The mythical affordable LSA?

jpower

jpower

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
1,350
Location
Northern Virginia
Display Name
Display name:
James
I've been wondering about this for a while now. There's this airplane out there called the Quasar Lite that nobody really seems to know much about. It's powered by a 2cyl HKS engine that produces 60 hp. It can fit two people in a cabin wider than a 172 and cruises at right around 115 knots. It does have fairly poor climb performance, but can get over 45 miles to the gallon (statute miles, that is), because the engine sips between 1.8 and 2.5 gph. It sells new for around $100k loaded. Engine overhauls only cost around $2000 for parts and labor (does not include shipping), though the TBO is a realistic 1000 hours. Is this the mythical affordable light sport aircraft, especially if/when some begin appearing on the used market?

What say you? Supporting documentation below.

Page from the Brazilian manufacturer (in Portuguese but easy to navigate)
QL Brochure (from the US distributor)
Specs page (also from the US distributor)
Engine FAQ
Wired article (photo of interior/seats outdated)
Dan Johnson review (for shots of the current interior and the thoughts of someone else)
 
I'd have to agree with bartmc that $100k isn't exactly a number that stands out as affordable - given the competition.

For example, except for the small size of its cockpit, the Sonex can get about the same MPG and cruise at a higher speed and has an acquisition cost in the neighborhood of $30k, plus build labor. Below is a graphic from the Sonex web site (biased toward them, obviously):

mpg_graph.jpg
 
affordable is a relative term. IMO the vast majority of new LSA aircraft have failed to attain the mythical status of "affordable". For most pilots of average income and without access to an inheritance windfall, "affordable" means flying a 20-60 year old aircraft.
 
More of the aging fleet will have to be destroyed by whatever means (crashes, neglect, bad maintenance, whatever) before $100K is the right price point.

You can buy a lot more performance for $100K still right now. Especially right now.

Heck, some of the timed out (by their standards) CAP Cessna 182 aircraft auctioned off with run-out engines and about 6000 hours on the airframe for barely over $25K in the last big auction.

Run-out meaning they'd hit TBO, not on condition. All were reasonably maintained and even worst case were flown no harder than any rentals out there.

Slap and engine on it if you feel the need and go fly the hell out of it.

The reason they go that low is it's cash and carry... You win the bid, you dump the cash. And then you put it in the shop and dump another wad. Many folk do not have the capital to do that in a single year. Or we're gun-shy in a weak economy.

When that type of aircraft is available that cheap, and even better owner-hangared pristine ones are still less than the LSA, you're paying a lot of money for very little performance.

It boils down to being brand new, which will always be a draw for some owners, and also for some, the ability to finance. That and maybe if the aircraft has a legitimate business purpose, tax advantages. Sometimes. (I am not a tax attorney and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express this week.)

Sure, a brand new 182 will cost almost five times the LSA price from Cessna, but they don't do anything better than their older cousins. In fact, they're worse on payload after putting the G1000 on board, lots of leather and people pleasing modern automotive amenities, and two hundred fuel drain sumps. ;)
 
The problem with 'affordable' aircraft (beside not being affordable) is the cost after purchase. In Missouri, the personal property tax would be several thousand $ a year, and insurance up there, too.
 
tinerj said:
The problem with 'affordable' aircraft (beside not being affordable) is the cost after purchase. In Missouri, the personal property tax would be several thousand $ a year, and insurance up there, too.
Click to expand...
So this is why Back Yard Flyer is made (and mostly sold) in Missouri. $20k ready-to-fly and no need to register, keeping it away from a taxman.
 
I totally agree that the $100k mark is too expensive for now. What I was thinking more about is down the road, when these will be on the used market. Some LSAs are selling for more like $50k on the used market, which gets more attractive. As I see it, there are two segments of LSA folks. Those who are perfectly healthy and want a less expensive way into flying and those who need another way to keep flying after letting a medical lapse. If those who let their medicals lapse take the initial hit of buying the new airplane and then sell it back at a lower cost, it becomes much less expensive.

