Navion

A

ateamer

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
2,048
Location
Port St. Lucie, FL
Display Name
Display name:
ateamer
@flyingron and others with Navion experience: I’m looking for a different plane - the RV-8A is just too small for me and my usual passengers. Mission: Breakfast and lunch flights inside Florida, maybe exploring the southeast, and local flights just for fun, normally won’t have more than two passengers. Nothing where we have a schedule to keep, no challenging terrain or other conditions, no great need for speed.

I have an instrument rating, but haven’t been current in years and don’t really see the necessity for the flying I do - especially with thunderstorms and not having radar and the performance to get above most of it.

So, four seats, at least as much room as a PA-28 or 172, let’s say 550 pound payload with 3+45 fuel, 120+ knots cruise, VFR is adequate.

Navions piqued my interest. Cherokee 180/Archer, Arrow, 172, 177, 182 are all on my radar as well. I’ve got some time in Bonanzas, but don’t think they’re for me.

Tell me about the gotchas. If you have a Navion, why wouldn’t you buy one again? What items specific to the model do I need to focus on? If a candidate has an E-225, how well supported are they?

My budget is for planes below a hundred grand, preferably below 90.
 
I liked and looked at Navions but bought a Comanche. I never flew in a Navion so I cant say how they fly. I did like the looks of them but it seemed like more people had Comanches, parts were more prevalent and mechanics were easier to find.
 
ateamer said:
If a candidate has an E-225, how well supported are they?
Click to expand...

I can't comment on the Navion itself since I haven't owned or maintained one but I owned an early Bonanza with the E-225. Support for these engines is nowhere near what it is for the more common Lycoming and Continental engines but it isn't too bad. I never had an engine problem that caused the airplane to sit inoperable for a length of time. Prop options for these engines is less than impressive however. I had one of the good propeller options and it still caused me a lot of headaches and downtime over the course of my ownership.

I would categorize the Navion like the early Bonanza. They are antique airplanes with antique airplane problems and support problems but do not have the same wow factor you would get if you showed up somewhere in a more prestigious antique like a Staggerwing or T6, etc.

That said, I think a Navion would be a reasonable choice for what you're doing.
 
Airframe parts are not too rough (and these planes are pretty stout). As pointed out the older engines can be a problem, not just with the engines but also with some of the accessories and the older prop. There are good options for engine upgrades (I went from the Gopher35 to an IO-550). The joke is that every time a Cirrus has a chute pull, a Navion gets a new engine.

The type society has a good intro book on "what to look for when buying a Navion."
 
Take a look at your insurance costs before you commit. It might surprise you. If you don’t have any retract/HP time, and you are older, make sure you are seated when you talk to your broker.
 
Ditto on looking @ a Navion and ended up in a Comanche, by happenstance, and couldn’t be happier. I wasn’t brave enough for the E series...
 
Rcmutz said:
Take a look at your insurance costs before you commit. It might surprise you. If you don’t have any retract/HP time, and you are older, make sure you are seated when you talk to your broker.
Click to expand...

900 hours, 100 retract, CFI, early 50s
 
asicer said:
And aren't those a bit hard to find? I don't recall a lot of them produced.
Click to expand...
This is probably why they cost more. They're a little sleeker and faster.
 
Rcmutz said:
Take a look at your insurance costs before you commit. It might surprise you. If you don’t have any retract/HP time, and you are older, make sure you are seated when you talk to your broker.
Click to expand...
I personally know pilots now uninsurable in retractable gear aircraft for the egregious sin of turning 80.
 
Navions are *really* cool planes. Just looks right. My favorite is the twin Navion, of which there are pretty much none
 
Tantalum said:
Navions are *really* cool planes. Just looks right. My favorite is the twin Navion, of which there are pretty much none
Click to expand...

Shocked face. I was waiting for you to go off on some tirade on how old they look.
 
Navions are built like a brick s*it houses. Extrememly robust airframes. Many people don't realize North American, like some of the German aircraft makers post war, was looking for revenue piston products which could be sold to the military and civilian markets in the emerging jet age. These products were marketed as VIP or short haul transport aircraft for commuting between military faciities.

Look closely at the Navion... It uses the Mustang's tail section. There are good resources for maintaining Navions with a strong owner community. I flew one 10 hours on a x-country trip and it was a delight. Nice taxiing with the canopy cracked open for ventalation in the summer months.
 
