Plane suggestions?

ircphoenix

ircphoenix

En-Route
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
2,531
Location
Redondo Beach, CA
Display Name
Display name:
ircphoenix
Alright party people....

I finished my PPL last year. I still need to get my IFR, high performance, complex, and build up 250 for commercial.

I'm realizing that I could conceivably save myself some money by purchasing a plane instead of renting one.

What I need are suggestions for a good plane to do exactly that. ALL of my flying has been in various 172S (SP)'s, so I'm also spoiled now. Cruising at 110 isn't exactly satisfying, but they're nicely appointed. Is there a four seat airplane for someone like me that has a budget that falls somewhere between a kite and a hang glider? If not, what am I looking for in the 2 seat department, if anything?
 
I went with a cheap 150 after I got my PPL. About 55 dollars an hour operating cost, and my insurance was about 550 for the first year with 45 TT. It was not fast, but if you are building time it doesn't really matter I think. I did 75 hrs last year in it. You can probably get a decent 172 or PA-128 for under 30K.
 
I originally went with an older 172,didn't loose a dime on that plane,then moved to an Arrow to build complex time.
 
It sounds like you want to eventually fly for a living. There are two things that come in handy when you have that 251hr commercial:
- tailwheel time if you want to get into something like banner towing for your first timebuilder job (and eventually Ag)
- complex time if you want to be insurable in complex planes.

You can find ugly duckling B and C-model mooneys with bad paint and outdated avionics in the same price range as 172s. If you have a mechanic willing to help you with maintaining it on a budget, you can gather complex time that way. They have 4 seats and if you have two friends who are double amputees, you can even fill them.

The other option is a cheap taildragger. Not many 4 seat taildraggers in the budget department. Cheap entry price also makes the insurance hit less painful.

The thing with obscure ugly planes that are cheap is that they are cheap for a reason. It's the only way to get rid of them. So for a timebuilder aircraft, you may be stuck with it far longer than you wanted to. A cheap 172 or Cherokee 140 otoh will always find a buyer close to what you had to put into it.
 
I started out with a well worn early model Cherokee 160, with a half time engine, that I bought for less than the cost of a Toyota Corolla. Not exactly exciting, but found it a tough airplane, near impossible to break, comfortable for 3 people inside (4 for short flights), excellent range, very good useful load, lots of available parts to keep costs down and the annuals fit my budget at the time. Most expensive things I had to do with it were to replace the vacuum pump and re-skin the upper surface of the elevator which had some cracks in it

No regrets at all owning that airplane. Stepped up to an Arrow next, and even with the extra hp the weight of the retractable gear and C/S prop meant I lost almost 200 lb of useful load :(
 
Last edited:
Got to agree with Blurceo. If you're looking to build time then something slow like a 150 will make the time in T=D/S. Having a small S will give you a big T. On the other hand, you can go with a 172 or in my case a 177 with a 150hp engine and use mogas to keep the cost down. Also, spend as much time as you can with your mechanic and get to know the plane to do your own MX and owner assisted annuals. Finally, when you are not flying, make plans to fly. Plan for destinations, places to see from the air, and also plan some time to run through a few of the skills you learned but haven't flown since training. Just getting to the airport and saying "I'm going to fly today" will leave you with the feeling that it is a chore and not a means to accomplishing a goal. One reason people drop out of flying.
 
Last edited:
Barnstormers makes me go crosseyed. Controller looks much prettier.

NONE of the plane websites are very pleasing to the eye though. =\

Thanks for the info guys! I think I'm going to avoid the 150/152's. Much too small for my liking. And though slow means more time built, I could just go to the local practice area and fly in a circle for 4 hours to build time. I do want my trips to be SOMEWHAT enjoyable. =D
 
ircphoenix said:
Barnstormers makes me go crosseyed. Controller looks much prettier.

NONE of the plane websites are very pleasing to the eye though. =\

Thanks for the info guys! I think I'm going to avoid the 150/152's. Much too small for my liking. And though slow means more time built, I could just go to the local practice area and fly in a circle for 4 hours to build time. I do want my trips to be SOMEWHAT enjoyable. =D
Click to expand...

I flew my ratty looking but mechanically sound Cherokee 160 1200 nm to OSH two months after I bought it. Full tanks, two big guys and all the camping gear for a week. You KNOW you've been on a cross country after 2400 miles in a Cherokee :D Being a slow learner I did it all over again 3 years later. I wouldn't even think about that in a 150/152.
 
ircphoenix said:
Barnstormers makes me go crosseyed. Controller looks much prettier.

NONE of the plane websites are very pleasing to the eye though. =\

Thanks for the info guys! I think I'm going to avoid the 150/152's. Much too small for my liking. And though slow means more time built, I could just go to the local practice area and fly in a circle for 4 hours to build time. I do want my trips to be SOMEWHAT enjoyable. =D
Click to expand...


ASO.com is not bad. Tho they have fewer listings. Trade-a-plane and Barnstormers are a PITA
 
I'm looking hard at a 160 in Ohio now. Only 1500 SMOH =D.

