I know this subject has been beaten to death over the years, and I feel like I've read just about every thread regarding the subject at hand, BUTTT I still have to ask...

Best first plane given my particular set of circumstances?

I'm a relatively big dude, 6'6" and 225lbs, albeit reasonably flexible all things considered.

Minuscule budget: $20K all in. I realize that's barely anything, but that's what I can swing currently.

Third consideration, is that this plane would be living outside. Being based in Boise, the wait for a hangar of any kind is lengthy (to put it lightly) and not something I really want to pay for.

Finally, I have zero tailwheel time, but I'm a fast learner.

Given those points, I've focused my attention toward Cessna 140's and Luscombe's. I'm not sure if they'd be a great fit, but they seem to have relatively OK performance if you keep them really light and have realistic expectations of them. Being metal I'd imagine they'll fare better outside than something of the fabric variety.

I've been extremely lucky to have been able to fly a very well equipped rental aircraft off airport for the past 9 years. I'll probably continue to for awhile, it's bound to have more performance than anything I can afford. I just feel like I'm ready to take the leap and have something that's mine.

I’d say a C-140 is a good choice. I’m 6’1”-ish and 200-ish lbs. My instructor, who weighs a little more than me, and I flew mine just fine with full fuel (rag wing). We were super duper cozy, but we did fine. I didn’t have any fitment problems, length/height-wise. And the C-85 had plenty of gumption to lift us off the ground.

Also my first taildragger after training in a Citabria.

Relative humidity is kind to fabric (synthetic) where you are. Protect the wings with some wing covers. Lots of good and also cheap tw in fabric. Champ,Taylorcraft, Pacer, Stenson. 120 or 140 fine, but fabric gives more to look at. It takes some looking and a good mechanic to find a workable plane at $20,000. Go for ugly with good engine and tubing or corrosion free metal.

IncipientSpin wrote:
I'm a relatively big dude, 6'6" and 225lbs, albeit reasonably flexible all things considered.

Minuscule budget: $20K all in.

Maybe an early 172. Roomier than the 140. Not a lot of power, but they can be flown light, cool and early into a lot of places. I've seen two guys with minimal camping gear (and probably half tanks) take off from Smiley Creek at 7,000 msl in the cool of the morning. The ground roll took awhile, but they were good pilots from Colorado and very accustomed to high DAs. For almost any airplane, the cost of an engine overhaul alone can destroy most of that budget. Something to bear in mind.

CAVU

Yes, I agree with CAVU!
The early straight tails can be had reasonable, and are a lot of plane for the money. A good strong engine, and you have a decent plane you can fly comfortable in. The Pacers are a lot of plane for the money, but not really for your size. I know where an ugly one is now for 15K with a low time engine. They are actually pretty thick on the ground. Now that I think about it, I know where four are for less than that : )

Get some insurance quotes and decide if you want to pay the premium for a tail dragger. I think it's worth it, but only if you have it...

At that price point the best airplane is the one on the field that ticks most the boxes. It's a waste of time and money to chase airplanes around the country, especially low priced ones.

Personally I'd be super-choosey, not look at anything further than I could drive in a couple hours, and save my money. If you find the perfect fit, great. But a $30k airplane two years from now will probably be a much better experience.

Good luck!

Hammer wrote:Get some insurance quotes and decide if you want to pay the premium for a tail dragger. I think it's worth it, but only if you have it...

At that price point the best airplane is the one on the field that ticks most the boxes. It's a waste of time and money to chase airplanes around the country, especially low priced ones.

Personally I'd be super-choosey, not look at anything further than I could drive in a couple hours, and save my money. If you find the perfect fit, great. But a $30k airplane two years from now will probably be a much better experience.

Good luck!

What hammer said, great advice!

At 225 pounds you wont have any room for a passenger in a 140 with gas in the tanks.

It's really hard to beat the value in a straight tail 172 for $20k. They are really great two place airplanes.

If the tail goes down, the price goes up (initial cost and insurance) as others have said. A 170 of the same quality of that 172 will be $15k more and an extra grand a year in insurance.

Recommend reading this Advisory Circular pertaining to ownership:

“Plane Sense General aviation Information 2008”, FAA-H-8083-19A

https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/media/faa-h-8083-19A.pdf

Plane Sense introduces aircraft owners and operators, or prospective aircraft owners and operators, to basic information about the requirements involved in acquiring, owning, operating, and maintaining a private aircraft.

