Buying a New Plane in the Current Day

Catfish47

Catfish47

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Oct 23, 2021
Messages
100
Display Name
Catfish47
If someone wanted just a regular single engine plane but wanted new and wanted to keep it +/- $300k (a little over is ok, under is great), what kind of good, proven options with a good track record would they be looking at? I'm talking about factory-built, factory-new airplanes. The purpose is mainly flying for fun, some cross country, and probably solo or with one px the vast majority of the time. Back country flying is something I'd like to get into but I have no experience or knowledge in that yet, I am really attracted to the idea though. 4 seat would be nice but not realistic for the price point. $300k factory-new means pretty much any option I can think of is going to be LSA. So far this is what I've come up with:

-CubCrafters CarbonCub SS (this is pretty much right at $300k, goes a bit over with some additional options)
-Factory-Built Vans RV-12iS
-Factory-Built Kitfox Series 7
-Tecnam P92

Some factors to consider would be that it'd be nice to keep maintenance and parts availability and cost in mind. I know these days if someone wants new, experimental is the name of the game, but I really have no interest, time, or space to build an airplane myself and have no experience in that sort of thing. It is also my understanding that it is harder to insure experimental amateur-built aircraft, and buying one made by someone other than the factory would leave doubts about whether it was done 100% to factory specs especially for longevity in decades of use.

For what it's worth, I fly under BasicMed and don't have to fly under MOSAIC, but might someday.
 
VL-3

JMB Aircraft | VL3 Retractable Gear

The airframe is completely made of composite material which excels in its specific strength and excellent fatigue properties. The entire aircraft can be broken down into individual units, i.e., both halves of the wing and tail surfaces, including stabilizers, can be separated from the fuselage...
www.jmbaircraft.com www.jmbaircraft.com
I almost did this....but up-panelled my Seneca II instead.
 
Catfish47 said:
If someone wanted just a regular single engine plane but wanted new and wanted to keep it +/- $300k (a little over is ok, under is great), what kind of good, proven options with a good track record would they be looking at?
Click to expand...
FWIW: I would wait until the new Part 22 LSA certification rules go live in a few months and see what offerings that may come from that before making a decision. If the market responds to these factory options, I think you'll find your answer that will hit on all your points to include maintenance and parts.
 
bbchien said:
VL-3

JMB Aircraft | VL3 Retractable Gear

The airframe is completely made of composite material which excels in its specific strength and excellent fatigue properties. The entire aircraft can be broken down into individual units, i.e., both halves of the wing and tail surfaces, including stabilizers, can be separated from the fuselage...
www.jmbaircraft.com www.jmbaircraft.com
I almost did this....but up-panelled my Seneca II instead.
Click to expand...
I'll have to look into those, I've not heard of them before. Though I'd prefer fixed gear and fixed pitch prop and 200hp or less.
 
Catfish47 said:
I've always been attracted to Maule, I see the MX-7 is even available in nosewheel configuration. I can't really find a base model price for one new.
Click to expand...
I got a short demo flight in a tri gear Maule…the salesman said I was the first pilot he’d flown with who hadn’t touched down nosewheel first.
 
Along the lines of @Bell206 ‘s comment above, the Vashon Ranger might check your boxes if Vashon gets the MTOW up a few hundred pounds. When I looked at one at SNF a couple of years ago, the factory guy told me it was designed to a higher weight but papered lower to meet LSA specs.
 
Half Fast said:
Along the lines of @Bell206 ‘s comment above, the Vashon Ranger might check your boxes if Vashon gets the MTOW up a few hundred pounds. When I looked at one at SNF a couple of years ago, the factory guy told me it was designed to a higher weight but papered lower to meet LSA specs.
Click to expand...
Have there been any news on the ASTM update? Or will 7/24/2026 roll around and they say "here it is!"
 
