Commander 114, A, B

Tan

Tan

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jun 26, 2018
Messages
125
Display Name
TheCapTan
Home Airfield
Krei
Hi,

Current owner of Piper Arrow 180 and have interest in a Commander 114 as a possible future plane. I like the look, but really like the interior space compared to my plane and the benefit of 260 HP. I haven't been able to speak to any owners locally so I wanted some insight from any Commander owners on how they handle and maintenance etc.

Thanks
 
If you do high density altitude takeoffs, be sure to run the numbers to ensure the performance meets your needs.

You may be shocked, for example, by the runway required to depart GCN on a hot summer afternoon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tan
A 114B or 115 (same same) is one of those airplanes on my short list and I was a member of the Owners Club for a couple years, very helpful group pf folks - https://www.commander.org/. I'm still not ready to buy though.

I was over in Middlebury VT (6B0) a couple weeks ago getting some work done on our Archer and there was a 114 with a Turbo install, fresh annual, new paint, sorta dated panel and was told about 1000 hrs on the engine. The owner passed away in March and the family is interested in selling. The price was scary low in my mind - stunning looking plane - if interested J&M Aviation is looking after it. https://www.facebook.com/p/JM-Aviation-100069327744648/

IMG_0036 2.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tan
Pugs said:
A 114B or 115 (same same) is one of those airplanes on my short list and I was a member of the Owners Club for a couple years, very helpful group pf folks - https://www.commander.org/. I'm still not ready to buy though.

I was over in Middlebury VT (6B0) a couple weeks ago getting some work done on our Archer and there was a 114 with a Turbo install, fresh annual, new paint, sorta dated panel and was told about 1000 hrs on the engine. The owner passed away in March and the family is interested in selling. The price was scary low in my mind - stunning looking plane - if interested J&M Aviation is looking after it. https://www.facebook.com/p/JM-Aviation-100069327744648/

View attachment 141393
Click to expand...
That's a 112A, per the FAA registry: N1375J
 
They're on my short list of next planes if I don't build.
 
I own a 1976 112. When I bought it a runout IO-360 was installed. Yeah, some cash & got the IO-390, MT prop conversion. Doing so one gains a little power, sheds 40 pounds. Yes I know, still no 114. The back seats come out easily, another 40 pounds saved.

For maintenance it’s not that bad, Lycoming engine. It can get a little tight with certain airframe parts, Hyd gear pump, some gear actuators, etc.. Usually one can get what they have, ‘refurbished’. There are a few airframe parts at a few salvage yards, but if one lands gear up, could be totaled.

A few positives, ramp appeal can be above average, whatever that’s worth. It looks like more plane(and performance) than it really is. They do have the wider cockpit, comfortable, but slower per hp with larger airframe. Once any deferred maintenance is up to speed, annual costs are ballpark for a similar retract.

Just like with vehicle choices, can be very individual as to what aircraft. For the most part it’s only 2 on board, 3 a few times(with rear seats). I’ve flown to the east coast & FL a few times. Out west I’ve been to the Grand Canyon, and a separate trip to Salt Lake. Not the best high & hot aircraft for performance. I adjust fuel & loading as needed, airport choices too.

Anytime the gear goes up & down there will be extra expense. Before this I owned a low hour 74 Warrior, that was one of the best bang for the buck aircraft.
 
I looked into upgrading to a 114 for awhile. They seem like a great compromise to me: I’d rather fly two hours in comfort than 1:40 crammed into a sardine can. There’s a Commander 112/114/115 Facebook group that you can join for more feedback.
 
I have a 114A and we chose it for exactly the reasons you stated. Very comfortable cabin, lots of room, and good payload. If you buy a Commander, membership in the Commander Owners Group is very valuable, in my mind mandatory.

Getting the mtc up to speed and staying on top makes it a pretty affordable retract, but until the gear is right, it can be a money pit. The gear motor can be rebuilt and there is a COG member who has basically made keeping the gear pumps working his life's work. Jim Richard at Aerodyme specializes in Commander-specific parts.