What I was more thinking about was the operating costs, because this airplane would operate for less than even a 150. You save $24/hr on fuel (at $6/gal) and $6/hr (assuming you get 2000 hours on a 150 and 1000 on the Quasar) on engine reserve. Over a year with, say, 100 hours of flying, that's $3000. At a flight school putting 1500 hours per year on an airplane (just a guess), that's a savings of $45,000 per plane that they could pass on in lower rental and instruction rates.
 
The Brazilian site says it is a Jabiru engine:

"Jabiru 2200, um motor de 4 tempos, 4 cilindros opostos e 85 hp."
 
tinerj said:
The problem with 'affordable' aircraft (beside not being affordable) is the cost after purchase. In Missouri, the personal property tax would be several thousand $ a year, and insurance up there, too.
Click to expand...
exactly. I can afford a lower-end 172 right now. But the maintenance, overhauls, insurance, tax, and everything else that continues to happen long after the initial capital outlay is history is what stops me dead in my tracks whenever I think about it.

jpower said:
What I was more thinking about was the operating costs, because this airplane would operate for less than even a 150. You save $24/hr on fuel (at $6/gal) and $6/hr (assuming you get 2000 hours on a 150 and 1000 on the Quasar) on engine reserve. Over a year with, say, 100 hours of flying, that's $3000. At a flight school putting 1500 hours per year on an airplane (just a guess), that's a savings of $45,000 per plane that they could pass on in lower rental and instruction rates.
Click to expand...
I followed some of the Quasar links that James provided. That is an incredibly affordable aircraft, once you get over the purchase price. If only the GA planes could approach this level of affordability. :(
 
Last edited:
Rigged4Flight said:
exactly. I can afford a lower-end 172 right now. But the maintenance, overhauls, tax, and everything else that continues to happen long after the initial capital outlay is history is what stops me dead in my tracks whenever I think about it.
Click to expand...

I'm was in the same spot.... looked at buying planes under $40k and joined a flying club instead.
 
MSPAviator said:
I'm was in the same spot.... looked at buying planes under $40k and joined a flying club instead.
Click to expand...

It's not that expensive unless you make it. Get a solid plane to begin with, find an A&P that would RATHER you do most of the light work. Buy a plane like a Cessna 150/172 or Cherokee that are dead simple machines with an plethora of used parts and a decent pool of PMAed stuff. Me personally, I'd rather have a basic VFR 1960s vintage cessna 150 all to myself than deal with a flight club. I'm sure some are great, just not for me.
 
bartmc said:
I'm trying to muster up the gall to say that 100K is affordable.
Click to expand...

My thoughts as well.

RyanShort1 said:
The Apollo LSA is about 30K cheaper, and it's a legitimately good aircraft from my perspective. I'm training about 4 students in one right now.

http://www.tampabayaerosport.com/Apollolsa.html

That is impressive for the price I was also going to suggest the Aerotrek at 76K
http://www.aerotrek.aero/

But the Apollo seems very similar.

Ryan
Click to expand...

MSPAviator said:
I'm was in the same spot.... looked at buying planes under $40k and joined a flying club instead.
Click to expand...

Smart move IMHO.
 
My LSA cost me $20,000.

It may come as a surprise to some of you, but used aircraft often cost less than new aircraft.
 
My concerns about LSA's from a buyers standpoint is what happens to the LSA market if the 3rd class medical is eliminated?

Wouldn't a buyer with $60K rather have an IFR cross country bird like the Comanche for $55K?
 
Alexb2000 said:
Wouldn't a buyer with $60K rather have an IFR cross country bird like the Comanche for $55K?
Click to expand...
Only takes a couple of annuals on Comanche for the owner to get the picture.
 
If you're willing to go 2stroke(fine by me BTW) you can get into the 2 seat 'fat ultralights' that LSA & SP were adopted to address used around $5000.
 
