PhilosopherPilot
Well-Known Member
This isn't a financial decision. We can afford it, and we know it's not the smart thing to do financially. But you can't take the money with you.
Single Engine or Twin?
- Thread starter PhilosopherPilot
- Start date
This isn't a financial decision. We can afford it, and we know it's not the smart thing to do financially. But you can't take the money with you.
If its just You, wife and a kid, have you looked at the Mooney? Can't beat the speed for Fuel burn ratio....
Ask @ATN_Pilot
Ask @ATN_Pilot
alaskadrifter
Landing gear operator
First define your budget, then your mission. A single will typically have a far lower operating cost than a similar twin. My dream medium/long range plane would be a Bonanza. But it sounds like there are only three of you, and someone mentioned an Arrow. Not as fast as a Mooney, but more roomy.
EIR
It's 5 o'clock somewhere
I wasn't saying you can't afford it, I believe you took my post the wrong way. It's hard to help you find an aircraft when there is no budget. I have seen on more than one occasion when someone buys a light twin $100k and not more than a year later drops another $100k on engines. The pre-buy will not catch everything, and aircraft ownership is definitely a roller coaster, a fun one, but it has it's ups and downs.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
What is wrong with all the crazies suggesting the twin Comanche? Out of production for 44 years and just over 2000 built, whereas the Cherokee 6 had almost 8000 built with limited production running until 2007. While the OP states that he can afford it, no sense pouring money down the drain supporting a legacy complex twin when you could buy something slower and have a lot more operating budget for gas. Just my humble opinion.
Weren't 7999 6's gutted for cargo ops, run out and had the seats put back in it just before selling to unsuspecting 7th owners?
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Nope, low-time desert state examples abound on trade a plane.Weren't 7999 6's gutted for cargo ops, run out and had the seats put back in it just before selling to unsuspecting 7th owners?
Cessnaflyer
Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
If you are looking for real travel my first worry would be about de ice capabilities and not engines.
wheelsup
Well-Known Member
A jet is a time machine. Most piston singles and lower end piston twins are good at one thing, burning money.
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
Noted, and agreed about jets. I do not agree regarding piston singles and other GA aircraft, but I suspect that our respective truths don't necessarily have to be congruent, either.
bucksmith
Did you lock the doors?
I have, at times, recommended against de-icing cababilities in light twins. Of course, the people I was advising would likely use that capability to quickly get into trouble.
Either way, I have trust issues with boots being powered by piston engine(s).
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
I was just reading up on TKS mods to piston singles. They've apparently done a LOT of retrofits. Pretty interesting stuff.
z987k
Well-Known Member
They work great on a pa31. And then even if they don't it doesn't matter that much.
Richman
JC’s Resident Curmudgeon
Twinkies are a good choice....if you get the right Twinkie. Nothing wrong at all with a 50+ YO airframe...if you get one that's had the TLC. Get the wrong one, and it will eat your lunch.
Twins are a bargain these days. Gas got cheap, so if you want, you can roll the dice to see if it stays that way. If you are a professional pilot of any sort, the single vs twin debate is moot.
A normal SE breed is a 90% dispatch airframe. As a pro pilot, you will tend to manage your risks to a greater extent. You know that a trip over a wide area of low IFR probably isn't a good idea, along with night low IFR or over any kind of terrain. You, individually might take that risk, but it will get some second thoughts if you're taking your family with you. There's always the Cirrus option...but don't forget to add the 10 year repack into the cost of MX. You're not going to tangle with TRWs, which in Florida 8 months out of a year are legion. Trying to dodge them with XM or FIS data is a VERY bad idea. Ice of any kind is going to park you.
A piston twin, on the other hand, will probably move that number up to 95% IF you get one with de-ice and radar. You'll feel far more comfortable with the maybe/maybe not marginal situations.
As an aside, TKS is a nice...but unless the airplane already has it, it is prohibitively expensive to install.