In terms of performance, at sea level (I live in Louisiana), I can fly three people, bags, and full fuel. I plan 14 gallons/hour at 145Kts true at 6000 to 8000 feet. That gives me about 400 nm with IFR reserves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tan
Chris Mixon said:
I have a 114A and we chose it for exactly the reasons you stated. Very comfortable cabin, lots of room, and good payload. If you buy a Commander, membership in the Commander Owners Group is very valuable, in my mind mandatory.

Getting the mtc up to speed and staying on top makes it a pretty affordable retract, but until the gear is right, it can be a money pit. The gear motor can be rebuilt and there is a COG member who has basically made keeping the gear pumps working his life's work. Jim Richard at Aerodyme specializes in Commander-specific parts.

In terms of performance, at sea level (I live in Louisiana), I can fly three people, bags, and full fuel. I plan 14 gallons/hour at 145Kts true at 6000 to 8000 feet. That gives me about 400 nm with IFR reserves.
Click to expand...
Chris, Have you upgraded any of the avionics?
 
AC11 is a great airframe - BIG - as in you don't run shoulders with the one sitting next to you and pilots up to 6'5"+ fit fine. And it has a pilot's side door.

In my opinion though, the 114B is the model to focus on. It is a true 150 TAS plane at cruise power and it has a few improvements over the 114A ( plus it is 20 years newer). The Lycoming IO-540 in the B is a true dual mag engine and it is hardly working at full power.

I have had mine for 8 years. No parts or maintenance issues during my ownership.

Join the Commanders Owner Group before you buy and get with Judi Anderson at Suncoast Aviation - she is the guru of this type.
 
Tan said:
Chris, Have you upgraded any of the avionics?
Click to expand...
I have a 3 panel Aspen Pro Max, new transponder and com 2 but still have a 530waas and a king 200 autopilot. Replacing the EDM 700 is next.

As Stephan says, the B has a little better performance and they upgraded the interior, but B models and 115s sell at a premium over the 114
and 114As. Now , the Turbo and HotShots are even better, room and performance, but harder to find
 
Chris Mixon said:
I have a 3 panel Aspen Pro Max, new transponder and com 2 but still have a 530waas and a king 200 autopilot. Replacing the EDM 700 is next.

As Stephan says, the B has a little better performance and they upgraded the interior, but B models and 115s sell at a premium over the 114
and 114As. Now , the Turbo and HotShots are even better, room and performance, but harder to find
Click to expand...

What type of climb rate are you normally getting with temps 70-80s? My Arrow has horrible climb and I need to keep CHTs cool.
 
Tan said:
What type of climb rate are you normally getting with temps 70-80s? My Arrow has horrible climb and I need to keep CHTs cool.
Click to expand...
I cruise climb at 100 kts to keep my #6 cylinder below 400F and see 650 fpm to 6000ft using 25 square after that about 450 fpm up to 12.5k. If I let #6 go above 400 I can see 1000fpm to about 3k if I use 25 mp and 27 on the prop. This is at 3250 lbs and from sea level.

Commanders are great flyers, but they like runway. Foreflight is showing me at 1800 foot roll and 2100 feet to 50 foot at max gross and 80 F from sea level for a flight I’m planning this weekend. I typically require 4000 foot runways on a hot day down here.
 
I've had my 1976 114 for about 10 years - love it.

I am not the fastest thing around - but - I can haul pretty much everything I want and some people and travel for 3+ hours comfortably. The later models have different latching mechanisms on the doors, larger fuel tanks and a 24v system. Out of those differences, the 90 gallon tanks are what I would like the most. I have flown a lot between CO and Okla - I can catch headwinds that make me stop for fuel so I keep my personal minimums, so that extra 20 gallons would give me the reserve I would need to continue without a stop.

They are not light birds and will eat up a lot of runway if you are up at elevation or have a high density altitude. I am based at KCFO - which is just next to Denver International - we can have 10K density altitudes on hot summer days. So you just have to plan around those.

I have had her on the Atlantic, the Pacific and the Gulf coasts - and when I get near sea level the performance is amazing.

There is a Commander Owners Group (Commander.org) - it's got a wealth of information and some great folks - its a great resource. Yes, you need to pay a nominal fee - but it's well worth it.

Good luck with your search!

