Most affordable XCountry Bird
- Thread starter Kingairer
- Start date
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
Asked myself this very question yesterday, and ran across a used but very well-kept Mooney for around $39K.
9.5 GPH and 140kt cruise is pretty darn good for $40K. I know Diamonds tend to be more fuel-efficient but they're also 10x expensive.
Asked myself this very question yesterday, and ran across a used but very well-kept Mooney for around $39K.
9.5 GPH and 140kt cruise is pretty darn good for $40K. I know Diamonds tend to be more fuel-efficient but they're also 10x expensive.
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
Probably going to end up with a Mooney of some type. Not sure of the specific with the best economy, but I'd venture to guess both the M20E and M20J do fairly well.
Probably going to end up with a Mooney of some type. Not sure of the specific with the best economy, but I'd venture to guess both the M20E and M20J do fairly well.
WacoFan
Bigly
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
I would check out two Cessna's:
The Cessna Airmaster - one of the first airplanes to get 1MPH per horsepower:
If you need more room, higher payload, faster, but not as efficient (but still very efficient for what it does) I offer the Cessna 195 Businessliner:
I would check out two Cessna's:
The Cessna Airmaster - one of the first airplanes to get 1MPH per horsepower:
If you need more room, higher payload, faster, but not as efficient (but still very efficient for what it does) I offer the Cessna 195 Businessliner:
flyingmaniac
Well-Known Member
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
You never stop, do you?
How about choosing an airplane that is still in production.
You never stop, do you?
How about choosing an airplane that is still in production.
imatworkallday
Well-Known Member
clayfenderstrat
Well-Known Member
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
Those 190 series Cessnas are beauties. Anybody know what size radial is in there? Anybody flown one? Looks like a blast to fly.
Those 190 series Cessnas are beauties. Anybody know what size radial is in there? Anybody flown one? Looks like a blast to fly.
WacoFan
Bigly
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
Cessna 190's were powered by Continental engines of 670cid and 240HP.
Cessna 195's were powered by Jacobs engines - 755cid and between 245 - 300HP depending upon year and engine selection. My choice is a 275hp Jacobs - I've seen one that was modified to accept a 450 P&W and several 330hp turbocharged Jacobs 195's - but I also saw a higher HP turbo model catch fire while taxing to the active and the higher HP Jacobs do not seem as bulletproof as the 275.
Cessna 190's were powered by Continental engines of 670cid and 240HP.
Cessna 195's were powered by Jacobs engines - 755cid and between 245 - 300HP depending upon year and engine selection. My choice is a 275hp Jacobs - I've seen one that was modified to accept a 450 P&W and several 330hp turbocharged Jacobs 195's - but I also saw a higher HP turbo model catch fire while taxing to the active and the higher HP Jacobs do not seem as bulletproof as the 275.
WacoFan
Bigly
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
Because there aren't very many airplanes in production today, or really since Cessna quit making the 185 in the mid-80's that I think are worth a crap. That's one reason. The other reason is that there are many on this site that don't understand how capable some of these older airplanes are - the Airmaster for example was basically the Mooney of its day. It reinforces that there is very little new, and by serving up models that have historically fit the niche that someone is looking for they can see where aviation has been in trying to achieve what they are currently looking for.
But mostly it is because nosewheels and horizontally opposed engines suck.
Because there aren't very many airplanes in production today, or really since Cessna quit making the 185 in the mid-80's that I think are worth a crap. That's one reason. The other reason is that there are many on this site that don't understand how capable some of these older airplanes are - the Airmaster for example was basically the Mooney of its day. It reinforces that there is very little new, and by serving up models that have historically fit the niche that someone is looking for they can see where aviation has been in trying to achieve what they are currently looking for.
But mostly it is because nosewheels and horizontally opposed engines suck.
swisspilot
Well-Known Member
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
Some time ago I was planning of buying a plane with an other guy, to go places with it but keep it cheap.
I came up with a Piper Arrow, I was looking at mooneys too, but the arrow was just a better deal.
An toher option was the Socata TB20 trinidad, but was really hard to find one at a good price..
Some time ago I was planning of buying a plane with an other guy, to go places with it but keep it cheap.
I came up with a Piper Arrow, I was looking at mooneys too, but the arrow was just a better deal.
An toher option was the Socata TB20 trinidad, but was really hard to find one at a good price..
WacoFan
Bigly
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
I always liked Tobago's, Trinidads, Tampico's for taking someone for a first ride. Great visability, comfortable, almost "car" seeming. Even nervous people tended to be relaxed in them.
I always liked Tobago's, Trinidads, Tampico's for taking someone for a first ride. Great visability, comfortable, almost "car" seeming. Even nervous people tended to be relaxed in them.
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
Piper Arrow's aren't terrible. If you want an efficent Arrow, you want to look at the straight wing Arrow's, probably the 180 horsepower model's. They are cheap, cheap, but a likely to be a ragged out former trainer. Not a bad plane, but not something I'd really want to own.
Piper Arrow's aren't terrible. If you want an efficent Arrow, you want to look at the straight wing Arrow's, probably the 180 horsepower model's. They are cheap, cheap, but a likely to be a ragged out former trainer. Not a bad plane, but not something I'd really want to own.
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
I had 1/2 interest in a Twin Comanche for a few years. I like having the second engine if doing a fair amount of hard IFR flying, and the Twinkie was about as economical as you could get.
I used to keep the power back some and flight plan 155 knots and 15 GPH total (7.5 per side). The machine would cruise at 165 or so if you wanted to accept the higher fuel burns. The IO-320 (160HP) is a good little engine.
I had 1/2 interest in a Twin Comanche for a few years. I like having the second engine if doing a fair amount of hard IFR flying, and the Twinkie was about as economical as you could get.
I used to keep the power back some and flight plan 155 knots and 15 GPH total (7.5 per side). The machine would cruise at 165 or so if you wanted to accept the higher fuel burns. The IO-320 (160HP) is a good little engine.
Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
Yeah a DA20 would be nice, but no luggage storage, and as you said, VFR only...And that breaks the deal for a real XC airplane for me. The retracts to me sound like a ton more money in MX costs, but ive never paid for my own mx on any plane, so i really have no idea.
Yeah a DA20 would be nice, but no luggage storage, and as you said, VFR only...And that breaks the deal for a real XC airplane for me. The retracts to me sound like a ton more money in MX costs, but ive never paid for my own mx on any plane, so i really have no idea.
Joe Gremlin
Well-Known Member
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
For production airplanes, I don't think you can go faster on a gallon of 100LL than you can in a Mooney. But when total cost of ownership is factored in, several other models also become reasonable candidates for affordable XC flying. Older Bonanzas, Vikings and Comanches can be fairly reasonable to own and maintain. And while they burn more than most Mooneys, they turn in decent cruise speeds which generally brings the total trip cost down over slower and less efficient birds.
And don't forget experimentals. Most RV's go pretty fast for the HP and fuel burn. And even if you didn't build it, you can still do all the MX yourself except the annual condition inspection which must be done by the holder of the repairmans cert or an A&P (does not have to be an IA like production planes). So experimentals can be very cheap to own as compared to production airplanes even if you buy a completed and flying example. And some of them make very economical XC platforms.
For production airplanes, I don't think you can go faster on a gallon of 100LL than you can in a Mooney. But when total cost of ownership is factored in, several other models also become reasonable candidates for affordable XC flying. Older Bonanzas, Vikings and Comanches can be fairly reasonable to own and maintain. And while they burn more than most Mooneys, they turn in decent cruise speeds which generally brings the total trip cost down over slower and less efficient birds.
And don't forget experimentals. Most RV's go pretty fast for the HP and fuel burn. And even if you didn't build it, you can still do all the MX yourself except the annual condition inspection which must be done by the holder of the repairmans cert or an A&P (does not have to be an IA like production planes). So experimentals can be very cheap to own as compared to production airplanes even if you buy a completed and flying example. And some of them make very economical XC platforms.
Alchemy
Well-Known Member
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
C182 or C182RG if you can deal with the insurance hurdles on the retract. Ugly as hell, not sexy, but it's probably the most practical cross country aircraft out there. The 182RG I used to fly had pretty ridiculous endurance, around 6 hours at 140 knots if I recall correctly. To top it off you could carry 4 people with luggage and still fill the tanks up. If it was always only going to be a one or two person trip a mooney might be better, but obviously the cabin is much smaller. I think the C182 is probably the most affordable of the single engine cross-country class airplanes.
C182 or C182RG if you can deal with the insurance hurdles on the retract. Ugly as hell, not sexy, but it's probably the most practical cross country aircraft out there. The 182RG I used to fly had pretty ridiculous endurance, around 6 hours at 140 knots if I recall correctly. To top it off you could carry 4 people with luggage and still fill the tanks up. If it was always only going to be a one or two person trip a mooney might be better, but obviously the cabin is much smaller. I think the C182 is probably the most affordable of the single engine cross-country class airplanes.
meritflyer
Well-Known Member
Re: Most affordagle XCountry Bird
Pilatus PC-12 or TBM 850.
:bandit:
Pilatus PC-12 or TBM 850.
:bandit:
TUCKnTRUCK
That guy
Mooney m20e is the fastest of the short body version. Most have 201 series speed mods already, and can get up close to 170kts at 10gph. They also mostly have manual gear which is usually cheaper to maintain. You can get a decent on for 35-45k
