Looking for a time builder airplane (grab some popcorn and enjoy the show).

[MarkH]

I purchased a Yankee for this reason. I sold it before I reached my time building goals due to outside forces. During my ownership time, I averaged (approx) $190/hr to fly my Yankee, but the freedom to fly when and where I wanted to was so much fun.

A Yankee is still a good choice. Stock ones will do 105kts at 5ish gph, insurance is cheap, and with a little luck you can find a decent one for $30K.

Keep in mind that the purchase price is just the first payment. Insurance can add up quickly. A complex can be double the insurance cost of trainer. A tailwheel experimental can be 2-5x the insurance rate. By my math, if you purchase a good plane, the lower maintenance cost of an experimental will be eclipsed by the higher insurance costs.

Last thing to consider is where you live and where you plan to fly. Everything on a plane is expensive to fix, so the less "everything" you can find, the cheaper it will be to own. Based on my back of the napkin math, I would estimate that the cheapest (insured) time builder would be an Ercoupe that has never had an electrical system. But that would be tough to find.

 

[sourdough44]

Some pilots idle at the hold short line to build time. There is intent for flight later on, it saves fuel.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

If you have to fly 200 miles, it's better to get there in 2 hours than 1.

You can always go farther, and flying to areas farther from home would be good experience. Different terrain, weather, etc

 

[Magman]

A Colt is kind of the “ Bottom Dweller “ of the market. Similar engine to C-152 , skipper etc but most have 36 gallon tanks. They are roomy and can get in and out of most places.

Note there are “experts “ that will tell you what a bad aircraft it is. Ask them for the “ N- number “ of the one they owned.

 

[DMD3.]

As many others have stated, a Cherokee 140 is likely your best option. A bit of an underperformer as a 4-seater, but makes a great 2-seater. Unlike most 2-seater trainers, 2 adults and full fuel would still not likely exceed the gross weight (unless it were 2 exetremely heavy-set adults at a high DA airport). You could also take the two backseats out and have extra storage space for luggage. Also it would be much more comfortable than any 2-seat trainer. Lastly it holds much more fuel.

 

[lsaway]

I should mention my Walmart down here carries 93 non ethanol(mostly for boats but I’ll happily carry it to the airport)

I have a 150 gallon fuel tank with a 12v electric transfer pump in the bed of my truck.

 

[Nick Geber]

So I basically have to agree with the consensus of a Cherokee 140. Economical, will meet your mission, low insurance, stable platform. But the most important aspects are: Loads of parts available, easy to work on, common engine etc. I personally have a 68 Cherokee 235 C but as the other 235 guy here mentioned, thats probably a lot more plane than you need, it can be expensive to operate and is well out of the price range you gave. I heartily recommend a 140 (or even 160) - great planes, but then you know that because you’re already flying one. Another option is to put an ad out saying that you’re looking for a partner. Split the cost 50/50 and have access pretty much whenever you want. Good luck! I know you’ll find the right solution!

 

[2-Bit Speed]

I'm only going to chime in and say that 200 hours / year is only going to happen if you're not scrounging for parts. Get something solid (Good Pre-Buy) that has good parts support.

...

Or just get two planes.

 

[mandm]

Airplanes also need mx and are not going to be available all year when you want them.

 

[EvilEagle]

I would spend a bit more and go for a Citabria - then it’s at least fun to fly (and TW’s make you a better pilot). Resale is also good as long as it’s taken care of.

 

[Steamflyer]

Cessna 150/152 or Cessna 120/140 (120 is better since no flaps to carry around for no reason).

Both run 5-6 gph, will do somewhere around 90-95 knots and let you build time at your leisure. The tailwheel aircraft (120/140) are better at teaching stick and rudder skills, but since many have fabric wings they don't park outside well.

I would recommend against a Cherokee 140 or any low wing as one day, in the distant future, it will be a dark and stormy night with a vicious crosswind and you'll be responsible for hundreds of pax. The muscle memory and experience from long ago flogging the little high wing Cessnas will suddenly prove invaluable.

 

[GeorgeC]

You mentioned a possible tail dragger so I suggest considering a Cessna 140. There is an excellent 1950 article in Air Facts Journal about it. https://airfactsjournal.com/2013/10/from-the-archives-wolfgang-langewiesche-flies-across-africa/ A great and enlightening story by the master of the air.

