So what should I buy?

M

mike d

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jul 28, 2012
Messages
33
Display Name
Display name:
Mike d
I own a rv-6a now but need more seats for the growing family.

Mission:
- 4 place (a true 4 place)
- 150knts +
- can usa a 2000' runway safely
- landing speed under 70knts
- prefer modern, but would be happy with a well maintained classic with some modern instruments.
- around $200k, but I am cheap so less is better
- 60 to 70 percent hamburger runs but some long cross countries

Planes I have started to look at:
- RV-10
- Columbia 300 or 350
- cirrus SR20 or 22
- Navion
- C180 or C182

Not sure that I want a certified because I like to tinker with the plane. Not just fix stuff, but change things too.

I need the rear seats to be usable and comfortable. So no rear facing seats like the sportsman or wheeler. The Lancair's are out either due to price or the rear seats are not comfortable.
Canards are out due to landing speed and runway usage.

So, what say you? What plane should I be looking for?
 
I've got a Comanche for sale.
 
mike d said:
I own a rv-6a now but need more seats for the growing family.

Mission:
- 4 place (a true 4 place)
- 150knts +
- can usa a 2000' runway safely
- landing speed under 70knts
- prefer modern, but would be happy with a well maintained classic with some modern instruments.
- around $200k, but I am cheap so less is better
- 60 to 70 percent hamburger runs but some long cross countries

Planes I have started to look at:
- RV-10
- Columbia 300 or 350
- cirrus SR20 or 22
- Navion
- C180 or C182

Not sure that I want a certified because I like to tinker with the plane. Not just fix stuff, but change things too.

I need the rear seats to be usable and comfortable. So no rear facing seats like the sportsman or wheeler. The Lancair's are out either due to price or the rear seats are not comfortable.
Canards are out due to landing speed and runway usage.

So, what say you? What plane should I be looking for?
Click to expand...

A-36. For that kind of $ you can find a beauty. It's true, what you say about the flexibility of maintenance on an experimental, but the support network available to Bonanza owners is as good as it gets. Plus, you can put 4 fat people in it, cruise at 155-160kts, and it flies so nice - light controls, big picture windows, passengers love 'em.
 
j1b3h0 said:
A-36. For that kind of $ you can find a beauty. It's true, what you say about the flexibility of maintenance on an experimental, but the support network available to Bonanza owners is as good as it gets. Plus, you can put 4 fat people in it, cruise at 155-160kts, and it flies so nice - light controls, big picture windows, passengers love 'em.
Click to expand...

+1 :D
 
mike d said:
I own a rv-6a now but need more seats for the growing family.

Mission:
- 4 place (a true 4 place)
- 150knts +
- can usa a 2000' runway safely
- landing speed under 70knts
- prefer modern, but would be happy with a well maintained classic with some modern instruments.
- around $200k, but I am cheap so less is better
- 60 to 70 percent hamburger runs but some long cross countries

Planes I have started to look at:
- RV-10
- Columbia 300 or 350
- cirrus SR20 or 22
- Navion
- C180 or C182

Not sure that I want a certified because I like to tinker with the plane. Not just fix stuff, but change things too.

I need the rear seats to be usable and comfortable. So no rear facing seats like the sportsman or wheeler. The Lancair's are out either due to price or the rear seats are not comfortable.
Canards are out due to landing speed and runway usage.

So, what say you? What plane should I be looking for?
Click to expand...
I'm a bit biased (but for good reason) and I say a A36 Bonanza would fit your needs nicely with some extra speed to boot. You should be able to get a pretty nice one for $200K.

Your'e not gonna get 150+ KTAS out of the Navion, the SR-20 or either Cezzna. The Columbia 300 or SR22 has the performance but might lack the payload if your range on those long XCs is important and I suspect you'd be looking at more than $200K for a good one. I don't know enough about the RV-10 but I think it might be tough to carry 4 "full size" adults and their bags in one comfortably.
 
Experimental = RV10 - may be a few others but RV10
Certified = lots of choices
If it's mostly burger runs, be easy on yourself and get a C182.

