Looking for my first plane.. on a budget.. open to suggestions

At which airport are you flying?
Your budget would go a whole lot further with some partners. How much will you be flying?
How about a club?
Or partnership?
If you only need 450 pounds, then C-152 Sparrowhawk (125hp) might do it. Or, as mentioned above, 150hp C150. There are some Grummans with power increases from 110 to 150hp.
If you can get away with two seats, lots more options open up.
 
One possibility is to find something that needs work, fix it, fly it for a while sell and move up. The first airplane is the hardest. Sometimes the first is the only one if you buy wrong. The one I bought and have re engined, the original owner got in over his head and took a large loss on it. The market for unairworthy aircraft is small, pretty much just mechanics can afford to buy them (free labor). If you have to pay a a&p often it's not worth the cost.
 
I’ll second the two people that said club or partnership. Depending on where you’re at in the Denver area, there’s a real good option at Meadowlake if you meet the mins. Someone here is involved with that club. @SkyHog maybe?
 
Cherokee 140 with 160 hp upgrade will do the job and fits the budget. You won't be able to climb to 13.5 on a summer afternoon, but they do great with two people in the winter and summer mornings. I flew ours out of Ogden, UT, for years all over the mountain west. Keep in mind that you can fill the Cherokee to the tabs and save 84 lbs, and you still have ~4 hours of fuel.

If you can find a good 180 that would be even better, but a 140/160 will do what you need 90% of the time. Just be very careful about exploring the other 10%.
 
TCABM said:
I’ll second the two people that said club or partnership. Depending on where you’re at in the Denver area, there’s a real good option at Meadowlake if you meet the mins. Someone here is involved with that club. @SkyHog maybe?
Click to expand...
Yep. I'm in that club. Great option if you want to fly high performance aircraft
 
You can find some 76-79 Grumman Tigers in that range, typically with older avionics and original paint. Good little aircraft with excellent flying qualities. I bought one for 29.5K a couple of years back, with a mid time engine. Based it out of a 6000 msl alt field in New Mexico; it did fine with two adults and full fuel. Service ceiling 14000 ft. Ended up selling it recently (for 31K) to upgrade to an RV.
 
Paulie said:
Any Mooney that doesn't need work is going to be more than 35k
Click to expand...
Good luck finding anything that fits the OP’s criteria about which you cannot say that. I’ve seen a number of perfectly airworthy Mooney’s in the OP’s price range. They weren’t pretty, and they had weak panels, but they could fly. I doubt anything that can function in those conditions can be had guaranteed sqwack free.

Older Bo’s can also be had for what the OP wants to spend. That said, you’re looking at the poster child for a potential maintenance hog. Problem is the purchase price is just the entry point, other costs can catch up quickly. I hate to say it but I think the OP’s thoughts on this are unrealistic.

Vikings are cheap for a reason.
 
Once you have this airplane, what's your operating budget? A low purchase price generally means a higher maintenance budget.
 
Yeah, I considered a Viking, but I knew it would be really hard to resell. They are nice planes but I'm happier with a 4 cylinder lycoming pararell valve rather than a 6 continental. Almost pulled the trigger on a super with a lyc, but I know how much those angle valve cylinders cost. Plus they like fuel.
 
bluerooster said:
Early C182, early Cherokee 180, Both would fill the bill, and if you shop around, you should be able to find one at a reasonable price.
Click to expand...

He might find an early Cherokee 180 for that money, don't know about a 182, they're pretty popular. That's probably his best bet, anything else with 180 HP will be more money, and any four seater with 150 HP won't perform like he wants.

Watch out for that first annual, it might not be pretty.
 
FormerHangie said:
He might find an early Cherokee 180 for that money, don't know about a 182, they're pretty popular. That's probably his best bet, anything else with 180 HP will be more money, and any four seater with 150 HP won't perform like he wants.

Watch out for that first annual, it might not be pretty.
Click to expand...
182 isnt happening for $35k. Not one I would get in at least.
 
If you'd like something with a vintage feel, consider a Stinson 108. You might even find one with an O-360 in it.
 
If you consider a Viking, which is a beautiful airplane to fly, you MUST have a hangar. It also has to be checked out thoroughly by one of the two or three Viking specialist shops. If you don't, the initial cost of the plane will pale in comparison to the cost to fix everything. If your acquisition budget is this limited, then beware of your annual costs on any complex airplane, not to mention fuel costs. Having said that, I owned one and it was as fast and handled as nicely as my Bo.
 
TCABM said:
I’ll second the two people that said club or partnership. Depending on where you’re at in the Denver area, there’s a real good option at Meadowlake if you meet the mins. Someone here is involved with that club. @SkyHog maybe?
Click to expand...
This.....much better to learn with other people's money. ;)
 
Clark1961 said:
Are you set on sole ownership? have you considered a partnership or club? Probably several partnership opportunities in the area.
Click to expand...
Clark1961 said:
Are you set on sole ownership? have you considered a partnership or club? Probably several partnership opportunities in the area.
Click to expand...
I am open to shared ownership... need to find the right partner
 
One word: Tiger.

(of course some”one” will be along in a moment to advise against because you’ll get wet on ingress/egress in the rain :rolleyes:)
 
Glen R said:
If you consider a Viking, which is a beautiful airplane to fly, you MUST have a hangar. It also has to be checked out thoroughly by one of the two or three Viking specialist shops. If you don't, the initial cost of the plane will pale in comparison to the cost to fix everything. If your acquisition budget is this limited, then beware of your annual costs on any complex airplane, not to mention fuel costs. Having said that, I owned one and it was as fast and handled as nicely as my Bo.
Click to expand...

IMO, a low budget buyer should stick with a fixed gear/fixed pitch prop airplane. Operating costs over the years will well exceed his original budget, and simpler is less expensive to maintain.
 
Stinson...I'd say 150/160 Tri-pacer but your altitude requirement might be a problem.
 
I´m on the same boat.
Field elevation 8,300

Short listing: Tiger, Musketeer, Sierra, Mooney and don´t know if a Cardinal makes sense

Although I´ll likely buy towards end of 2019
 
wrbix said:
One word: Tiger.

(of course some”one” will be along in a moment to advise against because you’ll get wet on ingress/egress in the rain )
Click to expand...
Yup. I find that to be the dumbest argument against a plane. Unless you drive your car out to the ramp and pull it under the wing of your Cessna, you are going to get getting into a plane in the rain.
 
wrbix said:
One word: Tiger.

(of course some”one” will be along in a moment to advise against because you’ll get wet on ingress/egress in the rain :rolleyes:)
Click to expand...

Will he be able to find a Tiger for that little money?
 
CC268 said:
Nice Cherokee for 29k. Especially with new paint AND a 430.
Click to expand...
Looks good. The 160 with the gap seals will help the climb too. My PA28-140 has mods to the max, and I've had it to 17,500.
Do like I did: get yourself a second weight and balance for no rear seats...the seats come out in 5 minutes: less weight, more room for bags.
 
TBM930 should suit your mission well.
 
FormerHangie said:
IMO, a low budget buyer should stick with a fixed gear/fixed pitch prop airplane. Operating costs over the years will well exceed his original budget, and simpler is less expensive to maintain.
Click to expand...

I think that was my point...
 
FormerHangie said:
While I did dearly love flying the Cheetah, I don't think it's the best hot/high airplane.
Click to expand...
True. I flew the traveler at max gross this summer and it was definitely doing some serious negotiation with the air molecules trying to get them to go under the wing.
Under gross its great but then I am very near sea level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top