... Cessna 120/140 (120 is better since no flaps to carry around for no reason).

Good choices, but remember that these are antiques. You might buy for 30 or 40 and then pay 5 or 10k for your first annual, where you pick up the tab for the time builders that came before you.

 

[RyanShort1]

A Colt is kind of the “ Bottom Dweller “ of the market. Similar engine to C-152 , skipper etc but most have 36 gallon tanks. They are roomy and can get in and out of most places.

Note there are “experts “ that will tell you what a bad aircraft it is. Ask them for the “ N- number “ of the one they owned.

As a former owner, I’ll say that a Colt might indeed be a good buy. I bought mine in decent condition for $12.5k flew it for about a year and sold it for exactly what I bought it for.

 

[RyanShort1]

Good choices, but remember that these are antiques. You might buy for 30 or 40 and then pay 5 or 10k for your first annual, where you pick up the tab for the time builders that came before you.

Only of you lack the skills to be careful with your pre-buy.

 

[jssmith.lh]

I purchased a nose dragging Sonex a year ago and it's a great short trip ride. 16 gallons and 4 gph/110knots with a 2200 Jab. 500 useful load so can do
a couple of hours with another 'chunky monkey' The guy I purchased from (original builder) was 6'4"/240, but definitely find one to sit in before going to
far. Nice examples available for <$30k. My insurance this year was just over $1000. I wouldn't do IFR without an autopilot, but it is aerobatic

 

[Hector Parra]

I purchased a nose dragging Sonex a year ago and it's a great short trip ride. 16 gallons and 4 gph/110knots with a 2200 Jab. 500 useful load so can do
a couple of hours with another 'chunky monkey' The guy I purchased from (original builder) was 6'4"/240, but definitely find one to sit in before going to
far. Nice examples available for <$30k. My insurance this year was just over $1000. I wouldn't do IFR without an autopilot, but it is aerobatic

I'm going for a Sonex some time soon. Will probably have to build it as I don't see many already built for sale here in Canada. You like it so far? All good with the Jabiru? They offer the Rotax too, but at a higher price tag

 

[Smilespergallon]

I purchased a nose dragging Sonex a year ago and it's a great short trip ride. 16 gallons and 4 gph/110knots with a 2200 Jab. 500 useful load so can do
a couple of hours with another 'chunky monkey' The guy I purchased from (original builder) was 6'4"/240, but definitely find one to sit in before going to
far. Nice examples available for <$30k. My insurance this year was just over $1000. I wouldn't do IFR without an autopilot, but it is aerobatic

Jssmith,

Thanks for the responses. I haven't seen as many senex's with jab 2200 as I have with aerovee or jab 3300 so that's a good option to look out for. From the experimental world, I think its a great low cost option. Certainly not a RV-6 but its half the price as well (arguably less resale power than a vans though). That insurance rate is surprising low for an experimental OTHER than a vans aircraft. Is that 4gph throttled back at say 50% power to get that? could it fly even slower on less gph?

Thanks.

 

[Smilespergallon]

As a former owner, I’ll say that a Colt might indeed be a good buy. I bought mine in decent condition for $12.5k flew it for about a year and sold it for exactly what I bought it for.

Certainly sounds like a great intro cost to aircraft ownership. Like many have stated, the intro cost is just the beginning. I am certainly OK with paying more up front to get a great example of an airplane. The purchase price hurts once and maybe one day you will get part of that back. What really hurts is when the plane cost 10K a year before it even gets off the ground. Obviously things happen you can't predict however there are airplanes out there like discussed in this thread that generally can cut those cost down.

Thank you all for your inputs. For now I am going to keep on flying the mighty Cherokee 140 (owner actually put a nice garmin in it so its not a bad plane shooting approaches) until I do some more homework, and sharpen the penciles on a few of these aircraft. If anyone plans to go to Sun N Fun, reach out and I'd love to say hello.

Respectfully,
Preston

 

[Ventucky Red]

I’ve never been a fan of the skipper.

Skippers are great little airplanes... but good luck finding one. those that own them very seldom will let them go.

Good luck on your search...

 

[lsaway]

I just "dummy listed" my 152 using the above-average v-Ref price and the phone rang off the hook.

What is dummy listed?

 

[RyanShort1]

Certainly sounds like a great intro cost to aircraft ownership. Like many have stated, the intro cost is just the beginning.

