I got to admit that I'm not reading every post. But what about a 205? If I remember from another topic, the 205 may be a little more economical than the 206 (but I could be wrong).

I'm with m6rv6, those older bonanza will get in and out of some pretty rough stuff in short order even fully loaded. throw on tip tanks and it performs even better. you wouldn't be sorry to buy the bonanza !

I had a 67 182 for 7 years and now have had an S35 for nearly 4 years. There's nowhere that I took my 182 that I haven't taken my Bo. The 182's weak link is the nose gear attach point, a 206 is much stronger in that regard. The Bo is much stronger than the 182, not only in the nose gear but the mains also. The gear on my plane is the same as under a Baron of the same year that has a gross weight more than 2000 pounds more than my Bo. I have two more inches of prop clearance than my 182 which had a 6.00x6 nose tire. No horizontal tail to catch rocks. You do have a low wing, and therefore flaps, that can catch rocks but so far I have no damage. With myself and 40 gallons in both planes at a density altitude of 5000 the 182 gets off the ground in 450 feet, my Bo 550 feet. And the Bo weighs a couple hundred pounds more than the 182. The 182 can fly a little slower in the pattern, making it a little more comfortable in tighter canyons. Once airborne the Bo just kills the 182, far out climbing it and I am 47 knots faster in cruise. I get 175 knots true on 15 GPH. You really want an S model as they are the first year of the 520 and the big cabin. Once you get into the V35's they start to get heavy. I have a useful load of 1340 with two seats in. The reason I bought the Bo was because of the huge baggage area with just two seats in, easily a third to a half more than the 182. Just like in my 182 after three annuals everything is right and I'm cruising along normally now maintenence wise. Nothing wrong on the last annual and it cost me $1200, slightly more than the average 182 annual. One thing you'll notice with the Beech's is they are built to last, nothing vibrates loose. You pay for that in an increased empty weight. Insurance is now $1500 a year, 50% more than the 182. I had zero retract time when I bought it and still haven't got an instrument rating, no problem getting insurance from day one. When looking at cross country airplanes look at miles per gallon, not gallons per hour. Most Mooneys are more efficient than the Bo but you would be hard pressed to find a worse airplane to land off pavement. The 210 and the Bo are close MPG wise but I've never been a fan of the Cessna RG gear and I think the tires on the 210 are smaller than my Bo. I run 7.00x6's on the mains and 5.00x5's on the nose. Now is a great time to buy an S model, prices are down.

With a better perspective on your actual parameters, I'd say the Bonanza is probably the best choice.

Stay AWAY from the Mooneys if you are going to operate on ANY surface other than pavement, frankly. Great airplanes, airport to airport, but they have near zero prop clearance, and it is really easy to touch down prop first....which you REALLY don't want to do in the hinterlands.

Finally, insurance cost a factor?? Depending on your experience level, insurance on a retractable might be pretty steep initially.

MTV

all pretty good ideas, guys. my partner has 2 bo's and they are nice, but like to think of them as mostly pavement
pounders. faster for sure. funny thing about bo's, ain't never seen one at vines or soldier or cabin, but at all the nice grass strips. they have nice over the nose vis., but seem a little strange to me in the rougher stuff...
a 182 205 or 206 with some VG's and a stol kit deliver a ton of utility, and really are nice cross-country
mounts with a good auto-pilot. i must say that they are very well built, but i'd leave them to the smoothe stuff.
any of the above birds with the 540 or 550 is almost fast enough, and has great short and soft capabilities...

Finally, insurance cost a factor?? Depending on your experience level, insurance on a retractable might be pretty steep initially.

I got a quote from AOPA for a Comanche 250 with a hull value of $45k and it was $2000 a year. This is quite higher than my last bill ($900 a year for a Cherokee 235) but I'm sure it will come down with more time in type. I have 400 hours, Instrument rated and about 25 retract.

The responses pretty much mirror my initial take on the original choices:

Bonanza - hard to go wrong - great cross country performance and able to do dirt strips as long as they are not too rough

Comanche - Pretty much the same as the Bo - but the gear is more delicate especially with side loading - big advantage is market price for these right now. I also happen to think they are a bit roomier inside than the Bo.