But in the end, it's whatever turns you on and still does the mission.
 
mike d said:
- RV-10
- Columbia 300 or 350
- cirrus SR20 or 22
- Navion
- C180 or C182
Click to expand...

One of these things is not like the others. :D

Of course, my forever answer is: Bonanza S35.

yyaaaaaaawwwwwnnnnnnn. :yes:
 
I have been looking at cherokee 6. Not as fast, but so much plane for the dollar. I started out wanting a 206, but they are high as cats backs.
 
trackersocha said:
And I m a big bastard, the BO cabin is a touch small.
Click to expand...

Forgo the 150 kts and many things are doable. if you fit in a RV-10 you fit in a Bo, but maybe not as comfy.

The Navion will do what you want in comfort but they seem to hit a brick wall about 150-ish MPH. There's a chap on here once in a while quoting 155kts or something, but I would have to do flight test to verify. The three I flew would only go 155kts straight down. But they are damn cool planes, and very comfy. Like a mid-50s Buick sedan.
 
182RG. Less costly than a 210, can haul four people and reasonable fuel. Can take off in less than 1,000ft, does about 155kts at 12gph.
 
Maintenance and up keep should be relatively inexpensive. I don't know much about Bo's but heard they will suck your wallet dry. Tell me I am wrong. Examples?
 
Glasair Sportsman?

150 kts cruise
Vso 42 kts
Useful 1150 lbs
Full fuel payload 850 lbs
Modern
Two weeks to taxi: $180k + whatever

http://www.glasairaviation.com/sportsmanspecs.html

Edit: Nevermind. Overlooked that you had explicitly ruled the Sportsman out due to rear seats facing the wrong way. It can be (and has been) built with rear seats that face forward.
 
Last edited:
mike d said:
Maintenance and up keep should be relatively inexpensive. I don't know much about Bo's but heard they will suck your wallet dry. Tell me I am wrong. Examples?
Click to expand...
The main financial issue with a Bonanza is that Beech charges some outrageous prices for some parts. Savvy owners get around this by various creative methods typically involving finding what they need from salvage yards or having their old parts "rebuilt" by one of the many providers of such services. If you're the type of owner who gives their shop carte blanche at annual time or for any other significant repair you can indeed make your wallet fit in your back pocket a lot better but if you remain involved in maintenance decisions and consider the appropriate alternative part sources they can be as affordable as any other high performance retractable airplane.

While there's no question a A36 or either of the shorter Bonanzas will cost more to operate on a per hour basis than a C-182, that difference shrinks to nothing (or less) when you compare with a C-182RG or C-210.

But the thing that sells Bonanzas to pilots is the handling qualities and performance both of which are hard to beat.

For further information on the care and feeding of a Bonanza I suggest you take a look at www.beechtalk.com.
 
PilotAlan said:
A-36
Lance

I would lean toward a Lance/Saratoga. Lots and lots of room. It's a six seater, so you plenty of room for 4 pax and bags. For under $200k you could probably get a turbo Saratoga with Aspen glass.
Here's one you could probably get with a factory new engine, Aspen, etc. within your price range.
http://www.controller.com/listingsd...ATOGA-SP/1984-PIPER-T-SARATOGA-SP/1280643.htm
Click to expand...

I've flown both and the advantages of the A36 are pretty clear to me. Unless you're girth challenged there's plenty of room in a Bo (but the Piper is indeed noticeably wider inside) and the extra 15-20 KTAS is enough to notice on any long trip especially when you encounter headwinds. And while the Cherokee Six the Saratoga is based on is quite a hauler, IME a A36 with the same equipment can carry more than a Saratoga of similar vintage.

But the real attraction of the Bonanza is how it feels to fly one. A Saratoga feels like driving a big Jeep, a C-210 like a Chevy truck and a Bonanza like a large BMW sedan. The one feature of the Toga that's an improvement over the Bonanza is the small baggage compartment ahead of the cockpit, something that ironically would be even more useful in a Bonanza than it is in a Toga.
 
