555 nm each way, what to buy or do?

Tom-D said:
Here is your ride, with change left over.

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_823926_Bellanca+Turbo+Viking.html

High-altitude cruise is where the Turbo Viking shines. At 12,500 feet, the airplane trued 167 knots on 73-percent power for an average fuel burn of 15.5 gph. The handbook says that at 75-percent power, the Viking will true 187 knots at 20,000 feet and 193 knots at 24,000 feet, all on 15.9 gph. Bonanza pilots might be sniggering that this isn't terribly impressive speed for a 300-hp airplane and they'd be right; the Viking, despite its clean wing, is not as a whole as aerodynamically efficient as some other designs. This fact bothers Viking owners not at all.
Click to expand...

It bothers buyers, as can be seen by the price tag in your link. Replace every instance of "Viking" in that ad with "Comanche", "bonanza", "210" and the price multiplies by 5.
 
Find a nice 250 Comanche ,May not have the comfort for size your looking for,an older 210 would fit the bill all around.
 
How about a Grumman Tiger*?

Mine did about 132k, burned 10gph and held 50 gals.

Don't know if a large pilot would find it a squeeze or not - at 6'1" and about 185 it fit fine.


* compare it to an Arrow for an appreciation of its efficiency. An Arrow has 20 HP more, retractable gear and a constant speed prop, yet the Tiger cruises at about the same speed. I believe Mr. Lopresti is the one to applaud for much of this!
 
Kiddo's Driver said:
I LOVE the RV-10, but my pockets aren't that deep!

Thanks for bringing that up, I am not against a used experimental if I can get it financed.

Jim
Click to expand...

Look at a good RV-6(a) Fast, cheap, economical to operate. Fun as hell & easy to fly. Not the best IR platform, but certainly doable. Cruise speed around 200mph. ;)
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
Look at a good RV-6(a) Fast, cheap, economical to operate. Fun as hell too.
Click to expand...

I really don't think a 300 lb person is gonna fit too well in an RV6. As much as I like them.

182RG or 210.. probably the best suggestions so far.
 
dell30rb said:
I really don't think a 300 lb person is gonna fit too well in an RV6. As much as I like them.

182RG or 210.. probably the best suggestions so far.
Click to expand...

No problem. I sold one to a big boy, and he flies the hell out of it.

OP sit in one and see how you fit.
 
You didn't mention whether you needed a 4-seater or not. Assuming you do, then Comanche 250 or Super Viking come to mind as two good options. Bonanza is also good. Both are great values, lots of speed for the money.

If you don't mind a 2-seater experimental, there are lots of good options for you. If you want certified, look at the above options.
 
Long EZ? RV-6? Ha! This is a big dude we're shopping for...

...and so am I. At three bills, the Cessna 182RG will be your best bet. Plenty of room in the cabin and decent speed. Get a turbo and an O2 bottle and enjoy massive tailwinds eastbound. A 210 would work too, but expect a bit more for insurance and maintenance.

That high wing will be appreciated waiting out those showers too...
 
Bonanza/Debonair with tip-tanks
Comanche 250/260 +/- tip-tanks.
TB-20
182RG with 88gal wet wings

Both the TB-20 and the 182RG are above your acquisition budget. Both will accomodate your body type and have the range you are looking for.
 
Were that my mission I'd uses it for an excuse to step up to a 210 or the evil 337 twin
 
My fixed gear 1970 182 (pponk) did CCR to SAF (780nm) in January in under 6 hours without a fuel stop and landed with about a 1hr reserve according to the fuel flow totalizer. Seems like that sort of plane would fit the bill.
 
I do not see a Mooney in his future. If he could fit in the Mooney, then he could fit in the Lancair, which is 195ktas at 10gph. I don't know about cabin dimensions and egress/ingress on a Viking, but that could be a solid airplane. Otherwise, the 182RG/210 sounds like the business.

Certainly give the RV6's, Lancairs and Long Eze a look if you can, you'll get crazy efficiency there with any of them...but it'll all moot if you can't fit.

Good luck!
 
I'd find out where Richard Collins buried all his P210 parts and put that poor airplane back together.

You might find Jimmy Hoffa in the same hole.
 
coma24 said:
give the RV6's, Lancairs and Long Eze a look if you can
Click to expand...

You're comparing a lancair to a RV and Ez?

That's like saying go check out a corvette ZR1 and a miatia and a civic, one of these isn't like the others :wink2:
 
pericynthion said:
My VariEze does that sort of trip pretty well. 160 KTAS at 5.5 gph. One passenger *or* luggage. You might want to consider a Long EZ instead for a bit more elbow room, if you're on the larger side.
Click to expand...
I had forgotten about the Ezs! I've always loved the efficiency and speed they offer. I need to find a Long Ez and try it on.

