Saratoga, A36, or....?

J

Jared Kornelsen

Pre-Flight
Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Messages
98
Display Name
Display name:
Jared
Thinking about the next plane... Our family will be growing probably in the next year or so.It'll be me, my wife and 3 small kids. The Mooney M20F is going to be too small at that point.

Mission will be mainly 300-500nm trips besides just flying for enjoyment locally. Budget will be in the $150,000 - $200,000 range give or take. I want 160kts cruise speeds or better, definitely need to make it from Paris Tx to Seminole Tx in around 2 hours or preferably less. I feel like a nice low time turbo, retractable gear Saratoga can be had for that. An A36 is maybe at the top of that price range for something low hours, but looks like it can also be had for that. I've researched both some, looks like the Saratoga is moderately bigger in cabin size and hence more comfortable but the A36 may be a little faster.

What is yalls opinions on these 2 planes, pros cons etc. Or am I excluding any other worthy options I haven't listed? I know T-Tail Lances may fall into the requirements as well but I hear bad things about cooling and the tail, which the tail does not concern me near as much as cooling.

Should I be looking at/considering twins as well? If so which ones?
 
500NM in Texas region? NA Saratoga. the cabin is not moderately more comfortable from a Beech 36, it's significantly more comfortable imo. Speed edge will go to the A36, for this short a "mission" profile I really wouldn't make it a priority. I would also not mess with turbos for this mission. The T-tail (Lance II, no Saratogas ever came in T-tail) is no big deal, they just eat more runway before it can get pitch authority. Ditto for attempting full stall landings. Neither is a big deal as long as you're operating out of instrument runways (usually in excess of 4k and paved).

With your budget, you can't go wrong with either brand. Enjoy.
 
Jared Kornelsen said:
Thinking about the next plane... Our family will be growing probably in the next year or so.It'll be me, my wife and 3 small kids. The Mooney M20F is going to be too small at that point.

Mission will be mainly 300-500nm trips besides just flying for enjoyment locally. Budget will be in the $150,000 - $200,000 range give or take. I want 160kts cruise speeds or better, definitely need to make it from Paris Tx to Seminole Tx in around 2 hours or preferably less. I feel like a nice low time turbo, retractable gear Saratoga can be had for that. An A36 is maybe at the top of that price range for something low hours, but looks like it can also be had for that. I've researched both some, looks like the Saratoga is moderately bigger in cabin size and hence more comfortable but the A36 may be a little faster.

What is yalls opinions on these 2 planes, pros cons etc. Or am I excluding any other worthy options I haven't listed? I know T-Tail Lances may fall into the requirements as well but I hear bad things about cooling and the tail, which the tail does not concern me near as much as cooling.

Should I be looking at/considering twins as well? If so which ones?
Click to expand...

I think the cooling issue on the Lance T-Tails was a Turbo Lance issue, not as big of a deal for the NA version. However, you aren't getting 160kts out of an NA Lance. The C210 will run at 160kts though. It's one of those deals where you have to pick any two of the following: a) cost, b) speed, c) utility.

36 Bo - B/C
Lance/Toga - A/C
210 - A/B

You can probably find a few twins that fit the criteria as well if you are looking at Saratoga/36 Bo pricing.
 
Well Texas and surrounding states for now, I could make a few trips a year to Mexico as well, the area where we would fly to mainly over there is around 6,500'. My work should eventually take me just about all over the US and perhaps even Canada so I certainly would not mind a turbo, or atleast turbo normalized like our Mooney is.

I wasnt thinking a straight tail NA Lance could do it that fast, I was referring to the turbo version. Would the turbo versions cooling woes not scare yall?
 
Also should I be considering anything like a Cessna 310R or some other twin?
 
hindsight2020 said:
no Saratogas ever came in T-tail
Click to expand...
Trivia: They almost did. The 1980 model was originally supposed to be the "Lance III", with tapered wings and T-tail. A prototype (PA-32RT-301T Turbo Lance III) was in flight test when they decided to revert back to the low tail, which became the Saratoga.
 
