numbers a while back and I got approx the same figures.I have also seen spreadsheets where people account for opportunity cost.

You're kidding yourself if you don't include the cost of money. But OTOH, pilots are known as being easy to kid, so that's nothing new. The true measure of cost is the amount of money you would have, including what the money would make or other costs it would reduce if you didn't own the airplane.

I would say don't think to much of the costs, go for it, and enjoy. Life's to short and for all i know we could all be death by tomorrow.

Yeah, right. Just grip it and rip it. Ask big John how it has worked for him.

 

[Bob Noel]

.
You're kidding yourself if you don't include the cost of money.

Since the cost on money is always there, whether you spend the money on a house, food, new TV, or an airplane, the cost of money is a non-discriminator.

 

[wabower]

Only if they are in the same category. Not so if one expenditure is for an essential and the other is for a non-essential. Even bank loan officers understand that logic, or did before Barney Frank got involved in the loan approval process.

Since the cost on money is always there, whether you spend the money on a house, food, new TV, or an airplane, the cost of money is a non-discriminator.

 

[Bob Noel]

Only if they are in the same category. Not so if one expenditure is for an essential and the other is for a non-essential. Even bank loan officers understand that logic, or did before Barney Frank got involved in the loan approval process.

If you wish, you can deal with that appropriately just be prioritizing the purchase. Once your minimum essentials are paid for everything else is fair game.

But a $100 spent on food doesn't cost less than a $100 spent on an airplane. One might be more important than the other, but the cost is the same.

 

[wabower]

Try not eating for a year and not owning an airplane for a year and let us know which one you like best.

Only if they are in the same category. Not so if one expenditure is for an essential and the other is for a non-essential. Even bank loan officers understand that logic, or did before Barney Frank got involved in the loan approval process.

If you wish, you can deal with that appropriately just be prioritizing the purchase. Once your minimum essentials are paid for everything else is fair game.

But a $100 spent on food doesn't cost less than a $100 spent on an airplane. One might be more important than the other, but the cost is the same.

 

[Bob Noel]

Try not eating for a year and not owning an airplane for a year and let us know which one you like best.

Gee, we all are probably smart enough to know the answer to that. But it doesn't change the math.

 

[wabower]

And your half-baked theory doesn't change the importance of understanding the full financial impact of toy ownership. If you're interested, I can provide a long list of sad-sack clients (the ones who contacted me looking for the magic wand that would make the problem go away) who wished they had done so prior to signing the papers. Or are you just one of the guys who enjoys kidding himself?

Try not eating for a year and not owning an airplane for a year and let us know which one you like best.

Gee, we all are probably smart enough to know the answer to that. But it doesn't change the math.

 

[Anthony]

I'd block 17.5gph running 2 of them 62% power and leaned (climbed at 80%). I was turbo so altitude was irrelevant but it got me an IAS of 150 @4500'.

That's about right for the O-360 at 62%.