Ruthless53 said:
http://www.trade-a-plane.com/detail/aircraft/Single+Engine+Piston/1974/Piper/Cherokee+6_300/1688049.html

Would be a great plane for the job. Beautiful paint and fresh engine. Should get you well over 150knots at 16gph and a nice useful load.
Click to expand...
Is 150 knots realistic in a fixed gear Saratoga? I flew a retractable Saratoga from Tennessee to Alpine, MI and back. I don't think I ever saw 150 kts on that trip. I don't see how a fixed gear version could be faster.

Will he fit? Will he fit? Will he fit?
Click to expand...
I guess I really need to get to some fly ins and ask "Can I sit in your plane?"

RVs
Click to expand...
Love the RVs.

Seats
Click to expand...
90% of the flying is alone or with one person. 80% alone. I would REALLY like to be able to carry four people when needed and have no issues with lowering the fuel load to 3-4 hours total (2 or more hours flying plus reserves) for the few times that we all pile in to go somewhere. That said, there is something to be said about buy for the 90% and renting for the rest.

Here is what I am up against with the airlines.
Drive to airport: 45 minutes
Park, security, etc.: 30 minutes
Board before departure: 30 minutes
Airline says: 5 hours with one layover over
Get off plane & get to car: 30 minutes
Drive from airport (Wichita or Oklahoma City to Enid): 2 hours
Total 9 hours and 15 minutes.

The goal is not to be as good as the airlines. The goal is to do it better!
House to local airport: 15 minutes
Preflight: 30 minutes
Block time on flight: 5 hours average. (More going West, less going East)
Post flight: 30 minutes
Airport to Home: 15 minutes
Total: 6 hours and 30 minutes

Ability to leave when I want and the fact that I LOVE flying helps a lot.
Pre and post times are fixed. Anything that saves in the middle helps me out.

Jim
 
Last edited:
You have two serious limitations. First, you want a fast plane that can go 600NM unrefueled. Second, you are a big guy. These two competing goals may not be satisfied without a serious injection of money. Fast GA planes are often small or cramped. This is particularly true of most EXP planes, except the really expensive ones. You bought the plane you have now cause it fits. I think without going around and trying on planes, you're gonna be stymied in your search.

Frankly, I'd give up some speed/endurance for comfort. You might be able to fit in a Long-Eze, but after an hour it's going to feel like a coffin. And you've got to make this trip 20 times per year or more. This advise is beyond the 'what to buy' but I think you need to face some serious limitations that going west you'll need to make a stop for fuel, or you will need to spend a bunch more than your budget. A lot of planes have been mentioned, and all of them will do the job to a greater or lesser degree. If you could fit in a Glasair that would be great, cause there are some in your budget. But, you need to go get in and take a flight with the canopy down, and see if you can do that for 4 hours every other week.

<edit; I say this cause I have a very good friend who is 6'2" and 290# and when he and I are in the Bonanza, his limit is about 90 minutes. I'm not that big but he fills his seat plus some, and there's just no more 'there' there for me to give him. The Cardinal is the most comfortable GA plane I've been in before, and were I of the plus size, it's the only thing I'd get.>
 
Last edited:
docmirror said:
K. the book says 148Kts for the RG.
Click to expand...
Book lies. Got about 50 hours in Cardinal RG's a long time back, and I agree with Bruce -- 140 KTAS flat out sucking more gas in six hours than it carries. Definite one-stopper on this journey.
 
Tom-D said:
12,500' trued out at 170k on 16 gal, with 78 gallons on board.

Do the math.

555NM / 178k = 3.11 hours in route X 16 gph =50 gallons. leaves 28 gallons in the tanks or nearly 2 hours flight time.
Click to expand...
Ignores winds, takeoff, approach, and landing. Nobody gets average block speed anywhere near that close to cruise TAS.
 
Ron Levy said:
Book lies. Got about 50 hours in Cardinal RG's a long time back, and I agree with Bruce -- 140 KTAS flat out sucking more gas in six hours than it carries. Definite one-stopper on this journey.
Click to expand...

"Guess that's optimistic. The J35 is a sweet flyer. Tip tanks would take him pretty easy."

Or, see above, and live with the one-stop going west for comfort. 300# in the Bonanza is going to be tough except solo.
 
Brad Z said:
RV-6? Ha!
Click to expand...

