What's the least expensive airplane you would fly?

M

Mafoo

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
1,460
Location
New Hampshire
Display Name
Display name:
Mafoo
So I am most likely a little different then the norm here. I have no real passon for flying. I want to learn how to do it as a tool for travel. I drive a car to get places too far to bike to, and I want to fly a plane to get to places too far to drive to (in a given amount of time).

However the more I do it, the more it's kind of just fun to go up and fly around. While that in itself is kind of fun, it's not something I am willing to drop 40 grand on for the experience (I will spend a lot more for an aircraft for travel however).

So, what's the least expensive plane you would feel comfortable leaving the ground in?
 
I've flown ultra lights in the $5k range.

It's not the value, it's airworthiness. ;)
 
Last edited:
I needed two seats, do not like flying behind a 2-stroke, needed an LSA, so that pretty much stuck me at $20K.
 
I'd fly almost all of the newer ultralights...with a BRS.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
I needed two seats...
Click to expand...

Yea, I need that as well for travel, as my wife kind of needs to come along. However if I just go up and buzz around a Saturday afternoon, she has no interest in partaking.

Any number of seats will do.

I also think the open canopy thing would be cool for just flying around town.
 
Well my first airplane was purchased for $4600.00 back in 1988 - a Stitts Flutterbug with a P-40 Flying Tigers paint job.
 
I'd have no issues with a $10k Fly Baby...

Two strokes give me the willies, so most U/L's are not in my wheelhouse.
 
When you want to fly to places that are too far to drive to, you won't be doing the ultra light or sports plane thing, you will need a safe aircraft with speeds and fuel enough to really go places.

Price has no bearing on safety, what is safe for me will not be safe for some body else

I'd start with some thing like this, 40k budget leave half in the bank for the first years insurance and maintenance leaves you with 20-25k buying money.
http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_687909_Cessna+175B.html
 
You missed his question. Read #1 again.

Tom-D said:
When you want to fly to places that are too far to drive to, you won't be doing the ultra light or sports plane thing, you will need a safe aircraft with speeds and fuel enough to really go places.

Price has no bearing on safety, what is safe for me will not be safe for some body else

I'd start with some thing like this, 40k budget leave half in the bank for the first years insurance and maintenance leaves you with 20-25k buying money.
http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_687909_Cessna+175B.html
Click to expand...
 
Tom-D said:
When you want to fly to places that are too far to drive to, you won't be doing the ultra light or sports plane thing, you will need a safe aircraft with speeds and fuel enough to really go places.

Price has no bearing on safety, what is safe for me will not be safe for some body else

I'd start with some thing like this, 40k budget leave half in the bank for the first years insurance and maintenance leaves you with 20-25k buying money.
http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_687909_Cessna+175B.html
Click to expand...

I am willing to spend around 65K on something to travel with. A RV 6 or 7. But I am going to be picky, and it might take me a year to find what I want. A 5K thing to just tool around in and keep current while I look however, seems like a winner over renting.

kyleb, why do 2 stokes give you the willies?
 
Mafoo said:
I am willing to spend around 65K on something to travel with. A RV 6 or 7. But I am going to be picky, and it might take me a year to find what I want. A 5K thing to just tool around in and keep current while I look however, seems like a winner over renting.
Click to expand...

You want a traveling machine for 2 with bags? at 65k?

try one of these

http://techbas.net/cozy/
 
well we paid 2500 for Leah's glider and I flew that...
 
Mafoo said:
kyleb, why do 2 stokes give you the willies?
Click to expand...

I have very little first hand experience flying behind one (probably 10 minutes), but I have numerous mechanically competent airport friends who have had full or partial engine failures flying behind 2 strokes. Based on what I've seen, it appears that 2 strokes are significantly less reliable than 4 strokes and that they give less warning of impending failure.
 
kyleb said:
I have very little first hand experience flying behind one (probably 10 minutes), but I have numerous mechanically competent airport friends who have had full or partial engine failures flying behind 2 strokes. Based on what I've seen, it appears that 2 strokes are significantly less reliable than 4 strokes and that they give less warning of impending failure.
Click to expand...

Just like anything else if operated properly the Rotax line of 2 strokes are very reliable. I probably have 100hrs or so in various Rotax powered machines and have never had a problem. Aeronca Chief's can be had for around $10,000 in good flying shape, also Ercoupes. Lot of nice three axis ultralites also. Don
 
For a fun two-seater, think about group ownership of a Cub or other similar plane, say 4-6 owners at $5k each. Many owners can share such a plane with minimum scheduling conflicts since they never leave town and nobody flies them very long at a time. They are fun because they fly low and slow, and quickly become tedious for the same reasons.
 
Cubs are nice single seaters or if you want to throw a kid or midget up front.
 
