Name is Randy and I’m from the central Texas area. Been around for awhile, just haven’t posted anything yet. I’ve had my ppl for about 30 years but have only flown off and on over the years as time and money allowed. Well, our two daughters are essentially off our payroll now and I think I can finally stick with flying permanently. Currently renting from a local airport and it’s working out fine but…like most, I’ve forever dreamed of owning my own.
Now on to the question. What airplanes should I consider? Here are a few things to help narrow the list. The wife is very supportive of my aviation habit and loves to go with me, so it has to be something I can load the two of us, full fuel, and some luggage. It has to be a tail dragger because getting off airport and camping from the plane is a huge draw for me. I know a tail dragger isn’t a must for this but I hope to explore western back country strips one day, as well. Speed isn’t a priority. And I’d like to keep it under about $75k if possible.
My initial thoughts are something like a 170. But curious if anyone has other ideas based on what I’ve mentioned. Thanks in advance for any responses.
Randy
New-ish intro and question
Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:05 am
- Slowandlow offline
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2018 6:26 pm
- Location: New Braunfels
Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:52 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
I'll put in a vote for the Mighty Round Tail 170 but I'm a bit bias as well 
Tue Sep 13, 2022 5:33 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
You know, with just 2 people to worry about, you have a lot of options. Everyone will try to make a well-reasoned case for this or that, but aesthetics and what you are attracted to are important for enjoyment and peace of mind. If you want a taildragger, don’t let anyone talk you out of it, because they will try. Some people like aluminum and some like fabric. Some aircraft, like the Maule, use both.
4 seat aircraft are great for two people as it means more gear.
Unfortunately $75k is not the budget it used to be, but there's still some affordable stuff out there.
While waiting for that bird to come along, find a hangar and start a relationship with a mechanic. A platonic one. Kinda.
4 seat aircraft are great for two people as it means more gear.
Unfortunately $75k is not the budget it used to be, but there's still some affordable stuff out there.
While waiting for that bird to come along, find a hangar and start a relationship with a mechanic. A platonic one. Kinda.
- Zzz offline
- Posts: 2855
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 11:09 pm
- Location: northern
- Aircraft: Swiveling desk chair
Half a century spent proving “it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
Tue Sep 13, 2022 7:55 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
A 180HP 170 comes to the top of the list as far as enough room for a long cross country with plenty of baggage space.
But you will need to up your budget a little.
Fabric planes wise maybe a Pacer or Stinson???
Or a PA12 but the baggage would not be as plentiful depending on how it has been modded.
All planes have gone up quite a bit but I have a suspicion in the next year or so they could drop in price if you are not in a big hurry.
Thats just speculation though
It's hard to find the right plane. A 172 could be a good steppingstone and will do most anything you want until your dream plane comes along.
Good luck
But you will need to up your budget a little.
Fabric planes wise maybe a Pacer or Stinson???
Or a PA12 but the baggage would not be as plentiful depending on how it has been modded.
All planes have gone up quite a bit but I have a suspicion in the next year or so they could drop in price if you are not in a big hurry.
Thats just speculation though
It's hard to find the right plane. A 172 could be a good steppingstone and will do most anything you want until your dream plane comes along.
Good luck
Keep the Greasy side down!
Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:31 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
Mapleflt wrote:I'll put in a vote for the Mighty Round Tail 170 but I'm a bit bias as well
Ha, I can see from your signature why you recommended that. To be honest a super 170B would be at the very top of my want list. But price-wise, probably would be above my pay grade right now. Unless I could find a partnership.
Thanks!
- Slowandlow offline
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2018 6:26 pm
- Location: New Braunfels
Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:34 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
Zzz wrote:You know, with just 2 people to worry about, you have a lot of options. Everyone will try to make a well-reasoned case for this or that, but aesthetics and what you are attracted to are important for enjoyment and peace of mind. If you want a taildragger, don’t let anyone talk you out of it, because they will try. Some people like aluminum and some like fabric. Some aircraft, like the Maule, use both.
4 seat aircraft are great for two people as it means more gear.
Unfortunately $75k is not the budget it used to be, but there's still some affordable stuff out there.
While waiting for that bird to come along, find a hangar and start a relationship with a mechanic. A platonic one. Kinda.
Great advice all-around. I agree on 75K not being what it use to be. I'm also not in a hurry so I can wait until the market drops again before striking. Really appreciate the 'don't let anyone talk you out of a taildragger' comment. Ultimately...that's what I want and where my soul is. I'm not opposed to a 'stepping stone' aircraft either, if the right deal came along. Even a lowly tricycle gear...
