What would you change?

Last edited:
Gmonnig said:
I was going to say the same thing, Comanche!! It is a four person, full fuel, no weight and balance issue airplane. Having said that, things I would change/wish for if I had the money.....aircraft de-ice, turbocharger (the Comanche loves altitude but the O-540 loses steam about 10K), and I wish they were still in production!
Click to expand...

If I still have mine when it's time for OH, I may see what it takes to slap an TIO on it rather than an O.
 
EdFred said:
If I still have mine when it's time for OH, I may see what it takes to slap an TIO on it rather than an O.
Click to expand...
I've talked to the new owner of Rayjay turbos (he owns a twin Comanche) and they can do the twin turbos on a 250. I'm sure it's in the $20K+ price range. I routinely fly in the oxygen levels and find myself daydreaming about what my true airspeed would be with those manual turbos.....
 
Gmonnig said:
I've talked to the new owner of Rayjay turbos (he owns a twin Comanche) and they can do the twin turbos on a 250. I'm sure it's in the $20K+ price range. I routinely fly in the oxygen levels and find myself daydreaming about what my true airspeed would be with those manual turbos.....
Click to expand...
And if I slap some new paint on it then I have way more money in it than I would get out of it. Hmmmm, might have to talk to my IA about this.
 
Polarisguy said:
Maybe I missed it but, what are you driving?
Click to expand...
I'll have to assume it doesn't display well on your device.

<--- that's me and my plane
RV-6A in my signature indicates make and model.
 
Skyrys62 said:
Lol.. it is.
Let me reverse that.
A 182 with the same maintenance, overhaul costs, and fuel burn of a 172.
That reads a little better.
Click to expand...
throttle back and the engine will last longer between overhauls making the /hr cost lower and you'll have the same fuel burn as a 172. :D:D
 
EdFred said:
throttle back and the engine will last longer between overhauls making the /hr cost lower and you'll have the same fuel burn as a 172. :D:D
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with Ed. Our club runs both airframes. I don’t think mx or insurance is really different 172 to 182. Fuel burn at rated power and engine/prop overhaul are the big deltas. The real killer is purchase prices on 182s right now.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
EdFred said:
throttle back and the engine will last longer between overhauls making the /hr cost lower and you'll have the same fuel burn as a 172. :D:D
Click to expand...

Yeah...but.... there goes the speed.

I want cheap speed dammit!


(oh crap, now waiting for @eman1200 to PM me with a 'deal')
 
A second radio.
ADSB-Out.
Other than that, I have very little to complain about, and as long as it is airworthy and I have a key to it, I'm happy.
 
hindsight2020 said:
but but but they said purchase price is the cheapest part of it......:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
well, i'm not an owner yet, but I'll say that many of the trainers out there are getting expensive and aren't too bad to maintain. if you have someone (partner or self) that does the permissible little stuff and a little troubleshooting, then even with an expensive shop, they can be run fairly OK.

now, ask me after I buy an antique twin and my perspective might change
 
A GTN750 and a second G5. A couple inches wider in the cabin without speed loss would be nice.
 
Mostly In Order

ADSB out, just want to be done with it
Finish swapping out non-led lights
Engine Monitor
G5’s
Garmin Navigator
Auto pilot
Modern Audio Panel
Passenger side window that opens (+1 @455 Bravo Uniform)
Passenger side door steward that works
Passenger side seat with up/down adjustment
Passenger side floor safety belt kit Instead of the crappy stops
New windshield that isn’t crazed and doesn’t rattle
New interior side panels (ours are in like new shape but ugly)
New or Overhauled Prop
Texas Skyways Conversion

...or just buy that TTx that I really want
 
Avionics I could upgrade. But my DA20-C1 is VFR only and can never be certified for IFR because of the lack of lightning protection in the composite. That's a real bummer. And I'm not sure I'm ready to upgrade to a DA40 because I find the latter less fun to pilot. There might be an RV-7A in my future.
 
SWMBO would like for my rental Tecnam P92 to have a lavatory, but the owners didn't purchase the Tardis option that would allow installation.
 
Love my Tiger, but I really would like some ceiling air vents. Yeah, you can crack the canopy, but then you've got a 110KT airplane...
 
Besides a lil fresh paint and restriping even just a few inches wider in the old Cessna 140 wud be nice. Our butts have grown but our vintage craft haven’t...
 
A pilot who knows how to land the thing? :oops:
 
M20R: A second engine that doesn't burn any gas, a portable turbonormalizer, and de-ice.

Oh, and turbine power, of course. :D
 
The ultimate upgrade for my C182 would be to replace my PPonk engine with a 260HP aero-diesel.

With Soloy dithering on their STC, and quoting $240k for the conversion, probably not going to happen too soon.
 
Arrow in the real world - GPS, Pilot door, Autopilot, ADS-B

If we're talking dream world - an engine without TBO, no maintenance, "free energy", 2000' concrete runway at home. You know, easy stuff.
 
wilkersk said:
More power!

tenor.gif
Click to expand...


220, 221...whatever it takes.
 
250 kts, 10 gph, low wing, refuses to stall, elbow room, enough load to carry four fatasses. And call me old school, but I want steam gauges.
 
Here's the thing about me and pilot side doors on the low wings. For me: I actually don't want one. It's easier for me to us the whole cabin to get in and out, than it is to get out from the side the door is on. At least with Pipers and Mooneys. I've flown from the right side in my plane a few times, and it's a lot more difficult to get in and out from the passenger seat than it is from the pilot seat.
 
Tantalum said:
The ability to put 4 people in it, full tanks, and luggage
Click to expand...

Well technically, all that will fit just fine. It may not be legal to take off but it will physically fit...

I’d like pressurization, an extra 200 kts of speed and twin turbine reliability.
 
EdFred said:
Here's the thing about me and pilot side doors on the low wings. For me: I actually don't want one. It's easier for me to us the whole cabin to get in and out, than it is to get out from the side the door is on. At least with Pipers and Mooneys. I've flown from the right side in my plane a few times, and it's a lot more difficult to get in and out from the passenger seat than it is from the pilot seat.
Click to expand...

That's what I keep saying!
 
RudyP said:
an extra 200 kts
Click to expand...
the Cirrus can get you there, just need to go flying on a day with monster tailwinds and be descending the whole time

RudyP said:
twin turbine
Click to expand...
I mean, technically, the Continental tsio-550 does have twin turbines.. I'm pretty sure they're just mated to a piston engine so it still sounds like a piston. Kind of like how some BMWs pumps fake engine noises through their speakers

Can't help you on the pressurization though unfortunately..
 
He said extra 200kts....so....375kts. :eek::eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top