J
John Billheimer
Guest
I am in the process of going from a T210 which I have owned and operated for 20 years to a Beech A36 for a host of reasons. I am wondering if anyone has done a similiar transition?
Thanks
Thanks
AdamZ
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
- Messages
- 14,866
- Location
- Montgomery County PA
- Display Name
Display name:
Adam Zucker
Can't say I have but just curious why the switch?
He's classing-up, Adam. 
That joke aside, I'll look forward to reading the responses.
I have significant A36 (and of course, V35A, F33 and C33) time, and an adequate measure of 210 time, and I have a lot of respect for the 210. In the 210, you sit up all tall like an old Packard; in the Bo, you're more sports-car low-slung. In the 210, you ride in the shade, and unload out of the rain; in the Bo you... don't.
In the pattern, in a Bo, you can better see where you are going, but in the 210, you can lean forward and see what you need to see, so that is not such a big deal.
CG is a simpler task in the 210; it is tolerably close to the classic, "if it fits, it's in CG" model, while the Bo (yes, even the A36 to a limited degree) bears more scrutiny of aft loading.
The 210 is heavy on the controls, while the Bo is lighter and more responsive... which means, in IMC, the 210 is a lot less fussy.
Bonanza gear is robust and relatively maintenance free... the 210's... is not nearly so bad as some claim, but is definitely not up to the same standard.
Anecdotally, the Bonanza's a bit faster (for a given flight regime), but I do not possess hard numbers for that, so do not flame me. When I fly trips in tandem with my T210 buddy, I always slow it down a bit; I know that, if he needed or chose to fly higher, I'd be left far behind.
Third row of seats in an A36 are real seats, while in a 210 they are more like child seats, but neither plane works out to being a six robust adults and gear anbd fuel ride, anyway. 210 has much more flexible baggage-loading space, but the Bo has the big, honkin' double doors for loading. Of course, the pilot-side door on the Bonanza is single use only, and involves the use of cutting tools to open.
And that's about all I have to say about that.
That joke aside, I'll look forward to reading the responses.
I have significant A36 (and of course, V35A, F33 and C33) time, and an adequate measure of 210 time, and I have a lot of respect for the 210. In the 210, you sit up all tall like an old Packard; in the Bo, you're more sports-car low-slung. In the 210, you ride in the shade, and unload out of the rain; in the Bo you... don't.
In the pattern, in a Bo, you can better see where you are going, but in the 210, you can lean forward and see what you need to see, so that is not such a big deal.
CG is a simpler task in the 210; it is tolerably close to the classic, "if it fits, it's in CG" model, while the Bo (yes, even the A36 to a limited degree) bears more scrutiny of aft loading.
The 210 is heavy on the controls, while the Bo is lighter and more responsive... which means, in IMC, the 210 is a lot less fussy.
Bonanza gear is robust and relatively maintenance free... the 210's... is not nearly so bad as some claim, but is definitely not up to the same standard.
Anecdotally, the Bonanza's a bit faster (for a given flight regime), but I do not possess hard numbers for that, so do not flame me. When I fly trips in tandem with my T210 buddy, I always slow it down a bit; I know that, if he needed or chose to fly higher, I'd be left far behind.
Third row of seats in an A36 are real seats, while in a 210 they are more like child seats, but neither plane works out to being a six robust adults and gear anbd fuel ride, anyway. 210 has much more flexible baggage-loading space, but the Bo has the big, honkin' double doors for loading. Of course, the pilot-side door on the Bonanza is single use only, and involves the use of cutting tools to open.
And that's about all I have to say about that.
Last edited:
sba55
En-Route
I haven't made that transition, and I never will. But having flown both, there's no doubt in my mind that you will appreciate the Bonanza more. Overall, it's a much better plane:
- Quality-wise, all the fixtures (doors, panel, seats, fit of components) is rather car-quality like in a 210, while it's of higher quality in the Bo. Yes, those parts are more expensive, but you're paying more for quality. This has some real implications. Ever had to slam the door on a 210 (or any Cessna single)? Bonanza doors don't have to be slammed. It goes on....
- The handling might be a bit more difficult in IMC (which usually doesn't matter to me since I'm always on AP in IMC), but it's not a big difference, and I actually like the handling better. Reminds me of driving a towncar vs a Ferrari. Towncar's more stable, but that's not what I'm looking for - and it's only more stable as long as the road isn't challenging. Exactly the same story with the 210. Besides that, the 210 handles very poorly compared to a Bonanza. The control feel and the precision of the controls are orders of magnitude better in the Bo.
- The Bo's faster. Yes, high up, a turbo'd 210 will outrun a NA Bonanza, but that's not a fair comparison. A turbo'd or TN Bonanza will always outrun the 210 since the airframe is much more efficient (second to only some Mooneys). The Bo is also much more efficient in terms of fuel-consumption. I used to see 167 knots on 11.7 gph, which is quite nice....