As far as affordable LSAs go, Quasar is far from the best example. Firstly, it's not the lowest up-front price (I'll list examples), and secondly, the support of airplanes is even more important than dealership service for cars (although carmakers are trying their darnest to change that). The problem is that you inevitably need replacement parts. When I looked at S-LSAs years ago, I had no appreciation for it. I thought, it's a new airplane, what can go wrong... and if it does, what's the big deal? The experience with N28GX helped to right this misconception.

The problem with the pressure sender was the biggest hassle. It had to be replaced again and again, until Remos came up with a field upgrade kit for a remote pressure sender. The aircraft incurred a significant downtime in every occurence. It was like driving a pre-Ford Jaguar, with the happy difference that Remos eventually made it right.

Aside from the sensor, a skylight broke once. Again, you cannot just cut a piece of plexiglass and superglue it in => downtime. A renter smashed the right wingtip upon the hangar => downtime. In each case the part had to be gotten from Germany. I am sure the builders of experimentals feel smug just about now. But the point is, manufacturer's support is vital and Quasar loses big time because of that.

If the purchase price was the main factor, I would look at these before Quasar:

* Allegro 2007. Last time time I checked it was $72k. It's more like $80..85k now, but still noticeably cheaper than Quasar. It's built in North Carolina, and honestly, it's as cheap as 1942 Cub. But it's a great performer aerodynamically, if you can get over the lack of amenities and the center Y-stick. It's basically the lowest point of what can be called a real airplane.

* X-Air LS. Used to be $60k, now more like $75..80k. There were some doubts about the viability of the company, and they do not sell much, losing squarely to their one-time rival Aerotrek. However, I know one guy who has one and flies the wings off it, taking it to back-country strips. It may seem like an overgrown experimental, has a fuel tank cap on a zipper and lexan windshield, but it may be a dependable airplane with decent performance.

* Aerotrek. The sticker in 2012 is $79k, and it's built by the "villains" of Eurofox case. It's a well-proven airplane, which sells about 8 to 12 each year. I do suspect that the advertised price is low-balled, by looking at the list of options. I do not have any personal exposure to it.

* RANS S-7LS: $91k in 2012. They do not come as real as this, for crying out loud this airplane was certified under Part 23 in Recreational category. Kinda expensive, although still cheaper than Quasar. Excellent support, well-proven. The only downside - only comes as a taildragger.

* RANS S-6LS: $83k ready to fly, and then $11k in rado option. Yeah... Still, it's a nosedragger, and its cross-wind performance is amazing. Ugly-looking, ragwing. It's for those who like to fly, not admire their airplanes.

There's also a bunch of airplanes that notionally come a shade above Quasar, yet I would choose over it: Champ 7EC ($116k in 2012), WAC, J170-SP like that one Eric has (he's got it for $90k, I believe). There's also a new entrant, Pipistrel Virus, being promised in the $80k bracket. It's a bit special though. But the point is, Quasar seems like a very strange flag-bearer for "affordable LSA". I have to ask if the OP did any research and comparison before zooming in on Quasar.
 
Henning said:
If you're willing to go 2stroke(fine by me BTW) you can get into the 2 seat 'fat ultralights' that LSA & SP were adopted to address used around $5000.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's the case. Kolbs and the likes go for about $40k. You can get single-seaters 103s in $25k category with Hirth 33: Kolb Firefly, Gull, Belite. The Backyard Flier is the absolute champion with $20,500 in part because they use the Generac engine. Frankly I plainly do not believe in a $20k 2-seat fat ultralight unless you include a weight-shift of course.

P.S. Just the kit of Quicksilver GT-500 with a 582 engine is $31.5k.
 
Last edited:
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
It may come as a surprise to some of you, but used aircraft often cost less than new aircraft.
Click to expand...

That's not the point.