What's the Kitfox 7 like? I do like the idea of being able to store it at home. Anyone have an idea of what they cost from the factory new?
 
asicer said:
Have there been any news on the ASTM update? Or will 7/24/2026 roll around and they say "here it is!"
Click to expand...
FYI: with the release of Part 22 the ASTM will no longer be the controlling document moving forward. Typically, an Advisory Circular will be issued to provide guidance for compliance of Part 22 where most likely any applicable ASTM or other standards will listed.
 
bbchien said:
VL-3

JMB Aircraft | VL3 Retractable Gear

The airframe is completely made of composite material which excels in its specific strength and excellent fatigue properties. The entire aircraft can be broken down into individual units, i.e., both halves of the wing and tail surfaces, including stabilizers, can be separated from the fuselage...
www.jmbaircraft.com www.jmbaircraft.com
I almost did this....but up-panelled my Seneca II instead.
Click to expand...
A friend of mine is selling his VL-3, under $300K. OP if interested DM and I’ll send you his contact info.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1387.jpeg
    IMG_1387.jpeg
    1.6 MB · Views: 51
Rcmutz said:
A friend of mine is selling his VL-3, under $300K. OP if interested DM and I’ll send you his contact info.
Click to expand...
I will let you know, thanks. I am still researching.

Also looking into how owning a plane would work with storage. I don't really like the idea of leaving it tied down outside in the elements if I'm spending that much. I know plenty of people do it and it's not a big deal, but damn it'd be nice to have a hangar and there are absolutely none anywhere near unless I want to buy a home on an airpark an hour and a half away from where I work.

The idea of a Kitfox that I can store in a garage sure does sound nice. Same with a RV12iS
 
If you are near Dayton, Ohio, he has a hangar he owns that he will be looking to rent once the VL-3 is sold.
 
I bought a Carbon Cub FX3 builder assist brand new a few years back for about that much and have been really happy with it. I might consider the Carbon Cub UL instead of the SS though, got to fly one of those last year. Pictures from today with th FX-3 750 hours in 4 years and no major issues. Takes off or lands in <100 ft and cruises at 130 mph even with the 31” tires. The UL or SS should be in the same ballpark.

IMG_9200.jpeg
IMG_9212.jpeg
 
Narwhal said:
I bought a Carbon Cub FX3 builder assist brand new a few years back for about that much and have been really happy with it. I might consider the Carbon Cub UL instead of the SS though, got to fly one of those last year. Pictures from today with th FX-3 750 hours in 4 years and no major issues. Takes off or lands in <100 ft and cruises at 130 mph even with the 31” tires. The UL or SS should be in the same ballpark.
Click to expand...
That's a beautiful plane. Yeah, a factory built Carbon Cub SS or UL certainly is an attractive option to me. Only drawback going LSA I see is how it handles in crosswinds, but it's not like I'd be forced to fly on strong xwind days.

I have 0 taildragger time. I've heard it is more difficult and expensive to insure, and that it can definitely get away from you in landing in certain situations. Have you found either of these things to be a challenge?
 
Catfish47 said:
That's a beautiful plane. Yeah, a factory built Carbon Cub SS or UL certainly is an attractive option to me. Only drawback going LSA I see is how it handles in crosswinds, but it's not like I'd be forced to fly on strong xwind days.

I have 0 taildragger time. I've heard it is more difficult and expensive to insure, and that it can definitely get away from you in landing in certain situations. Have you found either of these things to be a challenge?
Click to expand...

A cub with bushwheels is not difficult at all as far as taildraggers go, especially the with modern suspension systems. Cubcrafters has factory approved training through tac aero that can get you up to speed, but since the takeoffs and landings only last ~5 seconds it’s not too hard. I went and flew an old squirrelly Citabria with spring gear for 30 hours or so to get ready.

Annual Insurance Hull coverage premiums will run about 3% of the airplane’s cost for an experimental taildragger. In Alaska where I’m at it’s closer to 5% even with my time in the airplane, so I just carry liability (which does include remote location recovery) for $700/year.
 
