Talk me out of a Columbia 400

cowtowner

cowtowner

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
599
Display Name
Display name:
Cowtowner
Me:

TT 500 hours. No IR. Travel mostly myself or one person 500nm trips

I fly over 200 hours a year


the plane is mid time engine with all the bells and whistles.

$325,000

My wife says get it. My business partner says get it

My very conservative self is worried. I own a PA28-180 that's paid for and is cheap to operate.
 
I will generally try to talk people out of turbocharged piston aircraft engines unless they live out west where mountains where it's really beneficial. Regardless of who makes it and the plane it's in, you've added a good bit of complexity that comes with maintenance gremlins to chase.

Also, look into the avionics. If it's an older G1000 that still has original GIA 63s, note that those are non-WAAS so you can't do LPV approaches. The upgrade to GIA 63Ws (which allow for WAAS) isn't cheap.

With that said, a friend of mine had a Columbia 400 and I flew in it a few times. It was very comfortable, he flew it quite a bit and enjoyed it. I liked flying in it when I did.
 
I don't think you've given us enough information to help, as you've not really said what you'll be using it for, how much the price and cost of maintenance will be an issue for you, whether you plan to get your instrument rating etc.
 
It takes all personalities. If this was me and I could afford it, my title would be, “Please don’t talk me out of…”
 
Not a ton of useful information but the guy who helped with the installation for our hanger door flew in and one. Beautiful plane. Fast. Perfect for someone who’s just one or two people.
He came late in the winter/early spring. His only complaint was it gets super cold in the winter when descending because it comes off the engine and typically he pulled back power for his descents somewhat and he had to dress pretty warm because he said he got super cold in the plane.
 
Solid planes and still had Textron support the last time I checked.

I'd call a Cessna shop...maybe one who used to be a dealer and get a read on the current level of support.

Ted's point to the non-WAAS G1000 is not to be overlooked. Know that number before you buy...it will come in to play at some point.

Which autopilot? I 'd assume a KAP140 or 55X. IF you can find a 400 with the WAAS G100 and a GFC700, you have a winner (not saying this one isn't).
I have owned G1000s with the KAP140 (non-WAAS 172SP) and the GFC700 (WAAS 182T) and now fly a PA46 with the 55X. The difference in the autopilots is so vast it is a whole topic right by itself.

From my perch, you have the wife buying in, the partner buying in and a nice plan on line...sound like the deal is done to me!

Note: Get the IR ticket first thing....in the 400. The insurance underwriter will most likely hamstring you without it...
 
For you and one other person it seems a bit much for a dead manufacturer. I love the Columbia's, but it'd be tough to find a mechanic familiar. Without the Instrument rating you're unable to get into the flight levels and take advantage of some of that advertised speed.

With that budget I'd look at Cirrus or a well done RV
 
CaptainXap said:
I don't think you've given us enough information to help, as you've not really said what you'll be using it for, how much the price and cost of maintenance will be an issue for you, whether you plan to get your instrument rating etc.
Click to expand...

80/20 business/pleasure. I take a lot of 500nm trips. Ft Worth to Denver, New Mexico, Monterrey Mexico

600nm to my parents

Oshkosh and weekend jaunts with the wife

I would own the airplane personally, the company would reimburse me for my use of it.
I can afford more than this, but I still try to live like I did 20 years ago when I was afraid of being homeless

I want my IR, just haven't done it yet
 
Racerx said:
For you and one other person it seems a bit much for a dead manufacturer. I love the Columbia's, but it'd be tough to find a mechanic familiar. Without the Instrument rating you're unable to get into the flight levels and take advantage of some of that advertised speed.

With that budget I'd look at Cirrus or a well done RV
Click to expand...

Van Bortel is local to me (this is not one of their planes, but I am meeting with them in a week to look at what they have and let them do a sales job)

prices on SR22 are stupid. A G3 for $500k

I've thought about ordering a new SR22 and waiting the two years. They nearly had me talked into it at Oshkosh.
 
Is this a Cessna built or home built?
 
cowtowner said:
80/20 business/pleasure. I take a lot of 500nm trips. Ft Worth to Denver, New Mexico, Monterrey Mexico

I would own the airplane personally, the company would reimburse me for my use of it.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you can do that - you'd be acting as a commercial pilot for hire and being an air operator. Different than a passenger giving you a pro rated portion of the cost to fly the aircraft.

But smarter people than me will be here shortly to help out with this.


cowtowner said:
I want my IR, just haven't done it yet
Click to expand...