For the record I'm on my sixth flyable plane... yes, intro costs are just the beginning, but you also don't have to get the craziest most expensive stuff, either. Plenty of aircraft out there that would fit the time building bill, and if you are as careful to sock away maintenance money as you are forced to be when renting, a well-considered purchase doesn't have to be full of surprises.

 

[Ventucky Red]

What is dummy listed?

Put an ad on Craigslist to see what the interest is. I had them reply to the Craigslist inbox... over 50 emails within 12 hours.

I know, not 100% kosher, but a good way to test the market.

 

[Maxnr]

Thanks for the response. I do remember these from a while back. Something about needing the wing mod as early versions has spar issues or wing separation? I am a fan on the jab 3300 though if that was my route id be tempted to go with the Sonex. Not sure if that the cheapest option or not but I would say it would deserve a spot in the consideration column.

Aileron flutter. Required a daily aileron cable tension check.

 

[Maxnr]

A Colt is kind of the “ Bottom Dweller “ of the market. Similar engine to C-152 , skipper etc but most have 36 gallon tanks. They are roomy and can get in and out of most places.

Note there are “experts “ that will tell you what a bad aircraft it is. Ask them for the “ N- number “ of the one they owned.

Doesn't have flaps, nor do you need them. Glide angle is like a tool box when at idle. The O-235 has a 2,000 plus hr TBO. The tail wheel mod is a real looker.

 

[Daleandee]

Aileron flutter. Required a daily aileron cable tension check.

Just to clarify ... the aileron flutter issues were on the original Zenith 601. The Sonex has pushrod controls for aileron & elevator. It does use cables for the rudder.

I considered building a 601 and there were several reasons I didn't and built a Sonex instead. Not the least of which was the massive main wing spar that Sonex uses ...

 

[psween]

You've already gotten a lot of good suggestions, but I'll throw mine in. I fly a C150, and I think it'd be hard to find a more reasonable time builder. I've owned for 6 years now, and my all in costs, including fuel, oil, annuals, a few repairs, and insurance, it has averaged out to just over $60 per hour. 5.3 gph with the STC for mogas, a case of oil lasted two complete oil change cycles, insurance is $700 a year for my 300 hrs. PPL. I don't have an engine reserve fund, and it's got just basic VFR avionics, but it's fun to fly, easy and reasonable to work on, and mine at least will carry two FAA adults with full fuel and a couple of overnight bags at 92 kts. for about 300 NM. Prices on them have gone up, but still pretty cheap time building.

 

[lsaway]

Put an ad on Craigslist to see what the interest is. I had them reply to the Craigslist inbox... over 50 emails within 12 hours.

I know, not 100% kosher, but a good way to test the market.

Now I Know why I keep running into these ads. I contact the seller. We exchange questions and answers, but when I ask them when I can come see it with intent to buy, the seller ghosts me.

 

[MarkH]

You've already gotten a lot of good suggestions, but I'll throw mine in. I fly a C150, and I think it'd be hard to find a more reasonable time builder. I've owned for 6 years now, and my all in costs, including fuel, oil, annuals, a few repairs, and insurance, it has averaged out to just over $60 per hour. 5.3 gph with the STC for mogas, a case of oil lasted two complete oil change cycles, insurance is $700 a year for my 300 hrs. PPL. I don't have an engine reserve fund, and it's got just basic VFR avionics, but it's fun to fly, easy and reasonable to work on, and mine at least will carry two FAA adults with full fuel and a couple of overnight bags at 92 kts. for about 300 NM. Prices on them have gone up, but still pretty cheap time building.

There is a reason Cessna 150s and Piper PA28-140s trade for almost twice the price of other trainers. In my opinion, that reason is repairability. When you are flying a club plane or a flight school plane 100hours per month for 5 years, that extra $12-20K in cost is trivial. When you are flying a time builder 300 hours per year, the math is different. Personally, if I were to buy another trainer today, I would seriously consider paying extra for a C150, but the question of how much extra is subjective. My Yankee had some downtime due to parts issues. If I had a C150, those downtimes would have likely been less. But, if those issues hadn't happened during the supply chain failures of the pandemic, they would have likely been much shorter on their own.