I did fly a beech 18 the other day, no TOL, just flying at altitude, some steep turns and such. The beech is lighter than the cherokee 6. Never have flown a BO, but I can imagine...
 
mike d said:
I own a rv-6a now but need more seats for the growing family.

Mission:
- 4 place (a true 4 place)
- 150knts +
- can usa a 2000' runway safely
- landing speed under 70knts
- prefer modern, but would be happy with a well maintained classic with some modern instruments.
- around $200k, but I am cheap so less is better
- 60 to 70 percent hamburger runs but some long cross countries

Planes I have started to look at:
- RV-10
- Columbia 300 or 350
- cirrus SR20 or 22
- Navion
- C180 or C182

Not sure that I want a certified because I like to tinker with the plane. Not just fix stuff, but change things too.

I need the rear seats to be usable and comfortable. So no rear facing seats like the sportsman or wheeler. The Lancair's are out either due to price or the rear seats are not comfortable.
Canards are out due to landing speed and runway usage.

So, what say you? What plane should I be looking for?
Click to expand...

Katmai 182 w/300hp.
 
RV 10 will do everything on your list. Big comfortable cockpit and it will haul four full size adults. Most will have state of the art electronics and you can put them in if the airplane doesn't have what you want for a fraction of the price of certified. Plus it flies a hell of a lot better than just about any certified four place and no insanely expensive parts. Don
 
yakdriver said:
RV 10 will do everything on your list. Big comfortable cockpit and it will haul four full size adults. Most will have state of the art electronics and you can put them in if the airplane doesn't have what you want for a fraction of the price of certified. Plus it flies a hell of a lot better than just about any certified four place and no insanely expensive parts. Don
Click to expand...

Depends on what engine you use.
 
Henning beat me to the Katmai, my dream airplane. I don't understand the OP's exclusions of canards--not with this bird.

Do people really operate Lances and A36's out of 2,000 foot runways? I fly a 210 (no STOL mods due to FIKI), but 2,600 feet is about as short as I care to use.

Wells
 
Henning said:
Depends on what engine you use.
Click to expand...

Even a 260hp RV 10 will outperform all of the parameters the OP is looking for. A 300+hp will be all the better. I have a couple of friend's with RV10s, one 260 and the other has a Lycon IO540 putting out around 325hp. The 260 cruises 160kts the other 180+kts. It is also a cleaner, lighter airframe than the 260. Both will operate out of a 2000' strip with no problems. Don
 
yakdriver said:
Even a 260hp RV 10 will outperform all of the parameters the OP is looking for. A 300+hp will be all the better. I have a couple of friend's with RV10s, one 260 and the other has a Lycon IO540 putting out around 325hp. The 260 cruises 160kts the other 180+kts. It is also a cleaner, lighter airframe than the 260. Both will operate out of a 2000' strip with no problems. Don
Click to expand...

My 260 HP RV-10 will meet all of the OP's parameters, burn mogas at $3.80, and I can legally do the maintenance. :dunno:

What's not to love? :lol: ;)
 
Geico266 said:
My 260 HP RV-10 will meet all of the OP's parameters, burn mogas at $3.80, and I can legally do the maintenance. :dunno:

What's not to love? :lol: ;)
Click to expand...

My Comanche is priced at $50,000.

What's an RV-10 priced at?
How much maintenance and fuel can I buy for $120,000?
 
Thanks for all the input so far.

For me, speed will slightly edge out payload.

The RV-10 sounds great, but not sure I have the time to build. There are very few for sale. Only three I can find at the moment.

I have ordered the buyers guide to the 182. Seems that will have the right size and landing requirements but not the speed. With most of my flying being hamburger runs, speed may not be the most important, but is highly desired after owning an RV-6a. But a good 182 in nearing the $100K range with several well over that mark.

I get EdFred's point. Lower entry price gets a lot of fuel and maintenance. But I may have a unique situation in that capital costs are more tolerated by the wife than maintenance costs. We hope to recover the capital costs, but can't recover most of the maintenance costs.