One of the big selling points about LSA's to start with was it's affordability right from the factory... Yes, they are less than half the cost of a new 172, however yes, they still cost more than a house.
 
zaitcev said:
I don't think it's the case. Kolbs and the likes go for about $40k. You can get single-seaters 103s in $25k category with Hirth 33: Kolb Firefly, Gull, Belite. The Backyard Flier is the absolute champion with $20,500 in part because they use the Generac engine. Frankly I plainly do not believe in a $20k 2-seat fat ultralight unless you include a weight-shift of course.

P.S. Just the kit of Quicksilver GT-500 with a 582 engine is $31.5k.
Click to expand...

You're talking new prices. The depreciation on these is worse than anything flying. You can find Challengers sub $10,000, Quicksilver MXII as well, on amphibs even. I see these deals on Barnstormers all the time.

EDIT: Yep, a quick browse of ultralights on Barnstormers shows several 2 seat 2stroke machines between $4500 and $7500.
 
Last edited:
fgcason said:
That's not the point.

One of the big selling points about LSA's to start with was it's affordability right from the factory... Yes, they are less than half the cost of a new 172, however yes, they still cost more than a house.
Click to expand...

Not really. I was involved in LSA from the very beginning. Price of airplanes had nothing to do with the ruling. The cost of certification was drastically reduced and those saving are being passed onto the consumer. Cost of operation, maintenance, parts, all much cheaper than certified aircraft, and there is the mistake most people make. You are comparing new planes to used planes. ;)

A new RV-12 cost $67k unpainted BTW. :D
 
Last edited:
fgcason said:
That's not the point.

One of the big selling points about LSA's to start with was it's affordability right from the factory... Yes, they are less than half the cost of a new 172, however yes, they still cost more than a house.
Click to expand...

There was no selling point to LSA. LSA/SP were regulatory choices to get the 2 seat 'fat ultralight' market that was hauling rides for money completely outside regulation legally under the auspices of providing training for sale. Then these people would buy 2 seaters and haul friends and family under the same auspices. Enough people got killed that the FAA had to come up with a very low footprint, low involvement industry enforced regulatory environment (you can thank SCUBA industry for sterling sampling of the concept.) that was just trying to assure very minimum standards of training and quality of machine.
 
bartmc said:
I'm trying to muster up the gall to say that 100K is affordable.
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better myself.

$10k for a Pietenpol Air Camper is an affordable LSA.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Henning said:
EDIT: Yep, a quick browse of ultralights on Barnstormers shows several 2 seat 2stroke machines between $4500 and $7500.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the tip. I was just going to start researching the used ultralight market. I'm a complete novice in that though. They do not have logbooks any more than cars, do they? So how do I know the deprecation? Cars have odometers.
 
My favorite LSA's are the CTLS and Quad City Challenger. And now that I moved to my almost final house, ive decided to not buy a twin or Cirrus but get a low and slow LSA. No hassle with medicals (not that I had any issues, but now I just don't have to care). Also, 10-25 GPH for the cirrus or twin. And the cost of annuals and overhauls. LSA is so much cheaper and is still exciting to me. I'm actually looking at E-LSA and floats/tri gear.
 
fgcason said:
That's not the point.

One of the big selling points about LSA's to start with was it's affordability right from the factory... Yes, they are less than half the cost of a new 172, however yes, they still cost more than a house.
Click to expand...

zaitcev said:
Thanks for the tip. I was just going to start researching the used ultralight market. I'm a complete novice in that though. They do not have logbooks any more than cars, do they? So how do I know the deprecation? Cars have odometers.
Click to expand...

You know nothing except what you asses. I started with UL at 16, no rules nor requirements, what can go wrong? $2500 bought a brand ne Eiper Quicksilver with the HP 2 cyl Chrysler 25hp 2 stroke and a foam core FRP prop. Came with an assembly and flight manual, quite easy to learn to hop and fly squeeze throttle for up, let go to come down. This is as raw as flying comes until you get into UL Gyro and Helo copters. This is why the prices are low, no certification for those who aren't comfortable staking their life on their judgement. Since crazy and brilliant people are both typically paupers, cheap used ultralights are the rule rather than the exception.
 