- The gear makes a huge difference. It's virtually bullet-proof in Bonanzas. Beech had some amazing engineers.
You'll be happy with the transition.
-Felix
- Quality-wise, all the fixtures (doors, panel, seats, fit of components) is rather car-quality like in a 210, while it's of higher quality in the Bo. Yes, those parts are more expensive, but you're paying more for quality. This has some real implications. Ever had to slam the door on a 210 (or any Cessna single)? Bonanza doors don't have to be slammed. It goes on....
- The handling might be a bit more difficult in IMC (which usually doesn't matter to me since I'm always on AP in IMC), but it's not a big difference, and I actually like the handling better. Reminds me of driving a towncar vs a Ferrari. Towncar's more stable, but that's not what I'm looking for - and it's only more stable as long as the road isn't challenging. Exactly the same story with the 210. Besides that, the 210 handles very poorly compared to a Bonanza. The control feel and the precision of the controls are orders of magnitude better in the Bo.
- The Bo's faster. Yes, high up, a turbo'd 210 will outrun a NA Bonanza, but that's not a fair comparison. A turbo'd or TN Bonanza will always outrun the 210 since the airframe is much more efficient (second to only some Mooneys). The Bo is also much more efficient in terms of fuel-consumption. I used to see 167 knots on 11.7 gph, which is quite nice....
- The gear makes a huge difference. It's virtually bullet-proof in Bonanzas. Beech had some amazing engineers.
You'll be happy with the transition.
-Felix
J
John Billheimer
Guest
Thank you all very much as I am also new to this forum. The 210 has been a great ride for a long time with the flying I use to do. heavy loads in high country all over the West and a good IFR platform. My flying has changed over the recent years though and my 210 was in need of new interior and and some serious avionic upgrades all with my flying only about 60 hours a year and the plane sitting too much. I came across a partnership oppurtunity in an A36 at my home field and have decided to go in that direction. The A36 is the nicest I have seen from inside and out. From tip tanks to avionics including 530 Garmins and Avadyne MFD and everything yu could want so I am really ecited. I owned a 182 for a couple of years which I learned to fly in and have had my 210 for close to 20 years. Again thank you all for your input.
JB
JB
Doggtyred
En-Route
My interpretation of that statement is that the Bo is one of those planes you need to do TWO w&b's... one for departure and one for arrival with near empty tanks. It is very possible in a fully loaded Bo to be in limits on departure, and as you burn the fuel out of the tanks (which are forward of the spar), the CG will drift aft.
Can make for a nasty surprise when you go to flare in the landing and it drops out from under you.
I got about 45 cross country hours in a gorgeous late 90's model A36 with a silver crown panel, KLN 90 IFR gps, HSI and coupled autopilot. Was a joy to fly, and was a good instrument platform. Its been about 10 years since I flew those hours, but would own one today if I had the means.
wabower
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2008
- Messages
- 12,013
- Display Name
Display name:
Wayne
I flew 210's for 25 years and then owned a partial interest in an A-36 for reasons similar to yours. Before the 210's I had a F-Mooney, 180 and 250 Comanches and an S-35 Bo.
There are things you'll like about the Bo, and things you'll miss about the 210. If the Bo has tip tanks, both have plenty of fuel. The big bag doors and cowling access are much better on the Bo. Climbing up and down the wing and scuffing across the seat, then dealing with the passenger door are a PIA in the Bo, and you will miss the 210's ease of entry and getting all the pax loaded and secured before you strap in.
If you're tall and longwaisted, you'll like the 210 cabin better. I like to fly in the shade, so I'll take the 210 every time for comfort of flight. The handling qualities are a push. Beech is more responsive, but how much time do you hand-fly a cross-country machine. 210 is more stable and better instrument platform, but how much time do you spend hand-flying in IFR conditions?
They're both good airplanes, but neither is better than the other in all respects. Having a partner to split the ownership and fixed costs is a huge advantage, no matter which airplane you own.
There are things you'll like about the Bo, and things you'll miss about the 210. If the Bo has tip tanks, both have plenty of fuel. The big bag doors and cowling access are much better on the Bo. Climbing up and down the wing and scuffing across the seat, then dealing with the passenger door are a PIA in the Bo, and you will miss the 210's ease of entry and getting all the pax loaded and secured before you strap in.
If you're tall and longwaisted, you'll like the 210 cabin better. I like to fly in the shade, so I'll take the 210 every time for comfort of flight. The handling qualities are a push. Beech is more responsive, but how much time do you hand-fly a cross-country machine. 210 is more stable and better instrument platform, but how much time do you spend hand-flying in IFR conditions?
They're both good airplanes, but neither is better than the other in all respects. Having a partner to split the ownership and fixed costs is a huge advantage, no matter which airplane you own.