My plane cost $25K, but probably that again in maintenance the last two years (poor Pre-sale) and it doesn't have the panel I want for starting my IR. I have caught up the deferred maintenance and put about 250 hours on it, so I trust it, but had I to do it over, I would have stepped up a bit. Not that you can't find a deal sometimes, but you usually get what you pay for.
 
Mafoo said:
Good question. Just FYI: if you have 4 people in it, is there a baggage compartment? Not really on my list of requirements, but would be nice to know :)
Click to expand...
Like all Little Canards if the seats are full the bags go UPS.
 
Last edited:
Like all Canards if the seats are full the bags go UPS.
Click to expand...

Not so for the Starship, and while it's not a true canard, not so for the Piaggio Avanti, either.

The Avanti has external baggage; that is, accessed through an external door. It's also got plenty of room in the lav.
 
DouglasBader said:
Not so for the Starship, and while it's not a true canard, not so for the Piaggio Avanti, either.

The Avanti has external baggage; that is, accessed through an external door. It's also got plenty of room in the lav.
Click to expand...
I went back and qualified the statement just so you'd understand it.
 
John221us said:
My plane cost $25K, but probably that again in maintenance the last two years (poor Pre-sale) and it doesn't have the panel I want for starting my IR. I have caught up the deferred maintenance and put about 250 hours on it, so I trust it, but had I to do it over, I would have stepped up a bit. Not that you can't find a deal sometimes, but you usually get what you pay for.
Click to expand...


I don't know man, if your pa-28-XXX is amortizing $12.5K/yr in maintenance, you're doing it wrong. Like putting expensive avionics on the thing, you don't really have to go carté blanche on the process. I purchased a warrior with a timed out engine and so far the mx cost has been much more moderated. I don't go telling the A&P to go crazy on the labor chasing every gremlin at 75 bucks/hr. I can see it shooting up to that mark if I treated it as a restoration project as opposed to the old 420nm shuttle I use it as.

My co-worker had a 12K bill after his first annual and the related belated mx.... on a fuel injected, CS prop, cessna funky retract, 177RG... and that was fully admitting he went carte blanche on preventive mx like hoses and such because he flies the family in it and feels uncomfortable with the bare bone mx he would otherwise be comfortable flying himself with. That's a complex retract and belated mx post-purchase. Even his second year of operation of said complex won't hit the 10K mx mark. But on a cherokee two years in a row? Yeah I'd be analyzing my expenditure patterns or getting rid of the thing.

I don't mean to discredit your experience, but I often hear these high figure maintenance costs on fixed prop trainers and attribute it to a more meticulous liberal spenditure attitude than the result of bona fide airworthiness-stopping maintenance costs. That truly is a personal choice for sure. Nothing wrong with that. But I find it a poor case to make to merely favor the RVs, and I'd love to chuck the slow-can for a 7A mind you. I'd love to justify sinking 65K unappropriated dollars I don't have on an aircraft much more capable and suited to my mission under the premise that it would save me the purchase price difference in year-to-year maintenance over a cheap timed out spam can, say for example my dream RV-6/7/A, but the fact remains that, at least for my ownership experience of both a C-150 and a PA-28-161, that simply hasn't come even close to being true. The opportunity cost is of course, not owning at all until I could afford the dream aircraft, but Im willing to accept that cost because I value flying TODAY in anything as more valuable than the prospect of flying tomorrow in anything.
 
hindsight2020 said:
I don't know man, if your pa-28-XXX is amortizing $12.5K/yr in maintenance, you're doing it wrong. Like putting expensive avionics on the thing, you don't really have to go carté blanche on the process. I purchased a warrior with a timed out engine and so far the mx cost has been much more moderated. I don't go telling the A&P to go crazy on the labor chasing every gremlin at 75 bucks/hr. I can see it shooting up to that mark if I treated it as a restoration project as opposed to the old 420nm shuttle I use it as.

My co-worker had a 12K bill after his first annual and the related belated mx.... on a fuel injected, CS prop, cessna funky retract, 177RG... and that was fully admitting he went carte blanche on preventive mx like hoses and such because he flies the family in it and feels uncomfortable with the bare bone mx he would otherwise be comfortable flying himself with. That's a complex retract and belated mx post-purchase. Even his second year of operation of said complex won't hit the 10K mx mark. But on a cherokee two years in a row? Yeah I'd be analyzing my expenditure patterns or getting rid of the thing.

