Most economic Single Engine

DavidWhite said:
Find me a Bonanza that will do 160KTAS at 9.5GPH and I'll trade it in.
Click to expand...

I can do it on 10GPH, and that's burning auto fuel. The two tricks with old Bonanzas is a careful attention to rigging including the gear and doors, and getting rid of all the antennas. I don't know why, but every old Bo has some monstro, draggy antennas all over.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Do you buy 195 Knots burning 9.5 GPH?
Click to expand...

I do, yes. These airframes are very slick. Depending on the specifics of the build and builder, 190-200 is normal. The one I flew in. Did 190 @ 9, and 140 @ 4.
 
Toddvg said:
I have been looking into purchasing my first plane for the purpose of commuting. I work in PA and my family lives in MI, 6.5 hour drive each way. I want to purchase a cheap plane for my commute once or twice a week. It is 280 mile flight each way,

I just want a nice 2-4 seater that will cheap on fuel but also cheap to buy, I thought a 152 but seems to slow, then thought about a KIS TR-1 but I think wind will be to much of a factor.

Anyone have some ideas????
Click to expand...

Now, there's an oxymoron....
 
EdFred said:
The ad doesn't say 195 at 9.5gph.
Click to expand...

Taken from the description in the ad:

" I fly at 9500 to 10,500 all over the country I average 195kts..yes knots.. over the ground at 9.5 to 10mpg. No BS."

I had to read it again, but you are correct. I HATE when people mix units like that. So 195 knots = 224 MPH @ 10 MPG = 22.4 GPH. Several people before said 9.5-10 GPH for that speed is right so I suspect it is a mistype or that thing burns a whole lot of gas to go that fast.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Taken from the description in the ad:

" I fly at 9500 to 10,500 all over the country I average 195kts..yes knots.. over the ground at 9.5 to 10mpg. No BS."

I had to read it again, but you are correct. I HATE when people mix units like that. So 195 knots = 224 MPH @ 10 MPG = 22.4 GPH. Several people before said 9.5-10 GPH for that speed is right so I suspect it is a mistype or that thing burns a whole lot of gas to go that fast.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know. I was being roncachampish with that post. :D
I am pretty sure he meant gph and not mpg. I don't think an O-320 can burn 22.4gph even at full rich.

If I didn't have a 105lb dog and a shorter grass strip I go in and out of I'd be all over a 320.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
A few considerations, having spent a lot of my flying career in and around the area that you want to fly.

In the icing season you will need de-ice or you won't be going. If you have flexibility in your schedule and can accept this uncertainty for about 4-6 months out of the year then that's fine. If not, you're basically looking at a de-iced plane of some sort, which will probably put you towards a twin, and be nowhere near "cheap." If you're talking about doing this weekly, you want to minimize your flight time so you can spend more time with your family. A 150 won't help with this, and a 40 kt headwind (which happens frequently) will suddenly make the car faster.

To my mind, your best option is a Lancair 320/360. You'll be able to do the trip in about 90 minutes block time on 8-10 GPH. It probably gets about the same mileage as your car. It's experimental so that lowers a lot of parts costs and you can work on it yourself. Since you're going 190-200 kts, that means that a 40 kt headwind turns the 90 minute trip into a 110 minute trip. No big deal.

But keep in mind that you will need an instrument rating and a good portion of the year when there's ice in the forecast, you just won't be going. You'll also need to get some good training in the plane.
Click to expand...


:yes::yes::yes:

also, you need to gain a ton of proficiency and skill to acquire a reasonable dispatch rate and not get killed. I commute on an sr22t and it has been quite a journey from starting to fly in cavu skies to nasty low ifr. I do it for the sport and if i dont make it on time it does not matter. to each his own. I still believe it is better to hsve a pro pilot fly or at least tag along on business flgihts becuase your main purpose and worries are your business matters and the pro pilot only thinks about flying. thus the business flgiht comes with way less risk. low time business people will eventually pull a jfk jr.
 
The most economic plane I can find for that trip on a schedule would be a 182RG with TKS and that'll set you back $120k+. Reportedly the system works quite well on that airframe. It's not approved for 'know icing', but probably good enough to not kill yourself while trying to do this commute through the winter. If the trip was longer and 'known icing' a must, the next step up is a Bravo, Encore or Ovation with fiki TKS but now you are looking at $180k to hold the keys. You mentioned having family, if you want to actually take that family along you are looking at a A36 with TKS which puts you up to $210k on the purchase.

So so far my options are 4x and 6x and 7x the OPs purchase budget. How am I doing ? :D


If you have access to cheap tiedown space at both ends and are maybe able to borrow a car from your folks on short notice, any IFR aircraft will do. That's a long slog in a 150 (99kts), but I have run into some C-model mooneys (140kts) that can be had for your budget. They still have all their glorious Mooney weirdness, faded paint and leaky tanks, but some even have a wing leveler that may or may not help to keep the oily side down while you are dialing in a radio frequency on your clunky narco radio. None of them will have an IFR GPS, you'll just have to get really good at NDB approaches ;) .
 