Actually, an RV-14 may work for the OP, if instant gratification isn't a priority. The kit is new and only the factory bird is flying at this point. But it does get decent speed and as a bonus you can pump a few barrel rolls along the way. I still think it might be a bit tight for a non-stop flight, but it will fit better than the RV 6 and 7s.
 
Ron Levy said:
Ignores winds, takeoff, approach, and landing. Nobody gets average block speed anywhere near that close to cruise TAS.
Click to expand...

You do have 2 hours fuel to play with.

Find an aircraft as capable at the $65k price.
 
I think the distance between Wichita - ICT and Meridian, MS MEI is about the same 550 km or so.

I have made this trip many times as that is my favorite gas stop on the way to Florida where Maria's crazy family live. About 3 times a year we go to Disneyland, see crazy in-laws and escape rigid KS winters.

My most common Time in Route between Wichita and Meridian is 2:45 hrs and my most common return time is 3:15 hrs block times. I usually plan 3 hrs going East and 3 and a half hours coming back and am always happily surprised to do it in better time.

I normally flight plan at 11,500' and 175 knots give or take a few knots. I can usually pick an altitude that has 20-40kts tail wind on top of that and coming back the other way I usually can keep the head at or below 20 knots by finding friendly altitudes but sometimes I have to fly low to do that so coming back at 5000' where appropriate is an option at 160 knots. I tend to always return in early evenings so that might also account for lower head winds (I love night flight and the timing works for me).

If you subtract 20 knots per hour you can get an idea of what a Normally aspirated 155 knot airplane will do on this same route.

A 250 Comanche burns a bit less fuel than 300 hp 210/Bo/Viking. I typically figure 15 gallons the first hr and 14.3 from then on. I have 90 gallon tanks and 84 useable so I typically land with 35-40 gallons left in the tanks. I FL PLN 50 gallons to be safe. I've done this trip so much I just do it by rote anymore.

I would go faster if I darn o2 but I seldom do go higher.
 
Ron Levy said:
Book lies. Got about 50 hours in Cardinal RG's a long time back, and I agree with Bruce -- 140 KTAS flat out sucking more gas in six hours than it carries. Definite one-stopper on this journey.
Click to expand...


I saw a tornato alley turbo on 177 RG at their last fly in. It was awsome...
I think it would be above $100k to buy a nice Cardinal rg with that setup.

What do you suspect a good turbo 210/Bo or otherwise would run that was in ready to go condition?
 
A straight leg 182 w/ long rang tanks would fit your mission just fine.

I flew nearly 500nm round trip (southern Missouri to NE Ohio) almost every week for two years with 55 Gal usable and rarely (twice) had to stop for fuel westbound due to headwinds.

Get 88 gal tanks and you'll be stylin'.
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
I think the distance between Wichita - ICT and Meridian, MS MEI is about the same 550 km or so.

I have made this trip many times as that is my favorite gas stop...
Click to expand...

I've been there at least a half dozen times. Self serve gas, if needed. Great facilities. Hotdogs, popcorn, tea, etc. Plus there are usually military aircraft there to look at.

Jim
 
Kiddo's Driver said:
I've been there at least a half dozen times. Self serve gas, if needed. Great facilities. Hotdogs, popcorn, tea, etc. Plus there are usually military aircraft there to look at.

Jim
Click to expand...

And free Iced Cream! Of course I make myself sick eating the chili dogs and then Iced cream on top. But that is another thread.
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
I saw a tornato alley turbo on 177 RG at their last fly in. It was awsome...
I think it would be above $100k to buy a nice Cardinal rg with that setup.

What do you suspect a good turbo 210/Bo or otherwise would run that was in ready to go condition?
Click to expand...

Some of the guys with turbos on the Cardinal Flyers site claim 170-175 knots true in the flight levels burning 10 gph. OP would have his elbow room, speed, and efficiency, and I think at 10 gph, the range he needs.
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
250 Comanche is 155-157 knots on 14.3 gph at about 8000.' You can see nice ones from $45-55k. Ed Fred has one for sale....with G430.

You might see if he would want your plane as partial trade?
Click to expand...

Is the Comanche 250 really that fast? I looked into a Comanche 250 partnership a while back and the partners were discussing it as a <150 knot airplane.
 
Skylane81E said:
So I take it you are offering to pick up the tab on one of the engines then huh?:D
Click to expand...

Nope, I just know the allure of having two engines will win you over. :D
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Nope, I just know the allure of having two engines will win you over. :D
Click to expand...

I guess a twin is totally out of the question for the OP?

I was going to suggest a twin comanche. Their fuel burn is comparable to a single.