And the PC-12 is a just a skosh outside of my price range. Thanks for the tip though. ;)
 
Socata Tampico.... Picked up a 2400tt/400SMOH (lycoming factory oh) for less than I spent on my poorly appointed Ram 1500 crew cab. 5' wide inside and an 800lb UL. Slower than sin, but still beats driving.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
And that's the joy of a Vintage Mooney! My 1970 M20-C has 970 lb useful load, carries 52 gallons of fuel good for 5-1/2+ hours, and yields 140 knot average block times. Four adults work well for breakfast or lunch runs. My wife and I fill it pretty full traveling, though. It also makes headwinds not as unpleasant, like the time groundspeed went down to 68 knots crossing the mountains towards Knoxville . . . Wouldn't want to have been flying that evening in a Cessna!

Maintenance isn't too bad. Insurance was high when I bought it with 62 hours in my logbook, but I flew her 100 hours the first year and rates went way down. Trained for the Instrument rating in it, and rates fell even more.

Don't be afraid of the word "complex," it describes the number of flight controls not the aircraft. Early Mooneys are stone simple in construction and operation. Learn to do your own maintenance (whatever plane you buy!), it will give you extra confidence that the plane is in good shape.

Happy hunting! And fly safe . . . .
 
I wouldn't overlook the Piper Comanche either. I fly a 250 regularly, and used to fly a 180. It is easily my favorite aircraft to fly. They are decently priced compared to the competition, and a 180 is a pretty economical touring aircraft.
 
The burden of having more money... opens up a range of possibilities.

Fortunately I don't have any, so a Comanche and Mooney are both about 20k higher than the price I'd be looking at. =) Having no money is nice, only in the respect that your options are pretty well laid out for you. =D
 
ircphoenix said:
The burden of having more money... opens up a range of possibilities.

Fortunately I don't have any, so a Comanche and Mooney are both about 20k higher than the price I'd be looking at. =) Having no money is nice, only in the respect that your options are pretty well laid out for you. =D
Click to expand...

Quite a few of us started off the same way. Like I said, my scrubby looking Cherokee didn't get any admiring looks from passers by on the ramp, and I sure wasn't going to pick up any cute female flight instructors with it either. But I logged a lot of memorable hours and "aviation firsts" (first time I flew my own airplane, any airplane, into Oshkosh for example) in it.

BTW, the PC-12 is still a viable option. You need to have a bunch of rich friends to pay the gas, but not so rich they have their own Citations. Get workin' on it...
 
A former CFI at the school I use basically liquidated all his savings to purchase a Mooney C for about 25k. Flew the hell out of it for 8 or 9 months, got his 1500 hours, and sold it. Basically got his entire investment back, and only paid for operating costs. Now he is training at a regional airline.
 
Cherokees seem to be the best priced 4 seat planes on the market lately. I owned one for nearly a decade and it was a great, trouble-free and affordable plane to own and fly. A little slow once I got bit by the Vans RV bug :-D so I sold it since I rarely used more than 2 seats and wanted to go 65 knots faster.
 
Go exAB from the start and save yourself the aggravation of certified mx. I did own a run out warrior ii for a year. Flew the snot out of it and sold it before anything big came up. As long as you have a mission that can be filled by a two seater, exAB is the way to go.
 
Well if you're gonna throw experimental out there, anything you suggest in the 30k price range? I hear RVs are fantastic, but I also know they're friggin' expensive.
 
Warriors are cheap (as planes go). Easy to fly, fixed gear, 160hp, 3 1/2 adults on a good day. For complex, Navions are old but good. Complex, hp, 4 adults, prices all over the block. http://www.navionsociety.org/old/Classified_Ads/classified_ads.html The engines vary from a 185hp Continental to a 285hp Lycoming. And if you start out small, you have room to grow. Browsing the airplane sites mentioned, it would seem the ranges on complex/hp are all over.
Just an aside, owning is not necessarily cheaper than renting. There are a lot of fixed costs you have to pay for so figuring out your hourly rate is going to depend on how much you use it. Then there is the variable costs. And what happens when you break something. Not that I would change a thing. Owning rather than renting gets you what you want and when you want it. With rentals, you get what you get.
 
ircphoenix said:
That is a rather pretty ride.
Click to expand...

...with no radios to speak of. Also be careful of the siren song of short body mooneys. They share the same price space with PA-28s and C-172s but are by no means the same internally. There's a reason they go for PA-28 money while being faster, and I have no interest in getting the mooniacs all defensive, but caveat emptor. Without getting into a hissy with them: manual gear mx, fuel tank leaks and the reasons why they exist in the manner they do compared to Cessna and Piper, and steel tubing corrosion, which is unique to Mooney as C and P are chromate Al construction. If you want details PM me or ask someone else on the public space. Good luck to you.

ETA: Regarding the RV push, I was being completely facetious, I recognize no exAB solution exists for you, or me for that matter, at the price point you're discussing. I was merely deriding the certified mx kabuki that has made me lose much of the enthusiasm I once held for my aircraft's ownership. Having the freedom to maintain and modify my Arrow like Jay can work on his -8A would be a game changer for me. As it is, it sits old and un-updated because of that musky stupid certified folder of STCs and 50 year old crumbling page logbooks that certify its airworthiness in true placebo fashion. I digress.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top