What are some fast reasonably priced singles?

So to Ed's point about building time - how about a Commander 112? At least then you can build time in comfort!
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
and there is a good reason for that;
-properly cared for fabric has a limitless lifespan. (It does not say anywhere in the eg, Ceconite manual "Fabric must be replaced after 30 years' use".)
-from a practical standpoint, properly applied and cared for fabric* has a limitless lifespan. See a lot of accident/incident reports on (properly applied and cared for) fabric planes? Nope. Is fabric a common topic on the Vikingchat forum? Nope.
-no clue what is meant by 'after a while, fabric gets funky'. Have never heard of, nor seen 'funky' fabric.

Is there an inexplicable and irrational aversion to fabric? Yes, and we** do not expect this to change anytime soon. In fact we are ok with it.
Finally, whenever we point out our opinion on these things there is inevitably a rash of anti-Viking or anti-wood or fabric people who will launch into a tirade. We are ok with that too.
As long as we have an opportunity to quietly and rationally present this information (gleaned by dozens of actual Viking owners who have flown theirs thousands of hours in all conditions and locations) to new aviators or those unfamiliar, all is good!


*this is not difficult
**the few Viking owners on POA, those on the Viking forum.

(I may not check back on this thread because of how replies to this info usually goes, but I am happy to chat by PM about it, or direct you to the Viking forum.)
Click to expand...

Actually the fabric outlasts the paint. Other stuff happens also. Older fabric planes usually have ugly cracked up paint. The paint will loose its flexibility and crack. I had a 1972 Decathlon about 5 years ago that was beautiful. The fabric was actually getting rotten under the paint and really weak. Not sure why? I love tube and fabric airplanes. I just choose not to have one with 40 year old fabric! If you fly the plane 10 years who is going to want a plane with 50 year old fabric? Someone will want it very cheap! There is a reason the Super Viking has no resell value. I am not buying a $35,000 plane that will take $35,000 to recover one day! I am into making money when I am done with a plane, not giving it away...
As for you guys asking how fast of a plane I want. I would like around 200 mph. My Model 12 is well over 200 at a higher power setting. I would like my traveling plane to be faster than my aerobatic plane :)
 
you could buy a nice Duke for $69K.......and run the good engine.:goofy:
 
Last edited:
Mooney M20E/Super 21 with the turbo. It even looks fast with that straight tail. :yesnod:
 
If you want a cool, fast, SE true 4 seater and luggage, it's the Commache 400.
 
rachelk.tailwinds said:
Mooney M20E/Super 21 with the turbo. It even looks fast with that straight tail. :yesnod:
Click to expand...

And it's perfectly roomy if one is a midget!

I can't fly in one for more than about 30-45 minutes. Gave someone a flight review in one, and it was horrible.
 
EdFred said:
And it's perfectly roomy if one is a midget!

I can't fly in one for more than about 30-45 minutes. Gave someone a flight review in one, and it was horrible.
Click to expand...


I thought it was just back seat room that was tight.
 
teejayevans said:
I thought it was just back seat room that was tight.
Click to expand...

I was right seat, and my right arm was jammed into my side, I couldn't sit where I wanted/needed to be because if I was at the same seat slot as the pilot our shoulders would be smashed together, and I had to tip my head as far to my left as I could and it still kept bumping the window and ceiling where it rounded over. And it's not like I'm a fatass. I'm 6-3, 195.
 
ktup-flyer said:
The TTx does 235kts @ 18 with 90 less HP. Lots of drag, I guess. I'd rather have a Mooney personally
Click to expand...

TTx is nice, I got to do a demo flight when it was still the Columbia 400, sweet airplane, never figured out why Cessna didn't add a chute when they redid it. That was a bad mistake, it was quite obvious by Cirrus's sales numbers today's market demands it.

I don't mind the big bore Mooneys either, but the OP doesn't like them.
 
EdFred said:
And it's perfectly roomy if one is a midget!

I can't fly in one for more than about 30-45 minutes. Gave someone a flight review in one, and it was horrible.
Click to expand...

To each their own. I'm 6'1" - 190, which I guess is a pretty big midget....:goofy:

I'm perfectly comfy in mine and have done 1200 nm trips in the past with two of us up front. I don't have any issues hitting my head on the roof, so maybe that one had overstuffed seats... :dunno:

Cheers,
Brian
 
Last edited:
pigpenracing said:
Thanks Mark,
I forgot about those planes. They are very cool!
Click to expand...