Dean
 
codeeno said:
I've had my 1976 114 for about 10 years - love it.

I am not the fastest thing around - but - I can haul pretty much everything I want and some people and travel for 3+ hours comfortably. The later models have different latching mechanisms on the doors, larger fuel tanks and a 24v system. Out of those differences, the 90 gallon tanks are what I would like the most. I have flown a lot between CO and Okla - I can catch headwinds that make me stop for fuel so I keep my personal minimums, so that extra 20 gallons would give me the reserve I would need to continue without a stop.

They are not light birds and will eat up a lot of runway if you are up at elevation or have a high density altitude. I am based at KCFO - which is just next to Denver International - we can have 10K density altitudes on hot summer days. So you just have to plan around those.

I have had her on the Atlantic, the Pacific and the Gulf coasts - and when I get near sea level the performance is amazing.

There is a Commander Owners Group (Commander.org) - it's got a wealth of information and some great folks - its a great resource. Yes, you need to pay a nominal fee - but it's well worth it.

Good luck with your search!

Dean
Click to expand...
I agree with Dean 100%. I owned a 114-B and it was a great plane, very comfortable, stable and easy to maintain as Commanders were generally over built. The Commander Owner’s Group is worth the price of the subscription as the information available is top notch.

Never believe anyone who says these plane are hard to find parts for or to maintain - they do not know what they are talking about….

Contact Judi Anderson at Suncoast, Judi worked for Commander and as a broker for these planes knows or has a file on just about every tail number still in the air.

Jim
 
codeeno said:
I've had my 1976 114 for about 10 years - love it.

I am not the fastest thing around - but - I can haul pretty much everything I want and some people and travel for 3+ hours comfortably. The later models have different latching mechanisms on the doors, larger fuel tanks and a 24v system. Out of those differences, the 90 gallon tanks are what I would like the most. I have flown a lot between CO and Okla - I can catch headwinds that make me stop for fuel so I keep my personal minimums, so that extra 20 gallons would give me the reserve I would need to continue without a stop.

They are not light birds and will eat up a lot of runway if you are up at elevation or have a high density altitude. I am based at KCFO - which is just next to Denver International - we can have 10K density altitudes on hot summer days. So you just have to plan around those.

I have had her on the Atlantic, the Pacific and the Gulf coasts - and when I get near sea level the performance is amazing.

There is a Commander Owners Group (Commander.org) - it's got a wealth of information and some great folks - its a great resource. Yes, you need to pay a nominal fee - but it's well worth it.

Good luck with your search!

Dean
Click to expand...
Dean, I have family in Denver and have looked at flying my 114A into KCFO. How is it with 48 gallons and two folks (about 2980 TOW) in the summer? I live at sea level in Louisiana, and operating out of airports at 2000 feet is unusual, let alone 5500. FF Performance Plus says 2163 feet using Flaps 20 and lifting off at 67 kts and climbing at 93 kts. ( I use 1.3 as the safety distance factor for anyone checking me in the POH)
 
Last edited:
Chris Mixon said:
Dean, I have family in Denver and have looked at flying my 114A into KCFO. How is it with 48 gallons and two folks (about 2980 TOW) in the summer? I live at sea level in Louisiana, and operating out of airports at 2000 feet is unusual, let alone 5500. FF Performance Plus says 2163 feet using Flaps 20 and lifting off at 67 kts and climbing at 93 kts. ( I use 1.3 as the safety distance factor for anyone checking me in the POH)
Click to expand...
Chris, It's very doable. I've operated near max and never had a challenge. I am risk averse and also believe in a good safety cushion. For me, operating at KCFO - I break down and look at my W&B, ensure all is good there, then my performance calculations with a healthy margin of safety and finally - plan my departures for either mornings or evenings when it is cool. Morning are preferred because convective activity can cause delays and a bumpy ride.

I've had my 114 at Leadville (highest airport in North America KLXV) with 1/2 fuel, myself and a 200# pax. We took off from there around 9:00 AM local and it was more of a highspeed taxi down the runway until we lumbered in the air.

You are welcome to PM me if you would like and I'd be happy to discuss how I operate here versus Okla.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top