Honestly, I'd forget about changing airplanes for now and spend the next year getting your IR done. It will open up a lot more possibilities for flying and make your experience that much better than a new plane would.
 
Seems like a good deal. You should get it. But definitely get the IR too or you are wasting money…

BTW - I don’t suppose you are on rennlist with same user name by chance?
 
masloki said:
Is this a Cessna built or home built?
Click to expand...
If it's a Columbia it's neither. Cessna bought Columbia and changed the name to Cessna 400...then Corvallis...then TTX before confusing everyone so much they decided to kill it.
 
WDD said:
I'm not sure you can do that - you'd be acting as a commercial pilot for hire and being an air operator. Different than a passenger giving you a pro rated portion of the cost to fly the aircraft.

But smarter people than me will be here shortly to help out with this.




Honestly, I'd forget about changing airplanes for now and spend the next year getting your IR done. It will open up a lot more possibilities for flying and make your experience that much better than a new plane would.
Click to expand...

The company isn't paying me to fly the plane, how it reimburses me will be by the book.

If I got the plane getting an IR would be high on the list. I live in N Texas where I have only had to scrub a trip once in two years and I also have the flexibility to change dates or stay a little longer if I get socked in (as has happened a couple of times in Mexico).
 
RudyP said:
Seems like a good deal. You should get it. But definitely get the IR too or you are wasting money…

BTW - I don’t suppose you are on rennlist with same user name by chance?
Click to expand...
Not on rennlist
 
WDD said:
I'm not sure you can do that - you'd be acting as a commercial pilot for hire and being an air operator. Different than a passenger giving you a pro rated portion of the cost to fly the aircraft.

But smarter people than me will be here shortly to help out with this.




Honestly, I'd forget about changing airplanes for now and spend the next year getting your IR done. It will open up a lot more possibilities for flying and make your experience that much better than a new plane would.
Click to expand...

Getting reimbursed for business travel is not commercial operation. It is not much different than getting mileage reimbursement for driving.
 
WDD said:
I'm not sure you can do that - you'd be acting as a commercial pilot for hire and being an air operator. Different than a passenger giving you a pro rated portion of the cost to fly the aircraft.
Click to expand...

I did it for years. My consulting company simply paid the hourly dry rental and fuel costs. No different than if I rented someone else's plane.
 
I would never try to talk you out of that beautiful plane, which I have admired for years. You did mention that your PA28-180 was cheap to operate suggesting that could have been a concern, but then you said life is totally different than 20 years ago. Yes, I’d like LPV capability but no one in your close circle is worried about the purchase, so I think, life is good and in balance with this purchase. Could you add a Garmin GPS175 if needed?
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
how is airframe parts availability?
Click to expand...

When I think I have found an airplane model I want to investigate with an eye to purchasing, I join the forum/chatgroups and ask about support.
Does anyone know if parts are available for this model, or is it a total orphan?
Orphan doesn't necessarily mean it will be permanent aog at some point, just that you will have to get creative when that unobtainium part cracks/wears/corrodes.
 
My wife and few years earlier retirement date are all that's holding me back from the 400/TTx. I vote go for it. But only if you understand the new budget since your current bird is a lot cheaper. I suspect Annuals will average closer to $5k on average if all squawks always fixed. Seems like it would be around $300/hr plane to operate at 100hrs per year. If numbers like those don't spook you then definitely make all us TTx tirekickers jealous :)
 
cowtowner said:
Van Bortel is local to me (this is not one of their planes, but I am meeting with them in a week to look at what they have and let them do a sales job)
Click to expand...

As a fellow DFW neighbor, I’d be curious how your meeting with VB goes.
 
cowtowner said:
Me:

TT 500 hours. No IR. Travel mostly myself or one person 500nm trips

I fly over 200 hours a year


the plane is mid time engine with all the bells and whistles.

$325,000

My wife says get it. My business partner says get it

My very conservative self is worried. I own a PA28-180 that's paid for and is cheap to operate.
Click to expand...

Just do it! Life is short. That's a great price for a 500TT C400. What year is it?
 
It’s fast, and a lot more airplane than your Cherokee. Maintenance costs will increase considerably and you might be hard pressed to find insurance for a reasonable premium without an IR. I’d love one, I think you should get it!
kicktireslightfires said:
That's a great price for a 500TT C400
Click to expand...
He has 500TT, not the airplane.
 
Tennessee Aircraft Services/Paul New is the guy for the Columbia/400 series. Call him up and have him school you on the type specific gotchas.
 
RyanB said:
He has 500TT, not the airplane.
Click to expand...

