Success of the C-172 vs Cardinal
- Thread starter lockeed
- Start date
I wish I had been enlightened about the cardinal while I was plane shopping, I could have gotten a nice FG cardinal for what we bought the skyhawk for.
Alexb2000
En-Route
Cost and potential market is the issue. Given the current choices there are no obvious holes in the piston market for any mission, and the volumes aren't interesting on any level.
Take Beechcraft the G36 is approach ~$800K list. If the new turbo version comes out it will be bumping against the $1M mark for a piston single. Volume is what 20-25 per year.
Look at Cessna's numbers. We just discussed the $300K 172 on another thread. There doesn't seem to be any market to continue something like the NGP, which IMO looks better than the Tecnam and it has 4 doors!
Cirrus is probably the most aggressive, since pistons are all they have to survive on, but it hasn't been easy lately for them either.
Diamond has been talking about the DA50 since 2006. I would love to see another 5 seat pressurized single on the market, but it just isn't happening. I suspect the same issue, there just isn't a big market for a $1M piston.
I believe all of the design resources are being directed in the single engine jet or small single turboprop market. That's the logical step-up from the current piston offerings for a relatively small jump in price. If Cirrus can deliver the Vision at $1.25M, that will change aviation when you compare it to something like a NA G58 Baron at $1.5M.
Take Beechcraft the G36 is approach ~$800K list. If the new turbo version comes out it will be bumping against the $1M mark for a piston single. Volume is what 20-25 per year.
Look at Cessna's numbers. We just discussed the $300K 172 on another thread. There doesn't seem to be any market to continue something like the NGP, which IMO looks better than the Tecnam and it has 4 doors!
Cirrus is probably the most aggressive, since pistons are all they have to survive on, but it hasn't been easy lately for them either.
Diamond has been talking about the DA50 since 2006. I would love to see another 5 seat pressurized single on the market, but it just isn't happening. I suspect the same issue, there just isn't a big market for a $1M piston.
I believe all of the design resources are being directed in the single engine jet or small single turboprop market. That's the logical step-up from the current piston offerings for a relatively small jump in price. If Cirrus can deliver the Vision at $1.25M, that will change aviation when you compare it to something like a NA G58 Baron at $1.5M.
Smutny
Pre-Flight
Yeah, not bad for a Kiwi... You know, a flightless bird? The P2010 has yet to fly. The P2008, at a $160K price point, has only sold a handful outside of Italy.
I doubt the P2010 project will continue.
Smutny
Pre-Flight
Cirrus' savior from oblivion was CAIGA, as well as Continental's and Epic's. It will be interesting how the new GA paradigm shift will effect cost and production.
cessna182b
Line Up and Wait
[QUOTE
Agree. But if we go back the the P2010, this plane also has struts, but it still looks georgous. :wink2:
[/QUOTE]
What do you expect? - it's Italian!
BTW: I agree, it is a lovely airplane.
Dave
Agree. But if we go back the the P2010, this plane also has struts, but it still looks georgous. :wink2:
[/QUOTE]
What do you expect? - it's Italian!
BTW: I agree, it is a lovely airplane.
Dave
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Why, Tom? For some reason I always thought you were a big Cardinal fan.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
I like Cardinals, but I like the XP better. They should have put the IO-360 195 horse in the Cardinal then they would have had a great aircraft.
zaitcev
En-Route
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2010
- Messages
- 3,259
- Display Name
Display name:
Pete Zaitcev
"U.S. price is $275,000." -- according to Oshkosh release.
lockeed
Pre-takeoff checklist
The NGP looked great, at least their prototype did. But it doesn't belong in the same category as the P2010 at all, it'll be twice the price, if it ever come out :wink2:
I don't think the future of light aviation is in 300K + airplanes. Just take a look at what the LSA category did to the aviation industry within a few years, it has literaly transformed it in USA. Giving any aviation anthusiast, a real oportunity to take part in aviation, as it was back in the 50's and 60's for that matter...
Why? Fun to fly, reliable, modern, relatively easy training, relatively innexpesive, fast and confortable planes and most of all, much more economical to own and operate.
The fact is, if you want to fly away for a weekend with your wife, climb in your CTLS and you'll enjoy a 49" wide cabin, lugage space in the back, full glass instruments and modern aviationics, the security of a balistic chute and you'll be burning 4-5gal of auto gaz per hour cruising along at 110-120kts.
