Malibu operating costs...

Dav8or said:
I'll bet owners will absolutely love those long wings should the motor ever quit!
Click to expand...


As someone who is married to a lady who does not like flying :D I can tell you that the ride in turbulence is not a problem if you have a yaw damper. Also generally you're way above all the bumps anyway, and one of the comforting aspects of these planes is that as you mention that if the motor should quit with the excellent gliding ability and at the typical altitudes flown you have 50 miles of where you can decide to put the plane down. So how about landing at an airport? :lol:
 
James331 said:
Most of the knarly weather I see I can't even top with a service cieling of 30k. Pressurized AC are great for pax comfort, but piston pressurized... is really just the "I can't afford a turbine" area.
Click to expand...

Malibu makes 24k easy and holds a great cabin at 5.5 psi. Plenty of Malibu owners I know could buy multiple turbines if they so chose but many with that kind of money didn't get that money by buying things they don't need.

Have you flown one?
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
Malibu makes 24k easy and holds a great cabin at 5.5 psi. Plenty of Malibu owners I know could buy multiple turbines if they so chose but many with that kind of money didn't get that money by buying things they don't need.
Click to expand...

This. :yes: There isn't much gain for the additional expense.
 
dans2992 said:
So, apparently, plus one flyers rents one for $299/hr. Some folks on here were claiming that operating costs are much higher than that.

So.... is this guy just losing money when he rents it or what? Something doesn't make sense here....just wondering if anyone had any other thoughts.

I currently fly a Comanche 260B.

Dan

http://www.plusoneflyers.org/fleet/montgomery-fleet/item/16-n4363q
Click to expand...

I know the owner of that plane. He does not lose money on his rentals. I'm sure it's paid for. It's not hangared. I suspect he gets a deal on the tie down because it's in the flying club. Based aircraft get a volume discount for fuel at the FBO they use.
It flies pretty regularly. Henning is correct, some of the users come from Europe and fly it all over the country for a month or two.
It's for sale by the way. Has been for seems like 2-3 years. I don't recall the price but I recall that I thought it was high and he never has reduced it that I noticed. I suspect that he is waiting for someone with too much money to come along.
I haven't seen the interior but I would rate the exterior a 6.
I've often thought about getting checked out in it but I knew I wouldn't fly it often enough to keep current.
Are you in San Diego?
 
Last edited:
I am not in San Diego, but this was the only Malibu I saw for rent anywhere.
 
So, Senecas rent for $295/hr also (Seneca II). Would it be a reasonable assumption that their operating cost is the same as a Malibu, just that the Seneca is more fuel heavy and the Malibu is more maintenance heavy?
 
dans2992 said:
So, Senecas rent for $295/hr also (Seneca II). Would it be a reasonable assumption that their operating cost is the same as a Malibu, just that the Seneca is more fuel heavy and the Malibu is more maintenance heavy?
Click to expand...

Seneca is not as expensive as a Malibu IME, but the difference won't be great on a per mile basis. I would say the Seneca owner is making more than the Malibu owner.
 
Wow, great aircraft to rent. Can't imagine there are to many Malibu out there that you can use by the hour. Shame it's on the other side of the country. If it was local, I would absolutely be looking into getting checked out in that awesome flying machine.
 
dans2992 said:
So, Senecas rent for $295/hr also (Seneca II). Would it be a reasonable assumption that their operating cost is the same as a Malibu, just that the Seneca is more fuel heavy and the Malibu is more maintenance heavy?
Click to expand...