Until I was typing this, I didn't realize the issue that had not come up yet. Do you have a mechanic in mind? If so, this is likely a conversation worth having with them. For example, a Colt is a great airplane that generally sells at a good price, but if your mechanic lacks the equipment or willingness to do fabric work, you may run into some issues after purchase. Even if they are willing to do the work, if that plane is the only fabric plane they work on, the skills may be rusty when it comes time to work on your Colt.

 

[Ventucky Red]

Now I Know why I keep running into these ads. I contact the seller. We exchange questions and answers, but when I ask them when I can come to see it with the intent to buy, the seller ghosts me.

True.. but that is not my intent...

 

[WDD]

M2C

You want time building. You only have $30,000. This will be a temporary plane. Given the risk of expensive repair, your time and effort for all the things that go into owning, the risk of down time, I would just rent.

 

[jssmith.lh]

I'm going for a Sonex some time soon. Will probably have to build it as I don't see many already built for sale here in Canada. You like it so far? All good with the Jabiru? They offer the Rotax too, but at a higher price tag

It’s a blast to fly. If I were picking an engine I’d do the turbo Aerovee, but not because of issues with the Jabiru. Just to have a better understanding of the internals.

 

[jssmith.lh]

Jssmith,

Thanks for the responses. I haven't seen as many senex's with jab 2200 as I have with aerovee or jab 3300 so that's a good option to look out for. From the experimental world, I think its a great low cost option. Certainly not a RV-6 but its half the price as well (arguably less resale power than a vans though). That insurance rate is surprising low for an experimental OTHER than a vans aircraft. Is that 4gph throttled back at say 50% power to get that? could it fly even slower on less gph?

Thanks.

That’s running 3000 RPM. I believe max is 3400. So yeah, I could throttle back but I’m not building hours Go to sonexbuilders.net forum to get a better feel.

 

[Maxnr]

Just to clarify ... the aileron flutter issues were on the original Zenith 601. ..

Er, discussion was about the CH 601 in post #5. Post crash photos show wings that seemed to have exploded. Ground observers (two instances) reported that the "Engine seemed to be running rough." Likely the sound of flutter. Zenith upgrades included aileron balance and wing center section beef up. Problem cured.

 

[Daleandee]

Er, discussion was about the CH 601 in post #5. Post crash photos show wings that seemed to have exploded. Ground observers (two instances) reported that the "Engine seemed to be running rough." Likely the sound of flutter. Zenith upgrades included aileron balance and wing center section beef up. Problem cured.

Yep ... but that wasn't clear in the post I responded to. I wanted to reiterate that it was the original 601 that was effected. I know a lot of people that are fans of Chris Heintz designs. Appreciate you pointing out that that the issue was fixed, although it got messy for a little bit ...

 

[lsaway]

Yep ... but that wasn't clear in the post I responded to. I wanted to reiterate that it was the original 601 that was effected. I know a lot of people that are fans of Chris Heintz designs. Appreciate you pointing out that that the issue was fixed, although it got messy for a little bit ...

This is only applicable to 601 XL. The 601 HD did not have the problem.

 

[Daleandee]

This is only applicable to 601 XL. The 601 HD did not have the problem.

True! The HD is actually a very cool model!

 

[Shuckers86]

When I was younger I flew all over Florida and Georgia in a Tomahawk. I preferred it to the 152 because I’m 6’4”. I hear they are difficult to find these days. I ended up retiring on the 767 but I still have a soft spot for the PA38-112!

 

[Todd82]

Insurance can add up quickly. A complex can be double the insurance cost of trainer.

As a low time guy the insurance quotes I got for an Arrow vs a fixed gear PA28 of the same hull value were alot more than double. Try quintuple.

 

[lsaway]

When I was younger I flew all over Florida and Georgia in a Tomahawk. I preferred it to the 152 because I’m 6’4”. I hear they are difficult to find these days. I ended up retiring on the 767 but I still have a soft spot for the PA38-112!

My first plane was a Tomahawk. I really enjoyed it. For awhile, I leased it back to a flight school, but students never wanted to fly it. They were all scared about the stall characteristics. I had a very high time CFI train me in it. He never flew one before. The first stall we did, he commented that it was no where near as bad as he thought it would be.

 

[woodchucker]

Have you considered a club? My club has time building options to fly as well as re-sellable shares if you don’t plan on sticking around. Something to think about? Or a partnership. Pretty much the same but probably higher monthly rates.