Back to scope creep, but why bother spending that much on an A36 with TKS when there are tons of de-iced twins with better capabilities at half the price or less?
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Or just drive when he has to (which, apparently, he is already doing).
Click to expand...

The hangup with that approach is that you need to have the ability to return to base by car while leaving the plane at the remote location. If the aircraft budget is 30k, just keeping a car capable for the return trip at the remote location to account for that possibility is probably not an option. Unless he can borrow a car for a week from family, it means renting on short notice. Until I got my instrument rating, the Avis company made out like bandits on my short notice weeklong rentals. After I got my IR, this happened not as often, but if you pick up ice on the way in, it is a difficult argument to make that you didn't know about the icing conditions for the way out.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
So spend $100k+ more for a less capable airplane makes sense?
Click to expand...

When we looked at purchasing the Mooneh we took into consideration the cost of maintaining and flying it, which is why we ended up with a Mooney. There's no point in having an airplane you can't afford to fly - and I can afford to fly and maintain the Mooney without asking my parents for help.
 
If I had a twin, that burned 2x to 3x as much gas with 2 engines to save up for overhauls for and 2x as much mx, I would be able to afford to keep in in annual and that's about it. Yeah, I have a 100k+ airplane that is less capable than a 100k twin, but it's damn nice and I can afford to fly it.
 
Now if I had a mission that I NEEDED to get somewhere, and the cost wasn't a factor, I would be flying a FIKI twin (which is what I'm trying to get my boss to buy) but my situation is different and a twin does not fit my mission.
 
After reading through all the advice, I am beginning to think the OP can't get there from here :).
 
DavidWhite said:
When we looked at purchasing the Mooneh we took into consideration the cost of maintaining and flying it, which is why we ended up with a Mooney. There's no point in having an airplane you can't afford to fly - and I can afford to fly and maintain the Mooney without asking my parents for help.
Click to expand...

Of course, they did buy it for you.

That isn't a rub against you, but the point is if we're talking about planes that are nowhere near what the OP asked for, mentioning a $230k Bonanza with TKS is a ludicrous option in that case. Don't take it so personally. I still have the notion of trying to point the OP in a useful direction. ;)
 
Alexb2000 said:
Do you buy 195 Knots burning 9.5 GPH?
Click to expand...
Mine had an O-235 (118 HP?) when first flown and the builder said he did 160 knots. At around 60 hours total time the builder installed an O-320A model which was 150 hp but when it was rebuilt they put 10:1 pistons in which I believe bumps the HP up some. I cruise at 180 knots and the fuel flow computer reads 6.5 gph at cruise above 10k msl. Hand calculated based on time and the actual gallons used I believe works out closer to 8 gph. Regardless, 195 knots at 9.5 gph is what I would expect with 210 HP.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Of course, they did buy it for you.

That isn't a rub against you, but the point is if we're talking about planes that are nowhere near what the OP asked for, mentioning a $230k Bonanza with TKS is a ludicrous option in that case. Don't take it so personally. I still have the notion of trying to point the OP in a useful direction. ;)
Click to expand...

With a 30k budget, a 100k 'cheap twin' that eats 20k in operating expenses before you account for engine reserves is an equally ludicrous suggestion. Didn't you end up giving away one of your aircraft ? Barring another market collapse, that 230k deiced Bo is still going to sell for 200+ after a couple of years, a 'cheap twin' operated by someone who was looking into 150s to start with is going to go for parts and beercans if anything mechanical happens to it,

If you need a travel plane, you can fly a 40k mooney with cosmetic issues and basic avionics on the cheap. It's not going to be pretty, its not going to be fast, but if you don't require 100% mission completion it is going to get the job done.
 
weilke said:
Didn't you end up giving away one of your aircraft ? Barring another market collapse, that 230k deiced Bo is still going to sell for 200+ after a couple of years, a 'cheap twin' operated by someone who was looking into 150s to start with is going to go for parts and beercans if anything mechanical happens to it,
Click to expand...

First off, I put 1,000 hours on my Aztec and sold it with a run out and a mid time engine (vs the new and midtime engines I bought it with) for $500 less than I paid for it 4 years earlier. So my experience was positive.

I recommended a Lancair, which is a good option and still a reasonable price and fits the mission. The market can collapse again, likely will. I'm not getting where it makes sense to recommend a plane 8 times more than the budget. I didn't even recommend a twin and it doesn't fit his mission, but vs a $230k Bo? Absolutely.

G650. Bart was right. :rolleyes:
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I'm not getting where it makes sense to recommend a plane 8 times more than the budget. I didn't even recommend a twin and it doesn't fit his mission, but vs a $230k Bo? Absolutely.
Click to expand...

I think with my comment 'so far I am up to 6x the budget, how am I doing' I had made pretty clear that this was a tongue in cheek 'recommendation'.

The reality is, once you go into that territory around the great lakes, the minimum plane to fly on a schedule is something with known icing. The all around cheapest way to get that for a light passenger load is a Bravo with fiki TKS or an Encore. Anything below that is a hobby.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top