At the same airport with the Plus One Malibu, you can rent a Seneca for $50-75/hr less.
 
jkaduk said:
I know the owner of that plane. He does not lose money on his rentals. I'm sure it's paid for. It's not hangared. I suspect he gets a deal on the tie down because it's in the flying club. Based aircraft get a volume discount for fuel at the FBO they use.
It flies pretty regularly. Henning is correct, some of the users come from Europe and fly it all over the country for a month or two.
It's for sale by the way. Has been for seems like 2-3 years. I don't recall the price but I recall that I thought it was high and he never has reduced it that I noticed. I suspect that he is waiting for someone with too much money to come along.
I haven't seen the interior but I would rate the exterior a 6.
I've often thought about getting checked out in it but I knew I wouldn't fly it often enough to keep current.
Are you in San Diego?
Click to expand...
I know Gus too. While I never asked him the question directly, I do not believe he makes money on that airplane, but rather the revenue from the others (like 3803E) offset the loss. Things may have changed, but in the 5 years I was with Plus One, I didn't see it fly all that much. He obviously isn't in a hurry to sell it since as you mentioned all of his planes have been for sale for more like 4 years now, but the only place you will find them listed is on the bulletin board at Gibbs.

Unless Gus has a special deal with Gibbs (he may) there is no tiedown or fuel discount for club aircraft. When I left two years ago, tiedowns at Gibbs start at $150/month for a PA28/172 and they were talking about raising them.

The interior is okay, maybe a 7, but has very little baggage space which is why I never spent the money to get checked out in. It was fast, but I could haul my family and all our stuff much easier in the Duchess or 210.
 
Is there baggage space behind the rear seats?
 
Dan, go check it out. Saying it has very little baggage space is a gross exaggeration. :rolleyes: It has space behind the rear seats as well as in the nose between the engine and the cockpit.
 
How much volume of stuff do you need? Travel light, travel lean, travel clean.
 
jkaduk said:
I know the owner of that plane. He does not lose money on his rentals. I'm sure it's paid for. It's not hangared. I suspect he gets a deal on the tie down because it's in the flying club. Based aircraft get a volume discount for fuel at the FBO they use.
It flies pretty regularly. Henning is correct, some of the users come from Europe and fly it all over the country for a month or two.
It's for sale by the way. Has been for seems like 2-3 years. I don't recall the price but I recall that I thought it was high and he never has reduced it that I noticed. I suspect that he is waiting for someone with too much money to come along.
I haven't seen the interior but I would rate the exterior a 6.
I've often thought about getting checked out in it but I knew I wouldn't fly it often enough to keep current.
Are you in San Diego?
Click to expand...


The first Mooney I looked at is at Gibbs and he said the tie down was $185/month, and no the club doesn't get any discounts. I looked into adding my plane to the club, and decided against it because all my fixed costs would stay the same, but insurance would be higher. Looking at the schedule master for Plus one from 2014 briefly I'd say that plane doesn't fly much. I dont see any rentals for months to any europeans. Mainly just random 1-2 hour flights and some weekends here and there. If he's breaking even on that plane I'd be surprised. Doesn't even look like he ever uses it himself.
 
sixpacker said:
Dan, go check it out. Saying it has very little baggage space is a gross exaggeration. :rolleyes: It has space behind the rear seats as well as in the nose between the engine and the cockpit.
Click to expand...

Compared to other 6 seat singles and twins it is not an exaggeration. That space behind the rear seats is noticeably smaller than on a PA32.

Some folks can make it work, but it is a definite trade off. For me, the extra speed was not worth it at all for the length of trips we were doing compared to the capacity of a 210, PA32 or Duchess.
 
StinkBug said:
The first Mooney I looked at is at Gibbs and he said the tie down was $185/month, and no the club doesn't get any discounts. I looked into adding my plane to the club, and decided against it because all my fixed costs would stay the same, but insurance would be higher. Looking at the schedule master for Plus one from 2014 briefly I'd say that plane doesn't fly much. I dont see any rentals for months to any europeans. Mainly just random 1-2 hour flights and some weekends here and there. If he's breaking even on that plane I'd be surprised. Doesn't even look like he ever uses it himself.
Click to expand...

I don't think Gus flies any of his airplanes. I used to see him out at the airport every day, but never saw him actually fly.

Insurance is the big killer for Plus One owners. Insurance was typically double what it would cost to insure an airplane for yourself. I briefly considered putting my 170 in the club, but I probably would have lost more money than if it sat on the ramp. When I was looking into it, insurance for a 4 seat single was something like $7k/year.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Compared to other 6 seat singles and twins it is not an exaggeration. That space behind the rear seats is noticeably smaller than on a PA32.