Hammer wrote:….a $30k airplane two years from now will probably be a much better experience.

This.
Save up for aother year or two and get something that you'll be happier in.

Thanks for all the comments! Awesome info here... The more I think about it, maybe waiting isn't the worst idea. I like the idea of a straight tail 172 quite a bit, most of my time is in an O360 converted 172G with bigger tires, and I haven't had any trouble yet going most anywhere I want.

Any specific years I should keep my eyes peeled for?

IMHO I think the Cessna 170 series aircraft is the best "All Around" aircraft available. It does everything you ask of it well. Budget wise as well also. I flew a C182 up to AR and back then did the exaCT same trip two weeks later in a C172. The C182 cost twice as much to take on the same trip. "I sold the 182." And still have that 172. I have tried to replace it several times with sweet little C170s, but every time I get one going somebody just has to have it, yeah i'm hoe! But, to answer your question, a lot depends on what you want the future to bring. Personally I like the "68" and above because they have the Lycoming engines and they are the cheapest and easiest to upgrade. The beginning years "59-60 are easiest to convert to taildraggers because they still have the gear boxes. They have the C145, but a lot have been converted to the 0300D. Both are fine engines, properly rebuilt and balanced and you will be surprised at the performance they deliver!! They are naturally smooth engines. Did I mention reliable!

A lot of good advice posted already, but I'll say this, go into it carefully and with your eye's wide open. Sometimes that first annual can be a killer. My first annual on my little Tcraft was half the purchase price, and that was with me doing all the work.

FWIW, just completed my first annual on my Cessna 140. Total cost was $418 and change. did all of the owner allowed items myself to save time and money. Got bored today and wanted to find out how high the 140 can go, and stopped at 12,500 feet. It could have kept going, but i had somewhere to be and had to start the lengthy descent. Granted, this is with a O-200 conversion, but still. As long as you respect the limitations of a Cessna 140, you will be surprised of what they are capable of. Just make sure you keep it light and be careful not to land somewhere you cant take off. I can land in under 300 feet, but expect the take off roll to easily double that (if not more). Just be aware, when it comes to these light two seaters, every ounce counts. The 140 with just myself is a totally different airplane than it is with two people.

Bagarre wrote: A 170 of the same quality of that 172 will be $15k more and an extra grand a year in insurance.

You’re probably close on the 15k extra for a similar condition 170, if it’s a B model. A models and rag wings can be had for less. But I don’t think it would be 1k more a year to insure than a 172. My 170B was $800 a year on 50k hull with zero deductible.

$20k may not find a decent straight tail 172 - perhaps a well maintained Aeronca Chief, Vagabond or 115 HP early Citabria. Try and get the best maintained type you can find in this budget, if not you are buying an expensive project in disguise.

Hello,

I am surprised that no one has mentioned a Cessna 150/150 conversion. You might be able to find one of these in your price range. Plenty of power, cheep to maintain and insure. Good luck with you hunt.

Kyle Santosuosso

jlacharite wrote:FWIW, just completed my first annual on my Cessna 140. Total cost was $418 and change. did all of the owner allowed items myself to save time and money. Got bored today and wanted to find out how high the 140 can go, and stopped at 12,500 feet. It could have kept going, but i had somewhere to be and had to start the lengthy descent. Granted, this is with a O-200 conversion, but still. As long as you respect the limitations of a Cessna 140, you will be surprised of what they are capable of. Just make sure you keep it light and be careful not to land somewhere you cant take off. I can land in under 300 feet, but expect the take off roll to easily double that (if not more). Just be aware, when it comes to these light two seaters, every ounce counts. The 140 with just myself is a totally different airplane than it is with two people.

All great points about the 140 but he is a big dude, he may not fit in the 140.

I've always like the thought of an Aeronca too. I like the Chief, and ideally a Sedan. I've never sat in an Aeronca, more or less room than a 150? I don't see myself trying to get into any strips shorter than 2k feet, so I think 85hp would be fine.

Two very capable aircraft that are often overlooked but have good power and more room are the Cessna 175 and the Stinson. There are some real nice ones out there at affordable prices but are often overlooked for not necessarily good reasons.