Mooney - for paved runways only unless it is a really well maintained dirt strip.

Cessna 210 series - Late model T210 will do what I want but is out of my price range - earlier model 210s are a bit more maintinence than I want to deal with.

Cessna 205 or 206 - Probably does not have the cruise speed I'm looking for and after checking pricing on the 205 - it is still too high for me. The 206 is way too much money for my budget. As one person mentioned - the risk to 205/206 airplanes south of the border is also a signifigant downside.

So where does this leave me - I think I am back to shopping for the best deal I can find on either a comanche or a bo. For those with experience with either of these:

What is the downside to a J model bonanza versus the S? I know the difference in specs but the later model S is a signifigant price bump and I think the older J, K, M or N model will do what I need. I know the big difference is the engine (470 vs. 520).

Any similar info on Comanche 250 vs 260? I know there are several type specific groups and I plan on asking these questions there as well but there seems to be a wealth of experience on this board and I'd appreciate any insight.

Thanks
Patrick

Another issue you may want to take into consideration is repair/parts replacement costs. I believe annual costs were already discussed but it seems that Mooney's and Bonanza's seem to be in a different catagory. Maybe the mechanics figure all Bo-drivers are Drs./Lawyers and charge accordingly. JK
While all aircraft parts are expensive, some are more so than others. Years ago I had a friend with a Bonanza and when ever we had to replace/repair things I seem to remember that parts for it were considerably higher in cost than a comparable part for say a Cessna.
I know of a couple guys that keep there Mooney's at their farm strip and seem to have no problem flying them out of fields. Research "Flying Farmers" and you may find some of these farmers flying all kinds of stuff off of farm strips.
WW

patrickmathews wrote:So where does this leave me - I think I am back to shopping for the best deal I can find on either a comanche or a bo. For those with experience with either of these:

What is the downside to a J model bonanza versus the S? I know the difference in specs but the later model S is a signifigant price bump and I think the older J, K, M or N model will do what I need. I know the big difference is the engine (470 vs. 520).

Any similar info on Comanche 250 vs 260? I know there are several type specific groups and I plan on asking these questions there as well but there seems to be a wealth of experience on this board and I'd appreciate any insight.

Thanks
Patrick

Commanche sits lower to the ground and has a lot less visibility out the windows. Just look at them, a lot less window area there. Always look at the empty weight of the Bo you are buying. The J35's can be light and with a 470 they perform well. The factory empty weight was 1820, anyone over about 1900 empty is starting to get pig like. It was the first one with fuel injection. The J35 has the one piece rear seat that makes it a little harder to remove and doesn't allow seating for just three. It has the smaller baggage area as Beech installed a box behind the baggage door to restrict the size of this area. Look at the ads, many J35 owners have put in 520's and 550's in these planes. The 470 is the least desirable of the modern engines in the Bo. If it has the optional extended range fuel, as most do, it will have four tanks in the wings. Two 20's and two 10 gallon tanks. It has a lower gear extended speed of 140 MPH, my S model has a 165 MPH speed.
Find out from the Commanche guys if all the parts are still readily available. We've seen Commanche guys on the Beech List saying some stuff is hard/impossible to get. This is not a problem with the Bo with the exception of some of the very earliest electric props from the 40's. You would have no problem with any parts from a J model or mewer.

WWhunter wrote:Another issue you may want to take into consideration is repair/parts replacement costs. I believe annual costs were already discussed but it seems that Mooney's and Bonanza's seem to be in a different catagory. Maybe the mechanics figure all Bo-drivers are Drs./Lawyers and charge accordingly. JK
While all aircraft parts are expensive, some are more so than others. Years ago I had a friend with a Bonanza and when ever we had to replace/repair things I seem to remember that parts for it were considerably higher in cost than a comparable part for say a Cessna.
I know of a couple guys that keep there Mooney's at their farm strip and seem to have no problem flying them out of fields. Research "Flying Farmers" and you may find some of these farmers flying all kinds of stuff off of farm strips.
WW