Some folks can make it work, but it is a definite trade off. For me, the extra speed was not worth it at all for the length of trips we were doing compared to the capacity of a 210, PA32 or Duchess.
Click to expand...

I'm having trouble believing that you've been inside a malibu :lol:

I haven't had the pleasure of flying a 210 but have owned a 206. They are similar in space and baggage capabilities, no? I assure you that the malibu holds more in the baggage compartment than the 206. The malibu is wider. Of course if you take out the third row you have a massive amount of space in the 206 but in six seat configuration not really. You also seem to forget about the nose baggage area. That is very large. You just need to watch your CG loading but often the more bulky items can go in there. I considered the PA32 before getting the 206 and went with the 206 because it had more space overall inside. So I'm just not seeing what you're seeing, but that is okay everybody has a different value system when it comes to flying.

To each their own. For Dan I would say don't believe me, don't believe Fearless: Go and see for yourself. Don't forget to peak inside the nose baggage compartment.
 
sixpacker said:
I'm having trouble believing that you've been inside a malibu :lol:
Click to expand...

I've been inside the very Malibu that we've been discussing (Plus One- MYF). The rear baggage space looked a lot like the baggage compartment on my 1948 170.

The reason I liked the 210 better was that when you were only flying with 4, you had that whole third row back seat for baggage in addition to the actual baggage compartment. I could fit all the assorted baby crap that we were carrying at the time (pack and play, portable high chair, stroller, assorted totes with diapers and other kid stuff and four roller suitcases). No way could I have fit all of those items in that Malibu....unless I put a bunch of stuff on the empty club seats which IMO is less than desirable..

I'm not saying Malibus suck, by any means. Just saying that if load (bulk and weight) is what you need (and it sounds like a consideration for the OP)....there are much better planes.
 
If I want pressurized and FIKI, I think it's pretty much the Malibu or 210. In that general operating cost range.
 
So here's what I know about Malibu's. The guy that I bought my plane from upgraded into a Malibu from my Lance. His Malibu is a beautiful plane... certainly an upgrade into a whole different class. I would liken the move to being a move from a Chevy into a Cadillac. Fit and finish is nicer, more amenities, etc.

The Malibu has a similar mission profile to the Lance/Saratoga, however the Malibu adds FIKI (has boots), a little more speed due to twin turbos and "up high" performance. I believe he said about 20 more knots at 25,000', but you really have to be above about 12,000 for it to start outrunning a PA-32R. In fact, he said that at 8,000', the Lance would outrun the Malibu. The Malibu, of course, is pressurized, which adds to the comfort of the trip.

The annual on a Malibu averages around $11,000-$12,000/year. A bad annual (which he just encountered) came in around $17,000. That said, he said that the prior year's annual was around $5,000, so there is your average. He told me that fuel burn is similar, maybe a tad higher, but of course, as mentioned above the Malibu is supposed to be run LOP.

They are great planes and certainly after seeing his, I aspire to own a Malibu one day... but it is certainly a "whole nother ballgame"!
 
ahkahn said:
The annual on a Malibu averages around $11,000-$12,000/year. A bad annual (which he just encountered) came in around $17,000. That said, he said that the prior year's annual was around $5,000, so there is your average.
Click to expand...
Ouch. Might as well buy a Baron or 310 with that maintenance budget.
 
dans2992 said:
If I want pressurized and FIKI, I think it's pretty much the Malibu or 210. In that general operating cost range.
Click to expand...
Pressurization and FIKI in a single does limit you.

I know nothing about P210s, so can't compare to the regular Centurion.

I do agree that it is best to look them over in person, get inside and see what will work best for you.
 
jesse said:
Neither of which can do what a Malibu can do. Just depends on your mission.
Click to expand...
Go high and fast or carry a lot of stuff?

There is the P-Baron which will certainly outperform a Malibu in all the above, although I can't speak to the maintenance costs on that one.
 
dans2992 said:
If I want pressurized and FIKI, I think it's pretty much the Malibu or 210. In that general operating cost range.
Click to expand...