Problem is everyone wants a mini-bo with tv for chump change. you want to fly cheap? Plenty of used ultralights and homebuilts that are lsa legal.
Oh you want something brand new? Less than 100K how about less than 10K a bunch less
But but but. Stop whining people and go fly.
 
jmp470 said:
My favorite LSA's are the CTLS and Quad City Challenger. And now that I moved to my almost final house, ive decided to not buy a twin or Cirrus but get a low and slow LSA. No hassle with medicals (not that I had any issues, but now I just don't have to care). Also, 10-25 GPH for the cirrus or twin. And the cost of annuals and overhauls. LSA is so much cheaper and is still exciting to me. I'm actually looking at E-LSA and floats/tri gear.
Click to expand...

The Challenger is a great little airplane, I have owned 2 of them and will be buying another as soon as the boy is out of school.
 
Alexb2000 said:
My concerns about LSA's from a buyers standpoint is what happens to the LSA market if the 3rd class medical is eliminated?
Click to expand...

My LSA won't be worth any more than a POS Cessna 150. I'll probably lose $5K or so.

But I'm not holding my breath.
 
denverpilot said:
It boils down to being brand new, which will always be a draw for some owners
Click to expand...

Bingo. And this takes the somewhat rare combination of wealth and stupidity. IMHO, it's like buying a brand, new BMW 750li for $100K+ -- or buying a 4-year old version for $35,900.

To me, that's just a no-brainer decision, but I personally know guys who will go into debt to finance the new ones.

Quite frankly, I'm glad these people exist -- otherwise there wouldn't be any nice, lightly used Lexus' (Lexi?) for me to buy. :D
 
Jay Honeck said:
Bingo. And this takes the somewhat rare combination of wealth and stupidity. IMHO, it's like buying a brand, new BMW 750li for $100K+ -- or buying a 4-year old version for $35,900.

To me, that's just a no-brainer decision, but I personally know guys who will go into debt to finance the new ones.

Quite frankly, I'm glad these people exist -- otherwise there wouldn't be any nice, lightly used Lexus' (Lexi?) for me to buy. :D
Click to expand...

Some of us nuts just lease one for a $1000 a month, all maintenance paid, full warranty, fixed low depreciation, etc. More important lately, when hail pounds it to death we re not stuck with a seriously devalued asset. Same thing if it gets hit. That's the only way to buy a luxury car new IMO.
 
For those looking for an inexpensive LSA... how about the Bushcat? (formerly called Cheetah). Less than $50K. 'was mentioned on ByDanJohnson as a good budget LSA.
Link to Bushcat
 
Dean said:
That will never happen, the FAA will never do away with the 3rd class medical for a standard category aircraft.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by 'standard category'? One can fly anything that meets LSA criteria, like a Piper J-3 Cub, some Taylorcraft, some Ercoupes, etc., right now on a DL under Sport Pilot license or privileges.
 
Geico266 said:
Not really. I was involved in LSA from the very beginning. Price of airplanes had nothing to do with the ruling. The cost of certification was drastically reduced and those saving are being passed onto the consumer. Cost of operation, maintenance, parts, all much cheaper than certified aircraft, and there is the mistake most people make. You are comparing new planes to used planes. ;)

A new RV-12 cost $67k unpainted BTW. :D
Click to expand...

Gotta throw my support behind the RV-12. Vans has always made aircrafts for the middle class pilot in mind. Of course, you can build an RV-12 cheaper if you decided to go with a FWF kit that uses the UL260iS engine instead of the Rotax 912. You lose about 20 lbs of useable load, but (from what I've been reading) the kit is $4k cheaper.

Plus, I got to admit, I love the profile of RV-12 with the ULPower cowling.

Link to RV-12 with ULPower cowling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top