That makes more sense. It's funny, the first time I opened this thread, I duplicated that accurately. But then the second time I opened it to come write a reply, I thought he was talking about the airplane's time. Haha!
 
I've been happy with my 400 since I purchased it. They are more complicated than your Piper, and things can break that you've never had to worry about. The folks at Van Bortal are among the best in the business, so anything they say will be on the money. There are parts available (aside from supply chain issues), but what was mentioned near the beginning of the thread re the WAAS upgrade is correct. If you don't have G1000 WAAS, you are unlikely to ever get it. Aside from that, Cessna still supports them. All that said, it's a wonderful airframe and great traveler. I've taken 4+bags from Philly to Orlando and back with no issues (did 1 fuel/potty stop each way). Try to find one with AC, it's worth the weight!

There is a ton of info on https://www.cessnaadvancedaircraftclub.com/ with lots of helpful owners.
 
Flew it one when it was still Lancair. Really, really nice airplane. Nicely engineered. Fast and comfortable. You won't go those speeds in much else, though you might in one of the two-seat experimental Lancairs. A thought, they can be had for far less money, are fast as lighting and you're not paying for a back seat you never used don't want.
 
steingar said:
Flew it one when it was still Lancair. Really, really nice airplane. Nicely engineered. Fast and comfortable. You won't go those speeds in much else, though you might in one of the two-seat experimental Lancairs. A thought, they can be had for far less money, are fast as lighting and you're not paying for a back seat you never used don't want.
Click to expand...
You're not going for a weekend in a lancair with the wife if she packs luggage anything close to a typical wife.
 
steingar said:
Flew it one when it was still Lancair. Really, really nice airplane. Nicely engineered. Fast and comfortable. You won't go those speeds in much else, though you might in one of the two-seat experimental Lancairs. A thought, they can be had for far less money, are fast as lighting and you're not paying for a back seat you never used don't want.
Click to expand...

Mexico currently prohibits Experimentals.
 
steingar said:
Flew it one when it was still Lancair. Really, really nice airplane. Nicely engineered. Fast and comfortable. You won't go those speeds in much else, though you might in one of the two-seat experimental Lancairs. A thought, they can be had for far less money, are fast as lighting and you're not paying for a back seat you never used don't want.
Click to expand...
The 4 cylinder 2 seat experimental Lancairs will do close to the 400 speeds at lower altitudes. The 6 cylinder Legacy's will be faster. That is just with regard to speed though.

A bigger issue is obtaining and maintaining proficiency in one of the experimental Lancairs. As I understand it, the wing is different in the Columbia variants to make it more docile than the experimental variants. As an owner of a experimental Lancair with approx 1500 hours in type, it takes alot of time in one of these to obtain and maintain proficiency and confidence in one of these.

In my opinion, the one big advantage of the 400 is de-ice certification. Some may want certification vs experimental; I would rather stay experimental.

I would suggest Mr @cowtowner consider one alternative to a 400 if de-ice is not needed. That would be a Lancair ES-P. That is essentially an experimental version of the 400 with pressurization. One can likely be found for the same budget. Going that route would eliminate the hamstrings of certification with regard to avionics, parts, etc.
 
FancyG said:
Mexico currently prohibits Experimentals.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's 100% correct. According to CST Flight Services, the Agencia Federal de Aviación Civil (AFAC) has stated there are no operational restriction for experimental aircraft approved by the FAA to fly in the Mexican National Airspace, however some local Mexican Civil Aviation Authorities have started banning the operation of Experimental Aircraft at some airports. So it pays to call ahead and confirm, but there's no blanket prohibition.
 
Last edited:
FORANE said:
The 4 cylinder 2 seat experimental Lancairs will do close to the 400 speeds at lower altitudes. The 6 cylinder Legacy's will be faster. That is just with regard to speed though.

A bigger issue is obtaining and maintaining proficiency in one of the experimental Lancairs. As I understand it, the wing is different in the Columbia variants to make it more docile than the experimental variants. As an owner of a experimental Lancair with approx 1500 hours in type, it takes alot of time in one of these to obtain and maintain proficiency and confidence in one of these.

In my opinion, the one big advantage of the 400 is de-ice certification. Some may want certification vs experimental; I would rather stay experimental.

I would suggest Mr @cowtowner consider one alternative to a 400 if de-ice is not needed. That would be a Lancair ES-P. That is essentially an experimental version of the 400 with pressurization. One can likely be found for the same budget. Going that route would eliminate the hamstrings of certification with regard to avionics, parts, etc.
Click to expand...
At his level of experience I think this would be a bad idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top