Parts prices are one of those reputations you can't shake things. I will have had my Bo for four years in August. Barring something catastrophic in these next few months it will have been slightly cheaper to operate then the first four years of the 182 I had. The first annual of my 182 needed the engine mount overhauled, something that can't happen in the Bo, and the annual came to $4000. Second year was $3000, 3rd about $1800 and then it settled in at $1000. The 182 has cheaper annuals and insurance going for it after it has been made right. In my case the 182 was $1000 less a year for those items total per year. However the 182 used more gas the way I flew it. Since it would only indicate 135-140 mph at top of the green at 4500 feet I always operated it there when farting around the local area, which was most of my flying. That's going to take 12.5 GPH. In the Bo I usually run at 45% power, 19"/2100, in the local area. That will indicate 145-150 MPH and burns 8.5 GPH, well lean of peak and nice and smooth. At current local 100LL and mogas prices that makes my Bo about $200 per year cheaper in gas alone for 100 hours, assuming you run mogas in the 182. The J35 being mentioned can run mogas so that would make it about $1000 per year cheaper, erasing the annual and insurance differential. And on any cross country I will always have the option to burn a lot less fuel and still get there a little sooner than you or burn just a little less fuel and get there quite a bit sooner, the Bo gets better MPG at any power setting you want to operate at. So for me direct operating costs are less than the 182, the fixed costs are a little higher. You have to apply your mission requirements to see what each would do for you.

Buy your self a super cub and a Gulfstream. Use the supercub to get off the strips and fly to the nearest paved airport where your G5 will take you cross country. Its just the only good way to do it if you ask me.

My engine a&p says best to avoid the bonanzas with the E-series engines and electric props, and he overhauls lots of engines so i'm sure he knows what he is saying.

While I am fully in favaor of the Gulfstream/Super Cub combo, that might be a little out of my budget. I've heard you can get really good deals on Gulfstreams now days. I think the annual may be more than my purchase budget. Not to mention the hassle of insurance etc...

On a more down to earth level. I think I'm shopping for either a Comanche or a Bonanza - whatever I find the best deal on. I've flown both and I like the way the bonanza flies but I like the comfort of the comanche for long cross countries. I do occiasionally see what seem to be really good deals on big engine bonanzas (S35, V35 or V35A model) in the $ range of high 50s to mid 60s. I do wonder about getting the cheapest airplane advertised and what that will mean in the longer run cost wise. I'll probably end up with a nicely outfitted Comanche 250 or J35 Bonanza. In that price range, I can get something with a nice autopilot, decent GPS etc.. I won't have to add a bunch of stuff afterwords.

Check out these two Bonanza sites and start asking questions. These guys know where the good Bo's are that are up for sale. More importantly they know which ones are the bad ones.

http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beech-owners/

http://www.beechtalk.com/forums

I'm not a regular backcountry flyer, but I have heard that the PA 32-260 Cherokee six does quite well off pavement. It has a 1700lb useful load, cruises at 155mph, has a range of over 800 nautical miles and uses 1800ft to clear a 50ft obstacle. It's fixed gear, so insurance isn't bad. The only real drawbacks I would think are the low wing and prop clearance. We have guys here that fly people and cargo out to the outer islands of midcoast Maine and they have a couple 206s and a few 207s, and I watch them get those planes in the air pretty quickly. There's a man from Mass that comes up here in a cherokee six 260 and he has his buddies with him all the time. I must say it dosn't look like they miss too many meals. His cherokee gets in the air with three big guys almost as quick as those 206s and 207s. I've seen sixs for sale in the area of high $60s to low $90s. Some much lower and of course some much higher. Something to think about. Good luck.

Has anyone mentioned the 182RG? Essentially the short field performance of a 180/182, but faster. You can't put big tires on it since they won't fit in the wheel well, but similar gear system to a 210, and I've flown 210s in and out of some less-than pristine dirt and grass strips. Probably near the top of your price range but a newer airplane overall and many are quite well equipped. I have a few hours in them and I like them.