Yes, some LSA aren't cheap, costing up 150k on some models.... but compared to what? A C-172 at 300K $ a piece
??They're dirt cheap, for what these planes can do and have to offer IMHO... Go and fly one if you haven't. If it wasn't such a mess to import in register an LSA in Canada into the experimental "special" category, I'd probably own a Sportstar or a Sportcruiser instead of my RV-6A, even if I adore it. The fact that you can have as much fun flying around and spend 2-3 times less money doing so, it's just hard to beat...
John Baker
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2008
- Messages
- 7,471
- Location
- San Diego, California
- Display Name
Display name:
John Baker
The only problem I can see with this thread is that it evolves around high wing aircraft. What's the point? 
John
John
lockeed
Pre-takeoff checklist
The only problem I can see with this thread is that it evolves around high wing aircraft. What's the point?
John
Have to agree with you John, I love flying while sitting on the wing way to much to think about puting it over my head
I was reading a Glasair brochure this weekend, especially on the 2+2 model. Being roughly the same size as a 172 and operating with the same engine, it's interesting to see what this plane can acomplish utilising modern design.
Cruise at 75% (180hp) - 137kts (158mph)
Stall full flap: 42kts (48MPH)
Cabin width at shoulders: 46"
Tricycle or taildragger
Third door at the back for cargo. (300# capacity)
With the 210hp, cruise is 150kts.
lockeed
Pre-takeoff checklist
Forgot to say the most important thing about the 2+2, it's about half the price of a brand new 172 and you can choose any paint scheme and options you want 
The best part is, their *2 weeks to taxi* program enables you to spend 2 weeks at the factory building your own plane with the support of the technicians there.
I think this is absolutely awesome. Building, knowing and understanding your plane inside out before you fly it.
The best part is, their *2 weeks to taxi* program enables you to spend 2 weeks at the factory building your own plane with the support of the technicians there.
I think this is absolutely awesome. Building, knowing and understanding your plane inside out before you fly it.
zaitcev
En-Route
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2010
- Messages
- 3,259
- Display Name
Display name:
Pete Zaitcev
This may be true all true overall, but the limited gross weight is a killer for me. A Hershie bar Cherokee does 110 kts with 160 hp engine and wheel pants, but it carries 3x as much baggage. If CTLS came with a miniature wife who can pack light, it would be a much bigger market success. And once you realize that the payload is insufficient, you may up the speed as well. I can buy a pretty decent Mooney M20C that runs at 150 kts for half the price of a new LSA, and use the rest to cover the maintenance difference.
I realize that LSAs are amazingly cool. Everything best in private aviation happens to LSAs first these days. So, I turned this problem every way, but it's just insoluble. As a travelling machine, a basic retract single beats the best LSA into a bloody pancake, it's just the way it is. And I'm pretty sure FAA wanted it that way. That is why they are called "sport" airplanes and not something like "private" airplanes. That is why the regulations are so crippling.
The LSAs have one trump card though: to fly one, you do not have to live in fear every 2 years (not so much anyway).
sandfarmer
Filing Flight Plan
I'll chime in as a new 177 owner, I trained in a 172SP and loved it. Recently I became a serious airplane shopper with a desire to start my Instrument training and the $145 rent on the 172 becoming bothersome. As a Farmer I tend to do quite a bit of low level "looking" so the high wing suits me well. I had always thought the 177 was sexy and sleek on the ramp so I started doing some research. Turns out that Cardinal ownership is almost a secret society! I read everything I could about them and joined CFO to get the skinny. Brought her home last week from Texas and started the early phases of IFR training this week, I LOVE IT so far! Such a responsive airplane (I can see how a heavy handed person could over control it on flare) with great handling characteristics. That big door that doesn't require sliding the seats to enter front or back is great BUT also an area of caution due to catching wind, a critical pilot briefing point to be sure nobody let's go of the door in the wind! Very roomy with a gap between the front seats, I'm 6'3" so I like that. She's a 68' with Power flow and FG and seems to be a 125-130 mph airplane and I averaged 7.3 gph on the 6 hour flight home which I thought was great especially since I was leaning conservatively. My $.02.