Wont go with canards as they land too fast and take too much runway. Not comfortable with an engine out scenario. Everything else can be had in the Velocity

The Sportsman's rear seats face the back. This is not acceptable to me either.

The larger low wing planes wont fit in the shared hangar situation I have. And I like the current situation. The RV-10 has 31' wing span, the Cirrus and Columbia have 38'. This would really be pushing it, and probably wont be appreciated by the hangar mate.
 
Higher capital costs do not always equate to lower maintenance costs. Things are always going to wear out, break, need replacing, etc. I would wager the new owner's maintenance costs on a well maintained older plane vs a newer plane are probably pretty similar in the first 5 years of ownership. I might even wager them to be lower. More expensive plane = more expensive maintenance when it gets to that point.
 
Forget the Columbia. You can't really call them a 4 seater unless you're only filling the back seats with 80 pounders or the tanks one third full. Wheel pants on a grass strip and 2000 feet? Another reason to rule it out.
 
Threefingeredjack said:
Forget the Columbia. You can't really call them a 4 seater unless you're only filling the back seats with 80 pounders or the tanks one third full. Wheel pants on a grass strip and 2000 feet? Another reason to rule it out.
Click to expand...

Based at a 2200 foot grass strip. I see all types of aircraft fly in and out with wheel pants. 172's, RV's (tailwheel ones) piper cherokees... luscombes, champs.. cubs.. super decathlon..

Its well maintained but there are some rough spots
 
Last edited:
182RG or a 210, for the budget it would be hard to beat a STOL 210

I know a fellow with one based at his 2000ft grass strip
 
Geico266 said:
How old is the Commanche? :dunno:

The RV-10 is still gonna be worth $150k. ;)
Click to expand...

Never heard of a "Commanche."

So what if the RV-10 is worth $150 if you paid $175 for it. That's still a $25 hit. And no one is buying them to resell them in this scenario anyway. Even so, I doubt you'll take a $25 hit on a Comanche or Bo when selling based on where the prices are at now. And if you do, that means you're going to take way more of a hit on a more expensive plane. When I can buy a built RV-10 for the price of a Comanche or Bo, then I'll consider it. But 150k buys a hell of a lot of fuel and maintenance.
 
Last edited:
Being old and perhaps senile I would go with single engine commanche which is a Cadillac or BMW. Room, good looking , cruises nicely, stable and easy flyer. If its in nice, I mean NICE condition and has the proper engine HP with excellent believable logs, alway hangar ed, etc. I'd buy it. It's a buyers market. They fly out of 2500 feet paved very nicely. The only reason there are not many more around was the flood at the piper factory in penna. that destroyed the jigs. Years ago.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
Being old and perhaps senile I would go with single engine commanche which is a Cadillac or BMW. Room, good looking , cruises nicely, stable and easy flyer. If its in nice, I mean NICE condition and has the proper engine HP with excellent believable logs, alway hangar ed, etc. I'd buy it. It's a buyers market. They fly out of 2500 feet paved very nicely. The only reason there are not many more around was the flood at the piper factory in penna. that destroyed the jigs. Years ago.
Click to expand...
Sort of. Piper was looking for a way to kill off the comanche by that time. Comanches are great planes for pilots and passengers but they were a disaster for the manufacturer.
 
Skylane81E said:
182RG or a 210, for the budget it would be hard to beat a STOL 210

I know a fellow with one based at his 2000ft grass strip
Click to expand...

Does that plane/STC have takeoff performance numbers?

It would be nice to get something that can get about 775lbs in/out of W75 with 2.5 hours fuel on an 85 degree day.

W75 is sea level. Rwy is 2300x35. I'll have to take a good look at the airport but I would probably want 50ft obstacle clearance at about 2000 feet. I'll have to take another look at the obstacles surrounding the rwy.
 
Last edited:
W. Stewart said:
Do people really operate Lances and A36's out of 2,000 foot runways? I fly a 210 (no STOL mods due to FIKI), but 2,600 feet is about as short as I care to use.
Click to expand...

When you're running a Lance/Saratoga or A36 at 2/3rd or 3/4 its useful load, that's probably quite doable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top