You can get IFR twinks in his price range. :redface:
 
kyleb said:
Is the Comanche 250 really that fast? I looked into a Comanche 250 partnership a while back and the partners were discussing it as a <150 knot airplane.
Click to expand...

One thing I have found, most pilots do not know the performance of their own aircraft. I was guilty of it with the Cherokee as top speed performance wasn't really and issue worth investing the time to figure it out.

There are several areas of variation between aircraft of the same model or perceptions of performance between aircraft of the same model. One is in instruments pitot system, one is rigging of the aircraft, one is general body and engine condition the aircraft is in.

ComancheJoe says he plans 150knots and its not enough different for him to worry about.

Most days before I turn on the turbo I can get about 155 knots. however the turbo setup has some push back so maybe that costs me 1-2 knots according to turbo experts.

So my best speed at 75% is about 155 knots give or take a knot or two. AS I climb to 10,500-11,500 and dial in the turbo that is good for a neat 20 knots. So I cannot speak for every Comanche out there.

There is another thread here where an owner of a plane reports it gets 120 mph at all altitudes, this is just not possible. What is possible that many pilots really do not know for sure what their aircraft actually does so they substitute indicated airspeed or even uncorrected air speed.

A few posters on AOPA came up with some neat ways without GPS to calculate your aircrafts performance it was basically flying a triangle and averaging the speed as I recall. The triangle nets out the winds as it ads on one side and subtracts on one side and depending on whether it was a direct tail or head wind the third side splits that difference.


When I first bought my Comanche i was disturbed that it did not seem to get reasonable performance. I took it to Webco the Comanche experts and they said it was not normal so we checked rigging, rebuilt airbox, chased manifold pressure from the Turbos by fixing and finding every pin hole leak in the inductions system all to no avail. We tested the waste gates and the turbos added new plugs. So i decided to live with it. Fast forward a year and I flew to Palm Springs for a week and when I attempted to leave I had to abort the take off as I had no airspeed on the indicator. Realizing I had 1100 nm trip I decided not to take off and set her back on that long 7900 runway. I guess a little bug decided it was too hot and crawled up the pitot tube which I did not protect. We blew out the pitot system which was a bugger and had multiple problems but when I got back into the air all the performance that I seemed to have missed seemed to be there. 3 or 4 knots as I recall. When you buy a plane for speed even a 1-2 knot deficiency is noticed.
 
Last edited:
txflyer said:
I guess a twin is totally out of the question for the OP?

I was going to suggest a twin comanche. Their fuel burn is comparable to a single.

You can get IFR twinks in his price range. :redface:
Click to expand...

Nope, not out of the question, but it would have to be something like a twinkie to make it work. I can only afford so much fuel! Now you let me feed it alcohol free auto gas and it may help a lot. But that is another subject with way too many people with extremely strong opinions on both sides of the subject.

Jim
 
According to the Aviation Consumer (and many of my Comanche twin friends) the Comanche twin is the cheapest twin in Certificated airplanes with the Travelaire being right on its heals. Fuel consumption tips towards the Comanche with two 160hp rather than two 180hp of the Travel air.

If you are getting after it without speed mods you should get 166 knots on 17-18 gph. Or about 160-162 knots on 16 gph.

Two Cherokee engines would be cheap to work on and own. The only expensive twin parts I can think of are the heater and the fuel valve for the 6 tank were in short supply but I think that got resolved.

Considering you are doing this every other week, round trip 1100 nm, I think your mission calls for the highest speed/and or twin that you can afford.

I might give up a bit of speed to have that 2nd engine although I am not entirely sold on twin safety. If you flew a night that would lean me towards the twin. off airport emergency landings at night are pretty bad survival wise. So are IFR emergencies. So if you intend to do a great deal of IFR or night flying the twin could be the best option and worthy of consideration.
 
Kiddo's Driver said:
Nope, not out of the question, but it would have to be something like a twinkie to make it work. I can only afford so much fuel! Now you let me feed it alcohol free auto gas and it may help a lot. But that is another subject with way too many people with extremely strong opinions on both sides of the subject.

Jim
Click to expand...


A twink with a mogas STC would be a formidable machine. :goofy:

And I'll let you in on a little secret. I was out of gas one time out around Guthrie TX. Headwinds killed me.

I landed on the four sixes ranch private airstrip on fumes. Anyway, there was no 100LL for a hundred miles. I called the city, they gave me the Sheriff, and he brought me ten gallons of plain car gas. Super unleaded. I have the mogas STC for my 0-470, but not for that. :crazy: It ran just fine. :redface:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top