poadeleted21
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2011
- Messages
- 12,332
You aren't even a private pilot and you need a faster airplane?
He catches on fast.
You aren't even a private pilot and you need a faster airplane?
Not a show stopper as far as I know. Get it inspected as part of the pre-buy.
He catches on fast.
Whats the true speed of a Comanche and useful?
12-15 gph? Thousands of dollars in annuals?
That's awful.
Sure those suggested planes may fit the stated criteria but if the op will consider for a moment...
Are 4 seats really needed? Can he do with a useful load around 4-500 lb less than stated?
How does 180 kts on 6.5 gph above 10k msl sound?
How about a solo climb rate better than 2000 fpm at sea level and still close to 1000 fpm at 10,000 msl?
I have a Lancair 235/320 and these numbers are what I see. Some of these may be found less than the op's stated price.
ps: It's my first post so please be gentle.
Welcome. The performance of the Lancair is not all free as one would seem. It has a nasty accident record, and being amateur built has all the potential issues associated with that.
I wouldn't advise against the exp world, nor the Lancair in particular but consider this: The OP is a 50 hour student, who to date has flown an overpowered, rather sluggish Cherokee which if I'm not mistaken has the rather high drag Hershey bar wing. He specifically asked about the Bonanza, Deb, and Comanche. No mention was made of any EXP plane much less a dragon like the Lancair.
I for one, would not feel good about putting him in any complex EXP high speed plane until he has about 2-300 hours behind a Bo, or Comanche, or something similar.
I will stay with certified planes right now.
I prefer to get to my destination faster, which is my primary goal. And like others have stated 5kts won't matter much. My primary mission is a 350SM trip to work. The drive is 7 hours and the flight is currently 2.5hrs with my Cherokee. I'm trying to get below 2 hours. And the occasional trip where all seats are filled and traveling 800SM. So I figure these planes are my best bet.
I suppose I could go to a 210, if the transition isn't really difficult. But since I'm acclimated to a the low wing I figured I'd stay, but will the 210 fit my mission and wallet?
Well, my take on this given the mission is that you are not going to see the gains in speed you like for the added cost in maint. I would stick with the 235 which is a fine aircraft, maybe spend some money on speed mods and live with the extra 30-40 min enroute.
I'm not a Cessna 210 expert by far, but they are very capable planes. Somewhat slower than the Bo for the same fuel burn, but unless you're gonna fill the seats on your mission, the Bo would do the job fine, but I think the Cher 235 with some flap and gap seals, maybe a fancy nose fairing might give you a few knots rather than moving up to the complex stuff.
Oh brother. You're doing it wrong my man. A 300NM trip @ 2.5hrs 120KTS. You should be able to get 130 out of your 235. I recognize it ain't no Dakota, seeing how it's got the crappy wheel pants and hershey wing, but you're dialing it back way too much or you're grossly out of rig.
For your mission, a short body Mooney is the ticket. But let's get one thing clarified before we look at the relative merits of a short body Mooney. First of all, the distance of your mission is not of consequence wrt retractable gear airplane costs, so you're essentially quibbling about 30 minutes. Second of all, pushing the throttle up on your 235 will shave 15 minutes off that number and still be cheaper than any retractable cost, not to mention your added insurance cost for being low time in the gear swing department.
I'd say re-read your power setting table on the 235, clean up the airframe with some late model wheel pants, and go fly to work on it. Otherwise a Mooney 20 C or E for you at the expense of a cramped cockpit. Other than that you're not getting good value for your money by trying to use a Bo, Deb, Comanche or even 210 for a 300NM hop. IMHO.
I will stay with certified planes right now.
I prefer to get to my destination faster, which is my primary goal. And like others have stated 5kts won't matter much. My primary mission is a 350SM trip to work. The drive is 7 hours and the flight is currently 2.5hrs with my Cherokee. I'm trying to get below 2 hours. And the occasional trip where all seats are filled and traveling 800SM. So I figure these planes are my best bet.
I suppose I could go to a 210, if the transition isn't really difficult. But since I'm acclimated to a the low wing I figured I'd stay, but will the 210 fit my mission and wallet?
Unless you get a smokin' deal on a faster plane, I'd keep what you have. If you get a plane that does 150-160 knots in your price range, it will have less useable load and only get you there 30 minutes faster. If you were doing 800-1000+miles, I'd agree that you may want a faster plane. If your plane is relatively squawk free and you're happy with it overall, I wouldn't change.
The deb im after is a pretty good deal with 430waas. Im happy, its just slow. And I just want a new plane. 13-14gph for 125kts is not good.....
Oh brother. You're doing it wrong my man. A 300NM trip @ 2.5hrs 120KTS. You should be able to get 130 out of your 235. I recognize it ain't no Dakota, seeing how it's got the crappy wheel pants and hershey wing, but you're dialing it back way too much or you're grossly out of rig.