Catfish47 said:
That's a beautiful plane. Yeah, a factory built Carbon Cub SS or UL certainly is an attractive option to me. Only drawback going LSA I see is how it handles in crosswinds, but it's not like I'd be forced to fly on strong xwind days.

I have 0 taildragger time. I've heard it is more difficult and expensive to insure, and that it can definitely get away from you in landing in certain situations. Have you found either of these things to be a challenge?
Click to expand...
This will sound like a smart a** answer, but it's not meant to be. If a CC will take off and land in 100', and I believe him, then you might not need to land much crosswind. Maybe not so much paved, but grass just land into the wind.

I've never flown a CC, but have about 100 hrs in an old fashioned cub, learned in it, and tailwheel isn't really difficult. No false modesty here, I'm no more skilled than anyone else and I picked it up fine. What you might find, though, is that light wind loading = low stall speed = lower tolerance for gusty winds. As an example, I'll fly a PA-28 in 15G25, but I'd never do that in a cub. I kinda like my gust forecast to be less than .5 of my stall speed...but as stated before I am kinda a baby about some things.

All that said, if I were in a position to buy a CC, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Wish you the best in finding a plane!
 
Doing some reading on the Rotax engines (as used in planes like the Kitfox, Vans RV12, and others), it seems like some people complain about the reliability of it, and additionally the added complexity compared to more traditional engines. Not being direct drive, having a gearbox, and partially liquid cooled does seem like it'd add some complexity.

Am I just being a curmudgeon or is there something to the perception that they're less reliable than a Lycoming or Continental?

Speaking of Continental, the Titan in the Carbon Cub is apparently only supposed to be run at full HP for a short time, and then throttled back to 80HP? That seems strange.
 
Catfish47 said:
Doing some reading on the Rotax engines (as used in planes like the Kitfox, Vans RV12, and others), it seems like some people complain about the reliability of it, and additionally the added complexity compared to more traditional engines. Not being direct drive, having a gearbox, and partially liquid cooled does seem like it'd add some complexity.

Am I just being a curmudgeon or is there something to the perception that they're less reliable than a Lycoming or Continental?

Speaking of Continental, the Titan in the Carbon Cub is apparently only supposed to be run at full HP for a short time, and then throttled back to 80HP? That seems strange.
Click to expand...
Well, modern car engines are even more complex but how many of these are still of “traditional engines” type … aka 1930s design ?
Zero, since about 1980s…. and are much more reliable and efficient than ever …
Imho , the only real complain about Rotax engines is that it is harder to find a shop that can maintain them and the fact that they only go up to 160 hp.
 
Warmi said:
Well, modern car engines are even more complex but how many of these are still of “traditional engines” type … aka 1930s design ?
Zero, since about 1980s…. and are much more reliable and efficient than ever …
Imho , the only real complain about Rotax engines is that it is harder to find a shop that can maintain them and the fact that they only go up to 160 hp.
Click to expand...
That's a good point. Maybe I've just been reading too much into issues with them.
 
I'll put a second vote in for a Maule. You may not use 4 seats for most of your flights, but the extra useful load comes in real handy when airplane camping, or hauling toys to distant places. The double door opening on the right side of the plane makes it super easy to get big items in and out of the plane! A new basic model can be bought for mid $200K, and that's hard to beat these days! Besides, it's still a family owned and operated business when so much of the aviation sector has distant corporate ownership. That family touch adds a lot in terms of personal response to requests. When I needed to match the paint for some touch-up work on my Maule, I left a message on the company's answering machine. The next day I got a call back from Brent Maule and we chatted about the ownership history of my plane. I also got the paint info I was looking for. I fly a taildragger version, but the flying characteristics are very similar for the tri-gear version. Here's my rod bike loaded into the Maule for a cycling trip to the San Juan Islands. You can't do that with some of the other planes suggested! Other planes might be capable of carrying a bicycle, but loading and unloading it won't be as easy.
PXL_20250822_182315161.jpg

And here's my plane loaded for a flight to AirVenture/Oshkosh last year. No 2 seater is going to carry this much gear comfortably!
Packed-Maule.jpeg
 
Another vote for Maule here. I've been flying them for about 16 years and still find them to be a perfect blend of speed, useful, cost and STOL for my mission.

There are plenty of other options that are better at certain parts of the equation, but Maule is a compelling blend of features if camping and grass is part of your mission.
 
Depending on your flight mission, have you taken a peek over the fence at the experimental aircraft? Vans RV’s are available in both nose and tailwheel. They fly faster than similarly sized certified aircraft. Capable of ‘gentlemanly aerobatics’ and you can find already built well equipped examples for half of your budget.
 
rwellner98 said:
Another vote for Maule here. I've been flying them for about 16 years and still find them to be a perfect blend of speed, useful, cost and STOL for my mission.

There are plenty of other options that are better at certain parts of the equation, but Maule is a compelling blend of features if camping and grass is part of your mission.
Click to expand...
Where can you find pricing options for Maule? A 180hp fixed prop would be great, even better with tricycle though I would be open to tailwheel
rockyfatcat said:
Depending on your flight mission, have you taken a peek over the fence at the experimental aircraft? Vans RV’s are available in both nose and tailwheel. They fly faster than similarly sized certified aircraft. Capable of ‘gentlemanly aerobatics’ and you can find already built well equipped examples for half of your budget.
Click to expand...
I have, and prices are certainly better, but I have no desire to build, and I wouldn’t trust someone else’s build either. I’d really prefer something factory-built. Vans does do the RV12is though, and that is an option
 
Flyhound said:
I'll put a second vote in for a Maule. You may not use 4 seats for most of your flights, but the extra useful load comes in real handy when airplane camping, or hauling toys to distant places. The double door opening on the right side of the plane makes it super easy to get big items in and out of the plane! A new basic model can be bought for mid $200K, and that's hard to beat these days! Besides, it's still a family owned and operated business when so much of the aviation sector has distant corporate ownership. That family touch adds a lot in terms of personal response to requests. When I needed to match the paint for some touch-up work on my Maule, I left a message on the company's answering machine. The next day I got a call back from Brent Maule and we chatted about the ownership history of my plane. I also got the paint info I was looking for. I fly a taildragger version, but the flying characteristics are very similar for the tri-gear version. Here's my rod bike loaded into the Maule for a cycling trip to the San Juan Islands. You can't do that with some of the other planes suggested! Other planes might be capable of carrying a bicycle, but loading and unloading it won't be as easy.
View attachment 152425

And here's my plane loaded for a flight to AirVenture/Oshkosh last year. No 2 seater is going to carry this much gear comfortably!
View attachment 152426
Click to expand...
That’s awesome! What model(s) are in that pricing range?
 
Catfish47 said:
Where can you find pricing options for Maule? A 180hp fixed prop would be great, even better with tricycle though I would be open to tailwheel

I have, and prices are certainly better, but I have no desire to build, and I wouldn’t trust someone else’s build either. I’d really prefer something factory-built. Vans does do the RV12is though, and that is an option
Click to expand...
I’m not going to argue. It’s your money, you spend it how you like.

I had a DAR tell mr the RV was so over-engineered that 20% of the rivets could be missing and it would still be airworthy.

The -7 I bought was built by an A&P for personal use. Some of the rivets that he had a second person buck the tail end for him aren’t pretty. The effort to drill them out and replace them would inflict more damage than it would fix.
 