Oh come on!! Are you saying you wouldn't consider the original pressurized piston single, the Mooney M22 Mustang??!!

card10205_fr.jpg


They do come up for sale every now and then you know. I had to. It's part of the Mooney club thing. Plug the brand whenever, however... :D;)
 
Maybe its just me, but the only part of the Malibu I don't like the is the pilots seating. I felt like a pretzel trying to get in there. Then I had to tilt my seat back to clear my headset. The people in back have it much nicer, but I suspect EVERYONE wants the forward facing couch.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Go high and fast or carry a lot of stuff?

There is the P-Baron which will certainly outperform a Malibu in all the above, although I can't speak to the maintenance costs on that one.
Click to expand...

I doubt a P-Baron would cost less to operate. P-Baron pressurization isn't nearly as good as a Malibu either. You'll be a hell of a lot more comfortable in a Malbu at FL240.

12,500 ft cabin in the P-Baron at FL240 versus like 7,500 in the Malibu.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Maybe its just me, but the only part of the Malibu I don't like the is the pilots seating. I felt like a pretzel trying to get in there. Then I had to tilt my seat back to clear my headset. The people in back have it much nicer, but I suspect EVERYONE wants the forward facing couch.
Click to expand...

I got to fly in Morrison's Matrix close to 6 years ago at Wings, which was shortly after he bought it. I flew up front (left seat) one way, and then in back on the way back. I didn't like being up front, I found it cramped. I found in back to be comfortable, but still not ideal and I don't think it would've been as pleasant if I had someone else back there. I'm 6'2", so my height I'm sure has something to do with it.

Having flown Navajos, there's no comparison on the interior.

Now don't get me wrong, it was a very nice airplane. Beautiful interior, comfortable seats, etc. But it is the size it is. I find the 310 to be more comfortable, but what I care about most is up front. I also had limited exposure and it was a while ago, so my memory may be fuzzy.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I got to fly in Morrison's Matrix close to 6 years ago at Wings, which was shortly after he bought it. I flew up front (left seat) one way, and then in back on the way back. I didn't like being up front, I found it cramped. I found in back to be comfortable, but still not ideal and I don't think it would've been as pleasant if I had someone else back there. I'm 6'2", so my height I'm sure has something to do with it.

Having flown Navajos, there's no comparison on the interior.
Click to expand...

The older Malibu's are significantly more comfortable up front than the newer ones. That said I'm fine in either, but at 5'7" and 155 lbs I'm not exactly big.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I don't think Gus flies any of his airplanes. I used to see him out at the airport every day, but never saw him actually fly.

Insurance is the big killer for Plus One owners. Insurance was typically double what it would cost to insure an airplane for yourself. I briefly considered putting my 170 in the club, but I probably would have lost more money than if it sat on the ramp. When I was looking into it, insurance for a 4 seat single was something like $7k/year.
Click to expand...

That was why I didn't put the 310 with them.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Maybe its just me, but the only part of the Malibu I don't like the is the pilots seating. I felt like a pretzel trying to get in there. Then I had to tilt my seat back to clear my headset. The people in back have it much nicer, but I suspect EVERYONE wants the forward facing couch.
Click to expand...

The only thing I found lacking in the Mirage I sat in at Oshkosh was... well... nothing. Except that it wasn't a TBM 900. :D Both planes are outside my reality, so might as well go big I say!
 
jesse said:
The older Malibu's are significantly more comfortable up front than the newer ones. That said I'm fine in either, but at 5'7" and 155 lbs I'm not exactly big.
Click to expand...

I think the height matters. You and I are built about the same, but that extra 7" makes it harder for me to fit into smaller places.

I do recall sitting in an 80s Malibu and noting that it was much more roomy up front.
 
jesse said:
The older Malibu's are significantly more comfortable up front than the newer ones. That said I'm fine in either, but at 5'7" and 155 lbs I'm not exactly big.
Click to expand...

That may be true but the 2012's and newer had some significant changes to make the front more roomy. They resculptured the interior to carve out more room and also redesigned the co-pilot seat so that it can fold fully flat forwards. The rear facing seats can fold flat too now. It all makes it a lot easier to get into.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top