Jared Kornelsen said:
Also should I be considering anything like a Cessna 310R or some other twin?
Click to expand...
Yes.
I traded my Mooney for a Cessna 310.
Our family grew as well and was just too heavy for the Mooney. It was a good move.
You can get a lot of airplane for your money with a twin. Of course, you're operating costs do go up somewhat.
Like you, I looked at as many heavy hauler singles as I could find, but none really fit the bill for what I wanted.
I ended up buying a 1956 310. Love the plane! Tons of room in the cabin!
With carbureted engines, I run it about a 180 knots; 22gph Fuel injected models do about 190.
To me, having me the other engine is insurance. It's nice when you're flying home at night knowing that you don't have to pick a place to die if the engine quits.
If you want to go do sightseeing flights, pull it way back and burn 14 gallons an hour @ 150kts. Or you can push it up and do 180. The best part, there's lots of room to stretch out in the cabin.
Good luck in your search!
666f0b50708d1f99f0176fe8021b8c59.jpg


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
I’m in the exact same situation and have been trying to narrow down options for a month or so. At least for me I think I’m down to a Saratoga RG with an NA engine but would be open to a turbo if low (OH) hours and right price. One thing to also consider between Saratogas & A36s is the useful load. Togas seem to be a few hundred lbs greater useful load depending on options. For us (a growing family of 5 with our kids being 8,6,2) that extra weight available could be helpful in the future. Good luck in your search!
 
Wow, what a gorgeous plane.

mwagg737 said:
Yes.
I traded my Mooney for a Cessna 310.
Our family grew as well and was just too heavy for the Mooney. It was a good move.
You can get a lot of airplane for your money with a twin. Of course, you're operating costs do go up somewhat.
Like you, I looked at as many heavy hauler singles as I could find, but none really fit the bill for what I wanted.
I ended up buying a 1956 310. Love the plane! Tons of room in the cabin!
With carbureted engines, I run it about a 180 knots; 22gph Fuel injected models do about 190.
To me, having me the other engine is insurance. It's nice when you're flying home at night knowing that you don't have to pick a place to die if the engine quits.
If you want to go do sightseeing flights, pull it way back and burn 14 gallons an hour @ 150kts. Or you can push it up and do 180. The best part, there's lots of room to stretch out in the cabin.
Good luck in your search!
666f0b50708d1f99f0176fe8021b8c59.jpg


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
 
You can find a nice A36 with that budget. 160-165kts. Earlier models have better useful loads. There is an aftermarket AC available that seems to work very well.

I have both a NA and a turbo A36 (through partnerships). The NA is more fun to fly, the TC with it's tip-tanks etc. is better for longer trips where you can climb above the summer bumps. Downside of the turbo is that it burns more fuel, costs more to overhaul and has taken quite a number of mechanic hours for the fuel and MAP controller to be set up right.

And I agree, that 310 is cool !
 
I like the Vtail Bonanzas a lot but between the A36 and the turbo Toga I think I’m heavily leaning towards a very low time turbo Toga.

mwagg737 May have started a little something up again though, my goodness that plane looks awesome, reallyyy liking the paint scheme!!! -and what you have to say about it being roomy and the speed..

So let’s say I dive into researching twins, what others are there to consider for my price point and is there anything in particular to look out for when in twin territory?
 
Jared Kornelsen said:
I like the Vtail Bonanzas a lot but between the A36 and the turbo Toga I think I’m heavily leaning towards a very low time turbo Toga.

mwagg737 May have started a little something up again though, my goodness that plane looks awesome, reallyyy liking the paint scheme!!! -and what you have to say about it being roomy and the speed..

So let’s say I dive into researching twins, what others are there to consider for my price point and is there anything in particular to look out for when in twin territory?
Click to expand...

Baron 58. Not as spacious as a 310, but it will still feel cavernous after unpacking the family out of a Mooney. Big advantage is avoiding the overwing entrance for the backseaters.

An Aztec would also do the job (for a lot less entry money) but 160 knots is the limit, and mine seems to like 150 to 155 TAS better. And you have to be a bit of cultist, like me and @Ted DuPuis, to really appreciate them. But they do have Lycomings, and like @hindsight2020, that always scores bonus points with me. ;)
 
Last edited:
With small kids, whatever you buy, make sure it has an actual door to the back, and club seating.
 
How about some I haven’t heard people say yet but seem to be within reason price wise when looking at all piston twins ascending in price on controller.
Baron B55
B60 Duke
C414
C340A
C421B

There is a beautiful 1970 414 on controller for $189,900one engine is about 116 SMOH and the other is about 964. You see this a lot with twins where one side is very low hour and the other is much older... is this just how the cookie crumbles or does it behoove you to find one that has both engines redone relatively at the same time?
 