Flyhound said:
I'll put a second vote in for a Maule. You may not use 4 seats for most of your flights, but the extra useful load comes in real handy when airplane camping, or hauling toys to distant places. The double door opening on the right side of the plane makes it super easy to get big items in and out of the plane! A new basic model can be bought for mid $200K, and that's hard to beat these days! Besides, it's still a family owned and operated business when so much of the aviation sector has distant corporate ownership. That family touch adds a lot in terms of personal response to requests. When I needed to match the paint for some touch-up work on my Maule, I left a message on the company's answering machine. The next day I got a call back from Brent Maule and we chatted about the ownership history of my plane. I also got the paint info I was looking for. I fly a taildragger version, but the flying characteristics are very similar for the tri-gear version. Here's my rod bike loaded into the Maule for a cycling trip to the San Juan Islands. You can't do that with some of the other planes suggested! Other planes might be capable of carrying a bicycle, but loading and unloading it won't be as easy.


And here's my plane loaded for a flight to AirVenture/Oshkosh last year. No 2 seater is going to carry this much gear comfortably!
Click to expand...
I just sent Maule a message asking for the current base prices for the tailwheel and tricycle MX-7-180 models. A quick glance through their brochures don't show a glass cockpit option, but that's not necessary and the vast majority of my flying is with analogue gauges.

These seem like really capable airplanes, I've always been impressed by Maule. Why is it that they're basically half the price of a new Cessna 172SP? Surely there's more to it than just the recognition.
 
rockyfatcat said:
I’m not going to argue. It’s your money, you spend it how you like.

I had a DAR tell mr the RV was so over-engineered that 20% of the rivets could be missing and it would still be airworthy.

The -7 I bought was built by an A&P for personal use. Some of the rivets that he had a second person buck the tail end for him aren’t pretty. The effort to drill them out and replace them would inflict more damage than it would fix.
Click to expand...
I shouldn't say I would never trust a non-factory-built airplane, if the right one with the right provenance came along I might be convinced. At this stage, however, I'm just looking at factory-built... as time goes on and the factory new market becomes even more untenable, I'm not saying that couldn't change.
 
Catfish47 said:
Speaking of Continental, the Titan in the Carbon Cub is apparently only supposed to be run at full HP for a short time, and then throttled back to 80HP? That seems strange.
Click to expand...
That’s a “wink wink nudge nudge” limitation. The engine is powerful enough at normal settings to push the plane beyond the LSA speed limit (the old LSA rules) and to carry enough weight to put it well over 1320 pounds. So they limit it to full power just for takeoff - you know, as a safety margin for short fields. You should never ever ever run at 75% power and get regular Carbon Cub performance as a sport pilot. Ever.
 
I got a reply from Maule pretty quickly. Looks like their prices are quite a bit higher than the $200k's now. 2026 Maule aircraft begin at $416,000. Still, a new 172 is, from what I can tell, in the upper $500k's and more, so that counts for something.
 
ateamer said:
That’s a “wink wink nudge nudge” limitation. The engine is powerful enough at normal settings to push the plane beyond the LSA speed limit (the old LSA rules) and to carry enough weight to put it well over 1320 pounds. So they limit it to full power just for takeoff - you know, as a safety margin for short fields. You should never ever ever run at 75% power and get regular Carbon Cub performance as a sport pilot. Ever.
Click to expand...
I figured, though if you do run it at full power or 75% power continuously, do you risk any damage to the engine or more wear and tear beyond what any other normal engine with no such stated restriction would encounter?
 
Catfish47 said:
I just sent Maule a message asking for the current base prices for the tailwheel and tricycle MX-7-180 models. A quick glance through their brochures don't show a glass cockpit option, but that's not necessary and the vast majority of my flying is with analogue gauges.

These seem like really capable airplanes, I've always been impressed by Maule. Why is it that they're basically half the price of a new Cessna 172SP? Surely there's more to it than just the recognition.
Click to expand...
Maule is still a family owned and operated business, so they don't have the overhead expense of bigger, corporate aviation companies. If you ever get a chance to visit the Maule Air factory in Moultrie, GA, I encourage you to do that. It is a delightful, small operation. I spent some time at the factory and at the related Maule Flight business on the other side of the same airport before I bought my Maule. I even got a couple hours of dual with Ray Maule before he passed away. Nothing but good memories of both businesses and the planes they build/maintain.
Ray-N-Me.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top