I don't mean to discredit your experience, but I often hear these high figure maintenance costs on fixed prop trainers and attribute it to a more meticulous liberal spenditure attitude than the result of bona fide airworthiness-stopping maintenance costs. That truly is a personal choice for sure. Nothing wrong with that. But I find it a poor case to make to merely favor the RVs, and I'd love to chuck the slow-can for a 7A mind you. I'd love to justify sinking 65K unappropriated dollars I don't have on an aircraft much more capable and suited to my mission under the premise that it would save me the purchase price difference in year-to-year maintenance over a cheap timed out spam can, say for example my dream RV-6/7/A, but the fact remains that, at least for my ownership experience of both a C-150 and a PA-28-161, that simply hasn't come even close to being true. The opportunity cost is of course, not owning at all until I could afford the dream aircraft, but Im willing to accept that cost because I value flying TODAY in anything as more valuable than the prospect of flying tomorrow in anything.
Click to expand...

I am not sure what you are saying. I admit to being a nube when I purchased the plane and I hired the wrong guy to do the Pre-buy (see above). Unlike the previous owner, I don't defer maintenance (the hoses were from 1988). My first annual +repairs +shoulder harnesses was $11K. There were various avionics failures and a cylinder in between and another annual (much less). I guess you could call it personal choice, but my shop called the sign offs on the previous owner assisted annuals downright illegal and dangerous. The shoulder harnesses were an option for sure. I guess I could have decided not to fix the audio panel or transponder and just gone NORDO, but that's not why I bought the plane. You can go ahead and fly whatever you are comfortable with, I guess. I do trust my shop, though.
 
kyleb said:
I have very little first hand experience flying behind one (probably 10 minutes), but I have numerous mechanically competent airport friends who have had full or partial engine failures flying behind 2 strokes. Based on what I've seen, it appears that 2 strokes are significantly less reliable than 4 strokes and that they give less warning of impending failure.
Click to expand...

Every previous O360 i have ever owned has had an in flight engine failure.
 
Tom-D said:
When you want to fly to places that are too far to drive to, you won't be doing the ultra light or sports plane thing, you will need a safe aircraft with speeds and fuel enough to really go places.

Price has no bearing on safety, what is safe for me will not be safe for some body else

I'd start with some thing like this, 40k budget leave half in the bank for the first years insurance and maintenance leaves you with 20-25k buying money.
http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_687909_Cessna+175B.html
Click to expand...
Why would someone place something up for sale on such a visual media as the internet and not post a single picture? Especially with something that they expect to sell for thousands of dollars. One of my pet peeves. :mad:

Mafoo said:
What about something like this:

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_694259_hurricane.html

or this:

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_678942_1995+Challenger+II+503+Rotax.html
Click to expand...
That would be below my personal minimums. Minimum amount of plane I would want would be something like a Ercoupe or Cub or that Tomahawk (if it had turned out to be workable). None of them would be my pick for a travel plane, but for tooling around within a couple hours of home, those would do it for me.

Under the premise of "purchase your last plane first", I'm seriously rethinking my initial purchase. Unless I get a couple of partners, I'm not going to be able to afford a $65K plane, so I'm most likely going to be looking for something like a KIS Cruiser in the $30K range.

But this may change again before I get to the point where I need to pull out the wallet. ;)
 
kyleb said:
I have very little first hand experience flying behind one (probably 10 minutes), but I have numerous mechanically competent airport friends who have had full or partial engine failures flying behind 2 strokes. Based on what I've seen, it appears that 2 strokes are significantly less reliable than 4 strokes and that they give less warning of impending failure.
Click to expand...

I have owned 2- 2 strokers, have about 700 hours flying them. They are engines that need constant attention and mixture adjusting, "tweaking" if you will. EGT monitoring is critical. Run within the parameters of Rotax's operating instructions they are "safe". I had 3 engine outs, all 3 pilot induced. Each time I just landed in an open field and fixed what needed to be fixed and took off. Had I not pushed the edge all 3 would not have been an issue. My bad. :redface:

Most people who fly 2 strokers do so on a budget so maintaining them is usually put on the back burner from what I have seen, and as you know neglect is not a good plan for an airplane. The crankshafts are suppose to be replaced in 300 hours, decarb the engine every 100 hours. Use synthetic 2 stroke oil (pricey). Replace tubing once a year, Rarely, is any of this this done.

Letting old fuel sit in the engine and tank is a big no no as with any engine, but I have seen corn flake size chunks of varnish floating in the fuel tank from letting it sit.

I would not say 2 strokers are "significantly" less reliable..... but you are close. Diligent maintenance is paramount.
 
Last edited:
Let me play the grumpy old fart here (wait, I am that already)

You are not cut out to be a pilot or a plane owner... Take your money to Vegas and blow it at the tables... You'll have a lot more fun...
Flying, and especially owning, takes passion in order to put up with the misery... You don't have the passion - you will get only the misery in the end...
Spend your 40 grand on airline tickets if you must travel - or a motorcycle, or a boat (there's a way to unload 40 grand before you can blink)

Save yourself a lot of grief, unsign from this forum, and run far, far, away from anything airplane... Find something you do have a passion for - golf, booze, whatever...
 