I've got a turbo Bonanza. Back up alternator, Sat weather, Stormscope. NICE autopilot, WAAS GPS, ADSB in/out. With all that capability, I still won't take it LOW IFR unless I know I've got an out that's easily reachable. Low IFR the whole way is out of the question. TRWs need a clear path to deviate around. Ice is a non-starter.
I don't add up the cost, but it's probably the same as ATNs Mooney for the ancillary stuff...at the present. I spent some coin over the years to bring it to spec. Plan at least 15% of the purchase price to do the same. Non upgrade cost at annual time is about 3k. Hangars are spendy here so that's another 3.5k. Databases and sat WX subscription is another 1k. Fuel is $4.50 x 17 GPH for 190 knots true.
Good mechanical condition of the airframe trumps all, and it is wildly divergent. Buy the airplane that is set up the way you want already. Adding avionics and other items later is an immediate 50% upside down proposition...a waste. Paint and interior are the easiest and least expensive things to address. Get an A&P who is VERY familiar with the type to do a pre-purchase. Most airplanes have dealbreakers that will nail you financially if missed.
If you didn't want to roll the dice on a Twinkie, but wanted a twin, you could probably find a decent Seminole or Duchii. Beware each has airframe life limits. Senecas are nice, but a nice B-55 is probably in the same price range, and O-470s are solid. Finding radar in a Baron or Seneca is far more likely. Boots on short bodied Baron are kind of rarish unless it's a C/D/E.
Richman
Twins are a bargain these days. Gas got cheap, so if you want, you can roll the dice to see if it stays that way. If you are a professional pilot of any sort, the single vs twin debate is moot.
A normal SE breed is a 90% dispatch airframe. As a pro pilot, you will tend to manage your risks to a greater extent. You know that a trip over a wide area of low IFR probably isn't a good idea, along with night low IFR or over any kind of terrain. You, individually might take that risk, but it will get some second thoughts if you're taking your family with you. There's always the Cirrus option...but don't forget to add the 10 year repack into the cost of MX. You're not going to tangle with TRWs, which in Florida 8 months out of a year are legion. Trying to dodge them with XM or FIS data is a VERY bad idea. Ice of any kind is going to park you.
A piston twin, on the other hand, will probably move that number up to 95% IF you get one with de-ice and radar. You'll feel far more comfortable with the maybe/maybe not marginal situations.
As an aside, TKS is a nice...but unless the airplane already has it, it is prohibitively expensive to install.
I've got a turbo Bonanza. Back up alternator, Sat weather, Stormscope. NICE autopilot, WAAS GPS, ADSB in/out. With all that capability, I still won't take it LOW IFR unless I know I've got an out that's easily reachable. Low IFR the whole way is out of the question. TRWs need a clear path to deviate around. Ice is a non-starter.
I don't add up the cost, but it's probably the same as ATNs Mooney for the ancillary stuff...at the present. I spent some coin over the years to bring it to spec. Plan at least 15% of the purchase price to do the same. Non upgrade cost at annual time is about 3k. Hangars are spendy here so that's another 3.5k. Databases and sat WX subscription is another 1k. Fuel is $4.50 x 17 GPH for 190 knots true.
Good mechanical condition of the airframe trumps all, and it is wildly divergent. Buy the airplane that is set up the way you want already. Adding avionics and other items later is an immediate 50% upside down proposition...a waste. Paint and interior are the easiest and least expensive things to address. Get an A&P who is VERY familiar with the type to do a pre-purchase. Most airplanes have dealbreakers that will nail you financially if missed.
If you didn't want to roll the dice on a Twinkie, but wanted a twin, you could probably find a decent Seminole or Duchii. Beware each has airframe life limits. Senecas are nice, but a nice B-55 is probably in the same price range, and O-470s are solid. Finding radar in a Baron or Seneca is far more likely. Boots on short bodied Baron are kind of rarish unless it's a C/D/E.
Richman
Last edited:
