Your ideal new piston single?

[flyingcheesehead]

Cessna apparantly doesn't agree since they're supposedly working on a new design.

If I were in the matket for a new 4 seater, I don't think I would even consider either a Cessna or a Piper -- I'd go for one of the new composites probably. Or a Mooney. Or a Columbia. Or?

Hmmm. Smells like a poll.

I'm curious as to what people would want to buy, and why.

 

[Fast n' Furious]

My 1986 Mooney 252 with new paint and interior? Just can't justify the prices of some of the new stuff......yikes! A Lake Seawolf would be cool though. Are they still being made?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

And, I'll start right away with my own:

I'd go for the Diamond DA40, for a multitude of reasons:

1. Efficient. 145KTAS on 180hp/<10gph.
2. Good safety record, and thus good insurance rates.
3. Garmin G1000 is better than Avidyne.
4. Visibility

My second choice would be a Mooney. I just wish they still sold 200hp Mooneys. Avgas is expensive.

 

[ScottM]

I have a Warrior II now. It does basically everything I need but it would be nice to have a bit more room, speed, and payload. For me the perfect airplane would be a 182 with a 6-pack guage set, IFR GPS of at least the KLN94 but a Garmin 480 would be nice too, and a storm scope, +otto pilot.

 

[sessman]

I need the Cherokee Six. Although both of my kids are under the age of 5, you should my family pack a 182 or 182RG full for anything more than a couple of days out of town!

 

[Chris206]

The new Cessna CK (Cirrus Killer) if it has 6 seats. It would also have to have a decent full fuel payload of 900 - 1000 # and I'd look at one.

Chris

 

[mdreger]

Not that I could ever afford to buy a new airplane....

What would I think should go into a new Cessna aircraft?

Water cooled engine. Would provide safer, and better interior heating. Reduce or eliminate the danger of shock cooling. Should provide more even cylinder cooling and therefore more even wear.

A different design fuel tank that would eliminate the current 15 fuel drains back to the former 3, and make all fuel usable.

Bonded skin. I don't imagine all those rivets help reduce drag.

Engine size matched to the aircraft so the aircraft can carry what it seems it should. For example a C172 should be able to carry the 4 FAA avg. adults and, say 50 lbs of luggage total.

Aircraft pre wired for all predictable options. This would allow me to purchase a new, bare bones aircraft. As my finances allowed I would be able to purchase new/used radio's etc. and just slide them into the appropriate receptacles.

As much useless drag eliminated as possible.

Seats easily removable to allow carrying oversized items like bicycles and such.

LED lighting used as much as possible for cockpit, instrument panel illumination.

Tuned exhaust.

Choice of Yoke, side, or center stick.

 

[Tom-D]

It doesn't get any better than this..

http://www.cubcrafters.com/home.asp

 

[JRitt]

While down at Sun n Fun I checked out this plane http://www.fourwindsaircraft.com/ and install this Chevy LS2 engine http://www.vestav8.com/
The engine is a 6.0L Chevy Aluminum rated at 360hp @ 4600rpm and burns about 14gph in a cruise configuration (3600rpm) and should pull the fourwinds at 170kts. It can also burn 100LL or any premium pump fuel with the flick of a switch. At overhaul time you can replace the engine for 6K or rebuild it for 2K. Add another 1K to overhaul the PSRU and replace the fuel injectors.

The plane has a useful load of 1300lb, 4 doors, 49" wide cabin and a HUGE rear seat area. There is a steel cage around the cabin area for extra protection/stregnth.
Its not the fastest or the most fuel efficient but it is the most comfortable plane I have been in for 4 full size adults.


My second choice would be an RV-10. Also roomy front and back and a good usefull load of 1100lb. good cruise (160kts@12gph) and its a VANS.

 

[alaskaflyer]

If the diesel-powered, Cirrus-killing Cessna came with a tailwheel, I'd go into hock up to my eyeballs to have one.

Aside from that, I would buy what I just bought, all over again.

Maybe by the time my Franklin 6A-165 gives up the ghost (or hits TBO), a diesel powerplant will be available for a firewall forward upgrade!

 

[RotaryWingBob]

Robinson R44.

 

[Anthony]

The poll is fatally flawed. You're comparing planes with greatly different prices and capabilities. A C172, Archer, Tiger and Cirrus SR22 or Columbia 400 should not be in the same poll. The poll should compare planes with similar HP and price.

 

[Dan Smith]

I have a Warrior II now. It does basically everything I need but it would be nice to have a bit more room, speed, and payload. For me the perfect airplane would be a 182 with a 6-pack guage set, IFR GPS of at least the KLN94 but a Garmin 480 would be nice too, and a storm scope, +otto pilot.

Ditto, with me currently in a Cherokee 180. Some of the fast stuff is great (Columbias, Ovations, etc.), but my normal trip is less than 600 miles, into a strip that may be short or unpaved. Can't beat the all around utility of a 182/206 for that, and I want the wings back where they belong.

Dan

 

[EdFred]

The poll is fatally flawed. You're comparing planes with greatly different prices and capabilities. A C172, Archer, Tiger and Cirrus SR22 or Columbia 400 should not be in the same poll. The poll should compare planes with similar HP and price.

They are all piston singles. You're just upset because there is a plane in the poll faster than the Tiger. LOL

As for me, what I want in a piston single does not exist - at least as far as production planes go. The closest thing to what I would consider a perfect plane would be a Van's RV10. However, never having sat in one I can't say that for sure either. And that pesky "experimental" certificate causes a problem or two. But if it is ANY piston single...you left out the best one: P-51 Mustang - which is why I voted "other"

 

[Maverick]

When I first rad this question my first thought was along the lines of a "If money were no object" senario. Under those conditions I wouldn't have to worry about operational costs so I'd be thinking in terms of dream airplanes.

Well my dream airplane would be something with extreme performance like the Turbine Legend. I was drawn to that airplane the first time I saw one at Oshkosh. See pictures below. But then the Legend isn't a piston it's a turbine.

If I were limited to the choices in this poll I would be taking a long hard look at the Mooney Acclaim and the Cirrus SR22.

 

[Shipoke]

I have a warrior ,and will be looking for more payload,so i would have to say either a Cherokee 6 or cherokee 235 or cherokee 236 dakota. some of the kids i fly for Young Eagles are pertty big.
Dave G.

 

[JasonCT]

NC19143 You said it!

~Jay

 

[Anthony]

They are all piston singles. You're just upset because there is a plane in the poll faster than the Tiger. LOL

An analogy would be to pick your favorite car when the list includes Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Mercedes SL, a Ford Pinto, Plymouth Duster and a Yugo. Which would you pick?

Plus, there's no Marchetti SF260 on the list and that's just wrong.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

While none of these would be on my list now, if I had to choose it would be the G-36. One six seat retract, I believe.
If I was going to a single and note considering price, it would probably be a pressurized turbine. Not many pressurized, six seat choices in a single I'm comfortable with. So, the pressurized twin would be my next choice!

Dave

 

[fgcason]

First, owning something new will never be an option. It's prohibitively expensive and IMO there's nothing especially interesting on the shelf anyway.

If Bill Gates handed me a blank check and said go buy something new for myself, nothing comes to mind at the moment that's even remotely appealing except for Cubcrafters.

Electronics beyond the ignition means wasted time fooling with a computer which is not fun and you could sit at home at your desk doing that. Fast just means complicated, stress, pristine runways and too short of a trip.

The slower and less mystery electronics involved, the more time you get to fly and look out the window and enjoy the experience.

The finish line is of no importance. The journey is what counts. Leave the door open, smell the forest. Land on snow, water, sand and rocks.
Low, slow and throttle back on the turns.

 

[Bill]

It doesn't get any better than this..

http://www.cubcrafters.com/home.asp

You like that a lot better than the Husky? Now, if that Top Cub were also aerobatic, then dayam, I'd sure be interested.

 

[Ken Ibold]

PISTON single? Heck, I'd go for the TBM-850. It's a single, anyway.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Aight folks, read the question again:

If you had the money to purchase a new piston single, what would it be?

I was kind of trying to see whether Cessna is really going to do well with their new thing. That's part of why I left out quite a few taildraggers that can be purchased new (Cub variants, Maule, Citabria, etc.). The other part is that I don't have my tailwheel endorsement so I wasn't thinking about them at the time.

I agree with a lot of folks that the fastest bird makes the trip too short... That's why I picked the DA40. It'll get you somewhere reasonably quick, but still give you time to enjoy the flight, and it'll do it efficiently and with an excellent view. I've found it to be the best mix of utility and fun of any airplane I've flown.

I love the Mooneys too, but if I were to buy one now it would be used, M20J. After starting this poll the other night, I actually sent an e-mail to Mooney suggesting they bring it back, modernize it, and have the fastest 10gph single as well as the fastest guzzler.

I also wonder what they could do if they took their current design with its low-drag properties and changed it into a composite. I bet they could get 170 knots with 200hp, and they'd be the most efficient of all the new birds...

 

[Anthony]

I love the Mooneys too, but if I were to buy one now it would be used, M20J. After starting this poll the other night, I actually sent an e-mail to Mooney suggesting they bring it back, modernize it, and have the fastest 10gph single as well as the fastest guzzler.

Great ideas! With gas around $4/gal or more in many areas, you'd think that would be an incentive to bring back the 201. Wonder what that would cost?

 

[Len Lanetti]

PISTON single? Heck, I'd go for the TBM-850. It's a single, anyway.