Jared Kornelsen said:
How about some I haven’t heard people say yet but seem to be within reason price wise when looking at all piston twins ascending in price on controller.
Baron B55
B60 Duke
C414
C340A
C421B

There is a beautiful 1970 414 on controller for $189,900one engine is about 116 SMOH and the other is about 964. You see this a lot with twins where one side is very low hour and the other is much older... is this just how the cookie crumbles or does it behoove you to find one that has both engines redone relatively at the same time?
Click to expand...

Three kids in a Baron B55? The "fifth seat" is a baggage compartment special. Your family will probably outgrow it pretty fast. And Mom is unlikely to approve if she sees a 310 or Baron 58.
The Duke is a great airplane, and nice to have a pressurized cabin. But it'll be damned expensive to keep in the air. You'll soon understand why with a little DD.
Pressurized Cessna twins - go for it if you got the operating budget to keep them airborne. Do not expect to operate any of them for anything close to the same annual cost as their lowly, unpressurized, un-turbocharged 310, Baron or Piper cousins.
 
Is it just because of the pressurization system that things are so expensive to keep that working good or what is it about them?
 
If a pressurized hull is of interest, you may want to consider a Piper Malibu. Nice cabin set-up for a young family like yours.
 
The cabin size of the 340, 414, 421 where the main draws, I just researched them for about an hour or so and they are no longer on my list lol. I believe a Malibu is well out of my price range
 
C55. Kind of a sleeper of a Baron. Big engines, big UL, big flaps, big speed. I'm going to buy one someday. 150k will get you a great Baron BCDE. There's some good ones in TaP right now.
 
If I were you, I probably wouldn't bother with a turbo... And I definitely would consider a twin. You can get a lot of airplane for a low purchase price in a twin, in exchange for higher operating costs.

58 Barons and Senecas are twins that have easy entry through a big back door for the pax. Seneca has a lot more width to it than the Baron, but you either get one with terrible handling characteristics (I) or turbos (II-V).

310s require everyone to get up on the wing and in the front door, but they're very roomy once you're in. You can get a very nice one for well under your budget...

https://www.trade-a-plane.com/searc...&model=310&listing_id=2329195&s-type=aircraft
https://www.trade-a-plane.com/searc...odel=T310R&listing_id=2327731&s-type=aircraft
https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28860985/1968-cessna-310n
 
Jared Kornelsen said:
So let’s say I dive into researching twins, what others are there to consider for my price point and is there anything in particular to look out for when in twin territory?
Click to expand...

3 kids? A Be58 would get you anywhere you want to go. Same cabin as the the A36 with the barn door in the back. Tuck in wife and kids in the back 4, close the door and climb up front to the cockpit.

Your budget would put you into a 70s era 58. That's not a bad thing. You probably won't need deice. AC is available after-market through FTA.

If you get a twin, don't fall into the 'i don't need to do X because I have two of them' trap. Prop inspections, pressure pumps, engine overhauls etc. You only gain safety from a twin if you put the same level of effort into maintenance as you would in a single. Of course, if you do that, your maintenance cost is going to be considerably higher than a HP single. Now this is the internet and POA where nothing is like the real world. This place just crawls with twin owners who will tell you that nothing ever breaks on their twin and that it is basically the same as maintaining a J3 cub. It's not. A Be58 maintained to the same standard as a comparable A36 is going to cost you more, per mile of flight and per year of ownership. In return, you can travel a bit faster, carry a bit more and maybe feel better about yourself if you fly your family at night or over hostile terrain.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
If I were you, I probably wouldn't bother with a turbo... And I definitely would consider a twin. You can get a lot of airplane for a low purchase price in a twin, in exchange for higher operating costs.

58 Barons and Senecas are twins that have easy entry through a big back door for the pax. Seneca has a lot more width to it than the Baron, but you either get one with terrible handling characteristics (I) or turbos (II-V).

310s require everyone to get up on the wing and in the front door, but they're very roomy once you're in. You can get a very nice one for well under your budget...

https://www.trade-a-plane.com/searc...&model=310&listing_id=2329195&s-type=aircraft
https://www.trade-a-plane.com/searc...odel=T310R&listing_id=2327731&s-type=aircraft
https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28860985/1968-cessna-310n
Click to expand...

No free lunches with those twins. First one is with two near-run-out engines, budget $100k to fix that. Second one is turbo, something you suggested to stay away from (for a good reason!), and third one is Canadian with no engine times listed, and based on that, I'd say it will have runouts too.
 