The more you read about them, the more you're going to like them I bet.

They are true 200m.p.h. airplanes.

I flew one and it handles crisp with very smooth stall characteristics.
 
txflyer said:
The more you read about them, the more you're going to like them I bet.

They are true 200m.p.h. airplanes.

I flew one and it handles crisp with very smooth stall characteristics.
Click to expand...

We have one flying around here. A guy that used to sell bonanzas back in the day. Kind of an old school look, but a very respectable airplane...
 
brian];1965495 said:
We have one flying around here. A guy that used to sell bonanzas back in the day. Kind of an old school look, but a very respectable airplane...
Click to expand...


I like the retro almost art deco look.

Put an IO-550 spinning a MT three blade and you'd have a monster! :yes:


7720083132_ece0b4616c_b.jpg
 
LevelWing said:
You'll be hard pressed to find an M20K in good shape without a run out engine for $65k or less.
Click to expand...

Your right.... I own one and it was double that but well worth it. OP needs to step up his game!!! Don't know of much for 65k in aviation unless it is experimental, 50 years old or needs work.
 
txflyer said:
I like the retro almost art deco look.

Put an IO-550 spinning a MT three blade and you'd have a monster! :yes:


7720083132_ece0b4616c_b.jpg
Click to expand...
Wow, that's hot! :yesnod: Looks like an undersized McCauley on it though. A 3 blade would be awesome.
 
txflyer said:
I like the retro almost art deco look.

Put an IO-550 spinning a MT three blade and you'd have a monster!
Click to expand...

Ok, I'm obviously a bonanza guy. But wow!

There is something to be said about the Art Deco looks. Today, the only big issue I have with "glass" is the utilitarian look. My oldie still has the Art Deco panel and it has "personally "... It looks good.
 
A buddy of mine owns this Meyers. It really got my attention when he bought it. I just sent him a email asking some questions. I like it because it is different.
 

Attachments

  • meyers.jpg
    meyers.jpg
    145 KB · Views: 48
Biggest bang for your buck will always be the Mooney. 2 fewer cylinders to care for than the Comanche or Bo. No gear motors, either. The short bodied Mooneys can easily be had for the OP's money. Yeah, not a lot of back seat room, but I hardly ever use the back seat anyway.
 
steingar said:
Biggest bang for your buck will always be the Mooney. 2 fewer cylinders to care for than the Comanche 250 or Bo. No gear motors, either. The short bodied Mooneys can easily be had for the OP's money. Yeah, not a lot of back seat room, but I hardly ever use the back seat anyway.
Click to expand...

Fixed. The Comanche 180 was a 4 cylinder.
 
EdFred said:
Fixed. The Comanche 180 was a 4 cylinder.
Click to expand...

My A&P restored a Comanche 180, and I have flown it. It was very nice. I wouldn't hesitate to buy one or an M20C.
 
I would consider a Comanche 250 or 260 ,a lot of plane for the money.
 
Can't beat the 195 for nostalgia and Art Deco, and it's got a very roomy interior! :wink2:
 
Last edited:
frfly172 said:
I would consider a Comanche 250 or 260 ,a lot of plane for the money.
Click to expand...

You aren't allowed to suggest a Comanche on this board - it's an unwritten rule. You can only suggest Mooneys and Bonanzas, and even hinting at buying a Comanche is verboten because they are apparently pieces of ****.
 
EdFred said:
You aren't allowed to suggest a Comanche on this board - it's an unwritten rule. You can only suggest Mooneys and Bonanzas, and even hinting at buying a Comanche is verboten because they are apparently pieces of ****.
Click to expand...

Comanche was the best small plane Piper made of the metal cruiser genre. Even though it is not as kind to fly as a Bonanza, it is more forgiving of excess energy than a Mooney. A Bo you have to actively screw up a landing, a Comanche you can do it accidentally, a Mooney you need to pay particular attention to not.
 
EdFred said:
You aren't allowed to suggest a Comanche on this board - it's an unwritten rule. You can only suggest Mooneys and Bonanzas, and even hinting at buying a Comanche is verboten because they are apparently pieces of ****.
Click to expand...

But....you just did. :yikes::hairraise::yikes: :goofy:
 
EdFred said:
Where?
Click to expand...

Who else was complaining about Comanches?.....but, you?:D


...everyone else is just chest beating on the model aircraft they own....:rofl:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • pic1.JPG
    pic1.JPG
    204.7 KB · Views: 129
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top