Ken,

That one jumped to mind first...followed quickly by the Caravan on amphibious floats.

As far as the poll goes...I was going to vote Other but switched to the Mooney at the last minute. The new Acclaim sounds interesting.

That said, a half a million dollars can buy some very interesting used aircraft.

Len

 

[whirlaway]

The Mooney Ovation for sure. Why would anyone spend A quarter of a million dollars for a 172/182 and fly that slow.

 

[gkainz]

Brand new or almost brand new? I think they rolled 1 2005 Bellanca Viking off the line last year... That would be 1 candidate. And, like someone else posted, if it didn't have to be a "piston" single, then the Pilatus PC12 would be another candidate. That is, if money were no object.

 

[gprellwitz]

I voted for the Columbia because, while low and slow can be fun, I find I do an awful lot of trips more than 500NM, and that's not practical in low and slow unless you have vacation time. Plus, I'd like to get over the mountains again sometime without needing a twin. That said, if we pulled the "piston" part out, I agree with Greg. That Pilatus PC-12 is SWEET, and can go into an awful lot of fun & small strips. Being able to back up is good, too!

 

[JasonCT]

Are people that are buying 250K-500+K planes really worried about gas prices?

~J

 

[AirBaker]

While none of these would be on my list now, if I had to choose it would be the G-36. One six seat retract, I believe.
If I was going to a single and note considering price, it would probably be a pressurized turbine. Not many pressurized, six seat choices in a single I'm comfortable with. So, the pressurized twin would be my next choice!

Dave

In my biased opinion... 6 seats, sleek, G1000s, and add a set of GAMIs would make that one efficient travelling machine.

G36...

 

[AirBaker]

I voted for the Columbia because, while low and slow can be fun, I find I do an awful lot of trips more than 500NM, and that's not practical in low and slow unless you have vacation time. Plus, I'd like to get over the mountains again sometime without needing a twin. That said, if we pulled the "piston" part out, I agree with Greg. That Pilatus PC-12 is SWEET, and can go into an awful lot of fun & small strips. Being able to back up is good, too!

PC-12... Also awesome. Met an ex PC-12 owner this weekend. $45k/year for insurance on an owner flown PC-12.

 

[James_Dean]

PC-12... Also awesome. Met an ex PC-12 owner this weekend. $45k/year for insurance on an owner flown PC-12.

Interesting comparison that I just ran for my own edification.

http://www.controller.com/listings/...1093589&guid=E2265BFF4E2B41218AC99555EC230F97


My 'toga costs $2600/yr with $165,000 hull value = $63 of hull value per insurance dollar.

New PC-12 $45,000/yr with $2,800,000 hull value = $62.25 of hull value per insurance dollar.


Not sure what this means, but I sure didn't expect this result.

James Dean

 

[AirBaker]

Interesting comparison that I just ran for my own edification.

http://www.controller.com/listings/forsale/detail.asp?OHID=1093589&guid=E2265BFF4E2B41218AC99555EC230F97


My 'toga costs $2600/yr with $165,000 hull value = $63 of hull value per insurance dollar.

New PC-12 $45,000/yr with $2,800,000 hull value = $62.25 of hull value per insurance dollar.


Not sure what this means, but I sure didn't expect this result.

James Dean

He said his was a 3.1mil dollar airplane. So you're looking at a ~$68 number, but still relatively close depending on what it was insured for.

 

[gprellwitz]

What do I care about the insurance costs? I'm sure that if someone is generous enough to spring for a new PC-12 for me, they'll spring for the insurance, too!

 

[kevin47881]

Oh, this is an easy one for me...A Tiger

Great speed
Great fuel burn
Cool canopy
And that great tiger stripe paint scheme with the fangs! WOOOHOOO

 

[mikea]

A New Piper 6X until I get talked into something else like a Socata Trinidad...or a Columbia...or a Cirrus...

 

[infotango]

The diamond Da-40, it's the Tiger of the 21st century! Plus it's beautiful.

 

[Anthony]

The diamond Da-40, it's the Tiger of the 21st century! Plus it's beautiful.

Try fitting one in a hangar.
Try opening the canopy when taxiing or in the air.
Try getting the composite fixed.
It melts in the sun.
No cool owners group to hang out with and share tips.
No lineage to the Grumman cats, instead made by some foreign glider company.
Wing cannons are not standard equipment.

 

[poadeleted3]

Try fitting one in a hangar.
Try opening the canopy when taxiing or in the air.
Try getting the composite fixed.
It melts in the sun.
No cool owners group to hang out with and share tips.
No lineage to the Grumman cats, instead made by some foreign glider company.
Wing cannons are not standard equipment.

Yeah... but they can get off the ground in less than 10,000 feet, and stalling one is not the kiss of doom

 

[robsingles]

PC-12 For sure.