EdFred said:
Shocked face. I was waiting for you to go off on some tirade on how old they look.
Click to expand...
Well, he did start flying an AzTruck. Be on the lookout for tirades on new planes. ;)
 
Tantalum said:
Navions are *really* cool planes. Just looks right. My favorite is the twin Navion, of which there are pretty much none
Click to expand...

In the early 80's my Dad had one that I got my Multi-Engine and around 100 hours in. It was destroyed in a tornado at Ennis, TX airport, along with our Swift.

Twin Navion.png

I saw this one at FTW a few years ago.

20180404_163201.jpg

How about a Trimotor?

ttn66-03.jpg
 
I saw this sharp Twin Navion at Boeing Field in Seattle several years ago.



Many years ago I got some time in an early-1960s Navion Rangemaster. With a 260 hp IO-470 it had barely enough power, but it had solid, stable handling, good short-field capability, and as the name implied, fantastic range. It's the only postwar US low-wing single-engine lightplane I can think of with the only door on the left side. The door actually opens behind the pilot seat, so it has almost a cabin-class feel to it. The five-seat cabin itself is enormous - you could rent it out for weddings and bar mitzvahs.

 
RE: old vs new

Planes, really all things, should be honest with themselves.

A new Bonanza being sold today with zero refinements other than a lower useful load and a Garmin panel is a travesty, the core of it is outdated and a face lift will only go so far. But a lovingly maintained legacy example, nothing wrong with that, that's awesome. For sailors it's like a well maintained mid 70's Sabre 40. Don't try to be a new Beneteau (when really you're not)..

A 182 being sold today for $600K is also a travesty, it's an old slow plane that again, outside of a Garmin panel jammed in there, is a relic. A well maintained legacy example, nothing wrong with that.

A Mooney with a G1000 shoe-horned in and an extra door.. well.. you get the point


I freaking love the Aztec, and plenty of 'old' examples of planes, the Navion being one of them. They're solid and super versatile. They're old, but it looks nice and does its job well, and best of all, in the case of the Aztec Piper isn't still selling it with a G1000 jammed in, 500 lbs less useful, and some dumb marketing name like "super Aztec" when really the only change would a disproportionally high price coupled with a lower useful load and a more cramped feeling cabin. (I swear the 1960s Hershey Bar PA-28 in our club feels loads bigger inside than the nearly brand new Archer we have)..

so there's that/
 
Why I'm also not crazy about the G5 madness all these old planes have, at least the GI-275 fits nicely in and looks more "factory"
 
Pilawt said:
harp Twin Navion
Click to expand...
beatiful

Pilawt said:
The five-seat cabin itself is enormous
Click to expand...
yeah I'm always impressed how imposing they are on the ramp.. sure they sit pretty high but the cabin feels big


there was a guy somewhere around these parts, he's got a YouTube vid too, of a really well taken care of Navion, my only complaint is (sort of to my point above) the plane seems to have lost part of its soul with the flight school Skyhawk white with blue swoopy lines paint scheme. Something like really needs to keep that original look the designers intended
 
Suggest you check the status of prop ADs .

It can get pricey.
 
Magman said:
Suggest you check the status of prop ADs .
Click to expand...
This is indeed a problem with the E-225. The Hartzell that most of these have if it has not been upgraded is particularly onerous. There's some serious problems with the Macaulay props on these as well.

The other thing to check is the status of the fuel selector AD compliance (don't get me started on that stupidity). Other than that, the Navion doesn't have a lot of ADs to worry about. Most are either one time things that should have been dealt with years ago or are rather simple inspection things that get done at annual.
 
ATeamer,

I bought mine 2 years ago. It is a 1947 canopy model that was restored circa ~2002 with an IO-550 and 3-blade setup out of an A36 Bo. It will never be quite as fast as a Bo due to the huge cockpit, high lift wing, etc, but it is infinitely cooler. I think there is still adequate support for the 225, but the 470/520/550 upgraded models are certainly a little more desirable unless you are looking for serious vintage originality. It seems like the community is pretty tightly knit and a lot of the nicer airplanes change hands without much advertising on TAP/Barnstormers, etc. It pays to try to make contact with some of the movers and shakers for advice on buying. Very few of them have not been seriously modified by now, so you can probably find something you like. As others have said, the props can be an issue, make sure you know what you're getting.

112.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top