My Cessna 140 cost slightly over $20K. It's slow, but reliable and safe. Fast enough for short trips with one passenger being practical. There are some aircraft in this size/speed range that can be had in good shape below $20K.
 
My Cherokee cost 1 dollar. That's what I spent on my sweepstakes ticket. It is very spanky and flies just fine.
 
Last edited:
Dr. O said:
Let me play the grumpy old fart here (wait, I am that already)

You are not cut out to be a pilot or a plane owner... Take your money to Vegas and blow it at the tables... You'll have a lot more fun...
Flying, and especially owning, takes passion in order to put up with the misery... You don't have the passion - you will get only the misery in the end...
Spend your 40 grand on airline tickets if you must travel - or a motorcycle, or a boat (there's a way to unload 40 grand before you can blink)

Save yourself a lot of grief, unsign from this forum, and run far, far, away from anything airplane... Find something you do have a passion for - golf, booze, whatever...
Click to expand...

Almost bang on point. I would add that without the desire you might not have the drive to be as safe and proficient as you need to be. Flying isn't driving. If you want it to be a reliable travel tool you will need an advanced aircraft and an instrument rating. To remain proficient at instrument flying there will be a lot of boring flying around under the hood with a safety pilot. 40k buys a lot of airline travel.
 
Dr. O said:
Let me play the grumpy old fart here (wait, I am that already)

You are not cut out to be a pilot or a plane owner... Take your money to Vegas and blow it at the tables... You'll have a lot more fun...
Flying, and especially owning, takes passion in order to put up with the misery... You don't have the passion - you will get only the misery in the end...
Spend your 40 grand on airline tickets if you must travel - or a motorcycle, or a boat (there's a way to unload 40 grand before you can blink)

Save yourself a lot of grief, unsign from this forum, and run far, far, away from anything airplane... Find something you do have a passion for - golf, booze, whatever...
Click to expand...

lol, thanks grandpa. I don't have a passion for driving, yet I seemed to have dumped 70 grand into the two cars I own. I have a passion for travel.

We like to go somewhere just about every weekend. I am not going to buy tickets to Montreal, Quebec City, NYC, Providence, Northern Maine, Nova Scotia, Cape Cod, and dozens of other places we would take day trips or wekend trips too, but I sure would go there every weekend if I had a plane.

I remember the excitement I felt when I was 16, and got my first car. I couldn't give a rats ass about the car, but I got butterflies in my stomach when I thought about where it could take me. How much bigger my world just got.

I feel the same today. My weekend travel world at the moment, is large cities far away that I can take a commercial airliner too, and anything I can drive to in under 3 hours.

Soon, my travel world is going to get a whole lot bigger, and I am getting butterflies just thinking about it! :)
 
Mafoo said:
Soon, my travel world is going to get a whole lot bigger, and I am getting butterflies just thinking about it! :)
Click to expand...

When you have a 65k budget, and travel is your goal there are a bunch of aircraft on the market now that will fill your needs.

Now we need to know your load.
 
Threefingeredjack said:
Almost bang on point. I would add that without the desire you might not have the drive to be as safe and proficient as you need to be. Flying isn't driving. If you want it to be a reliable travel tool you will need an advanced aircraft and an instrument rating. To remain proficient at instrument flying there will be a lot of boring flying around under the hood with a safety pilot. 40k buys a lot of airline travel.
Click to expand...

I am here to be a safer pilot. I am aslo on track to get my license in 40 hours, because I have done the pre-work it takes to be efficient in an aircraft.

I find this mildly insulting, strictly because it implies I care little for my wife's safety.

I have every intention of being far above average with respect to operational safety. I do everything I put my mind to well, or I don't do it at all. Striving for excellence is something I definitely have a passion for.
 
Tom-D said:
When you have a 65k budget, and travel is your goal there are a bunch of aircraft on the market now that will fill your needs.

Now we need to know your load.
Click to expand...

220 pound pilot, 170 pound passenger, and around 50 or so pounds of luggage.

I would also like to go 1,100nm 4-5 times a years, as my home office and my wife's family are in MN, and we live in NH.
 
I keep liking the Luscombe 8A, that would probably be the minimum I'd own (about $20K). I have ridden in a pull-start Kolb Firestar II, so I guess what I'll get into depends on the plane and pilot more than the type (the Kolb pilot/owner/builder is a 10K hour jet pilot with *many* hours in the Kolb).
 
Mafoo said:
220 pound pilot, 170 pound passenger, and around 50 or so pounds of luggage.

I would also like to go 1,100nm 4-5 times a years, as my home office and my wife's family are in MN, and we live in NH.
Click to expand...

Bonanza it is, although you'll be relegated to VFR a good bit of the year unless you up your budget to include deicing equipment. A Mooney will do the job as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top