In our March towards a G5, 'for a little bit more' you can get a Navajo CR. Potty seat, all the room and payload you need. Just bring money.
 
weilke said:
...This place just crawls with twin owners who will tell you that nothing ever breaks on their twin and that it is basically the same as maintaining a J3 cub...
Click to expand...

The number of twin piston owners on this forum is quite small. Some of us have posted our actual costs in the past in an effort to provide some real world information to others examining that potential option. I don't recall any of us comparing our planes to a Cub. But then I'm getting old and forgetful. Maybe you could provide a link to an example. Shouldn't be difficult to do that if this place is crawling with twin owners making such representations.

To be clear, I don't disagree at all with the other points you made. Like any airplane, if not maintained, at a minimum it can deteriorate to the point where it's prohibitively expensive to rehabilitate (no small number of piston twins for sale fall into that "deferred maintenance" cohort, and many will probably end up parted out). In the worst case it becomes a potential hazard to fly.
 
Last edited:
Piper Comanche Single engine.
 
Last edited:
Just to give you an idea of interior space.

Mine is a 5 place. The UL is 1523. It holds 100 gallons so that leaves roughly 900 for people and bags. Perfect for our family.

The boys in back are 6'1", 210, 160. My wife and I are not small either. I love not rubbing shoulders with my co-pilot.
my wife even made the comment that she could turn sideways in the airplane when she needed to stretch.

I do most of my own maintenance, and so that is not a huge cost for me. That being said, I don't defer maintenance until the annual. When annual time comes, there's almost nothing to do except for re-rig the gear.

Nice copies of twins are little bit tough to find, as soon as they pop up they disappear. your best bet would be to do some networking around your local airport and put some feelers out. This one was a little bit like catching lightning in a bottle. I heard about it through my prop guy while I was getting work done on my Mooney. I paid a little bit of a premium for the airplane, but it's a beautiful restoration and an OshKosh show winner.

Anything newer than a C model sounds like it would fit your needs pretty well. That's where they went to six seats. If you can find a C that has six seats, that is a fastest of the bunch next to the R.

The 310 was Cessnas humongous home run in my opinion. It's a very trouble-free airplane. That's not to say it doesn't have its hotspots like every airplane, namely, the landing gear. it requires some special attention, but if you give it that special attention it will be as reliable and trouble-free as anything.

178595f22e0584d2c2ba604f2899f7aa.jpg
7a172f4cf8e78fe9b65316fb1c1842d6.jpg
1f9f365f72587bdc0093643a818aba3b.jpg


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
For comfort I would say go with the Saratoga. I have a Turbo Lance. We sometimes fill the seats (4 adults + 2 small children). The room is sufficient. I’ve glanced at some beautiful examples of the A36 on the ramp. I think I’d have a hard time convincing my wife and mother-in-law to cozy up in the back with the kids. Speed vs comfort is really a personal preference.
 
Loving the 310 and the retrac Toga so far. The turbo Toga, how much speed would you gain with the turbo vs NA if you stay around or under 13,000?

Need to research the B58 some more.

So Heftiger, how has your Turbo Lance experience been with engine cooling and in general?
 
Jared Kornelsen said:
Loving the 310 and the retrac Toga so far. The turbo Toga, how much speed would you gain with the turbo vs NA if you stay around or under 13,000?

Need to research the B58 some more.

So Heftiger, how has your Turbo Lance experience been with engine cooling and in general?
Click to expand...

The Saratoga is going to be faster than the Lance. The engine cooling isn’t an issue if you’re willing to feed it the fuel. We give it about 1GPH over what the book says to keep the TIT below 1500 (1650 is redline). A good engine monitor helps. The only time I’ve had issues with keeping the cylinders below 400 is in the peak of summer, and it’s always been manageable (read: I’ve never had to change how I’m flying because of the cylinders, just richen up a tiny bit)
The turbo LOVES fuel. The book calls for full rich in the climbs. That’s ~36 GPH at the max continuous setting of 33”. Mind you it’s not for long, because it always climbs well. Then we bring it back to 15 - 18 GPH in a 55% cruise.
 
Based on those charts looks like the turbo toga is around 160kts at 12-13,000 and the NA is 5-10 slower if I'm reading that right.. Heftiger, the turbo lance wont do better than 160kts below oxygen levels?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top