For your mission, a short body Mooney is the ticket. But let's get one thing clarified before we look at the relative merits of a short body Mooney. First of all, the distance of your mission is not of consequence wrt retractable gear airplane costs, so you're essentially quibbling about 30 minutes. Second of all, pushing the throttle up on your 235 will shave 15 minutes off that number and still be cheaper than any retractable cost, not to mention your added insurance cost for being low time in the gear swing department.
I'd say re-read your power setting table on the 235, clean up the airframe with some late model wheel pants, and go fly to work on it. Otherwise a Mooney 20 C or E for you at the expense of a cramped cockpit. Other than that you're not getting good value for your money by trying to use a Bo, Deb, Comanche or even 210 for a 300NM hop. IMHO.
I disagree, throwing 7,000 bucks at wheel pants is money that could be spent on upgrading to a faster plane. If he flys anywhere with snow, he will want to remove them in the winter and that's 7Gs sitting on a shelf in the hangar. If you think you take a hit on resell with avionics,try speed mods. With avgas between 5 and 7 bucks a gallon, I'm not sure the retract mechanism is going to cost more in MX than it saves in, if it only shaves half an hour off one way, he's saved 40 bucks on that one leg in fuel burn, make that trip 5 times a year round trip and youre at 800 bucks or so on 5 trips alone. I take that many trips in a three month span. Insurance on a 70K hull retract isn't going to be that bad, they make require double digit hours of dual before solo, then a few more before PAX. That pain should only be his first year premium if he flys with any regularity. To me, 162 is a lot nicer than 130, even more so when you're fighting headwinds.
Well, at least that's the reAsonong I came up with when I bought my Bonanza.
Welcome. The performance of the Lancair is not all free as one would seem. It has a nasty accident record, and being amateur built has all the potential issues associated with that.
I wouldn't advise against the exp world, nor the Lancair in particular but consider this: The OP is a 50 hour student, who to date has flown an overpowered, rather sluggish Cherokee which if I'm not mistaken has the rather high drag Hershey bar wing. He specifically asked about the Bonanza, Deb, and Comanche. No mention was made of any EXP plane much less a dragon like the Lancair.
I for one, would not feel good about putting him in any complex EXP high speed plane until he has about 2-300 hours behind a Bo, or Comanche, or something similar.
Sounds like me and my missions. Around 1-2% of my total hours I find I would like to have a bigger plane. Those 2 extra seats will cost you in fuel burn, purchase cost, maintenance cost, etc. but it sounds like you have made that decision. Cannot say it is a bad decision. Just thought I would mention something other than a certified (not just the model I fly) as it may fit your mission profile well. Really, defining your mission is important in deciding on what plane will suit your needs and which one you will be happy with in the long term.I will stay with certified planes right now.
get to my destination faster is my primary goal.
My primary mission is a 350SM trip to work.
And the occasional trip where all seats are filled and traveling 800SM.
tried to ask about that last year..... the response i got was "if you want to make a 235 faster you need to buy a faster plane"....lol
The deb im after is a pretty good deal with 430waas. Im happy, its just slow. And I just want a new plane. 13-14gph for 125kts is not good.....
You're looking at the wrong numbers. Fuel economy is a relatively small part of the equation. Prepare an annual all-in budget with realistic leg times for the trips you plan to fly, then calculate the total hours/year and fuel $/yr for both planes. Then you'll know.
Guy, you're gonna need an instrument rating. Stay with the 235 through that. Then you can let your self professed "real money" checkbook from being a safety guy, get you a capable bird. Not that the 235 isn't.
Get it rigged, You can get 132 knots out of it at 8,000. I can see if you're getting 120....it's not quite right.
tried to ask about that last year..... the response i got was "if you want to make a 235 faster you need to buy a faster plane"....lol
Mooney is the most efficient and least expensive to fly of the bunch. 9.5gph and 160kts is a real world number for the M20J
What the doctor said.
My friend and fellow board member Jay Honeck gets 142 knots out of his Cherokee 235.
Pics or it didn't happen. Not sure I've ever seen a speed claim on the internet that I believe, fuel burn either.
The trip, weather permitting will be made 24 times a year or 12 round trips.
AMEN. Or we'll be reading about him. 24 planned trips a year and no IR. Yeah, right.Without an instrument rating, you are not going to come close to doing those trips. My recommendation would be the put your money into the instrument rating, first, then worry about the faster plane. A 125kt plane is still faster than driving which is what you will be doing w/o the rating.
Without an instrument rating, you are not going to come close to doing those trips. My recommendation would be the put your money into the instrument rating, first, then worry about the faster plane. A 125kt plane is still faster than driving which is what you will be doing w/o the rating.
Now when I bought the mooney.......well if I didn't have an instrument rating I would probably still be stuck in Fargo, ND waiting for summer to come around and the ceilings to lift.