Thanks!
Last edited by Slowandlow on Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Slowandlow offline
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2018 6:26 pm
- Location: New Braunfels
Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:38 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
TangoFox wrote:A 180HP 170 comes to the top of the list as far as enough room for a long cross country with plenty of baggage space.
But you will need to up your budget a little.
Fabric planes wise maybe a Pacer or Stinson???
Or a PA12 but the baggage would not be as plentiful depending on how it has been modded.
All planes have gone up quite a bit but I have a suspicion in the next year or so they could drop in price if you are not in a big hurry.
Thats just speculation though
It's hard to find the right plane. A 172 could be a good steppingstone and will do most anything you want until your dream plane comes along.
Good luck
I really like the Pacer as well so that's a great idea to dig into. Never thought about a Stinson and will research. Agree that a 180 HP 170 would be (in my mind) aviation nirvanna. Probably could only make that happen with a fractional deal, which I'm completely open to.
And also agree about the stepping stone idea. I'm actually on a waiting list for a 182 right now, but I'm #6 so I'm thinking I'm years away from getting that call.
Thanks!
- Slowandlow offline
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2018 6:26 pm
- Location: New Braunfels
Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:58 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
Zzz wrote:While waiting for that bird to come along, find a hangar and start a relationship with a mechanic. A platonic one. Kinda.
Once you get your plane in the shop, whether you like it or not, it'll no longer be strictly platonic.
- CompSciAndFly offline
- Posts: 190
- Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2019 11:50 am
- Location: Anchorage
- Aircraft: Piper PA-12 Super Cruiser
YouTube @AKviation: https://www.youtube.com/c/AKviation
Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:14 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
Slowandlow wrote:I really like the Pacer as well so that's a great idea to dig into.
Now you're talkin'. I used to own a 170B. Great airplane and I will speak no ill of it for fear of an attempt on my life.
But after i chose the Bearhawk 4-place as a my kit, I also picked up a 1956 PA-22 tailwheel conversion that was flying...and I flew it for all of 30 hours before it too became a kit.
It will be finished and flying soon, but let me sing the praises of a Pacer.4-seats or 2-seats and a huge baggage with a huge baggage door (left side rear pax door.) The rear seat comes out pretty easily.
Many have skylight mods from Steve's Aircraft and it gives them an open, roomy feel.
A decently long CG envelope. Has a flying tail like a Super Cub or Skywagon.
They can be faster than their contemporaries due to their shorter wings. This of course makes short field landings slightly more challenging.
They fly wonderfully. They just feel well mannered in the air. However, depending on the quality of the conversion, the gear alignment can vary. One without good gear alignment is not very much fun on the ground (squirrelly.)
They remain less expensive than other types. A formerly $25K Pacer will now set you back $45-50K. Still relatively affordable. They live in the Piper parts universe, which is fairly affordable compared to Cessna.
I honestly think that a Bushmaster conversion is one of the ultimate airplanes for a man of modest means. It's an STC that takes a PA-22 fuselage, stretches it like 18" or something, extends the wings, and allows for 180hp engine. It keeps all that's great about a Pacer and fixes what's lacking for backcountry ops. Tough to find though unless you want to build.
- Zzz offline
- Posts: 2855
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 11:09 pm
- Location: northern
- Aircraft: Swiveling desk chair
Half a century spent proving “it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:17 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
CompSciAndFly wrote:Zzz wrote:While waiting for that bird to come along, find a hangar and start a relationship with a mechanic. A platonic one. Kinda.
Once you get your plane in the shop, whether you like it or not, it'll no longer be strictly platonic.
- Zzz offline
- Posts: 2855
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 11:09 pm
- Location: northern
- Aircraft: Swiveling desk chair
Half a century spent proving “it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
Tue Sep 13, 2022 10:03 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
$75K won’t get you even close to a big engine 170, and not very close to a stock 170. Bizarre prices right now on those, and, as noted above, they MAY come down some in the future.
But, I agree with the others: find a decent Pacer, and get a good check out, and I doubt you’ll look back.
One additional note: if your spouse is the slightest bit wobbly in flight, do NOT even consider a tandem seat plane….that back seat can be an evil place for anyone, and right front is much friendlier.
Good luck.
MTV
But, I agree with the others: find a decent Pacer, and get a good check out, and I doubt you’ll look back.
One additional note: if your spouse is the slightest bit wobbly in flight, do NOT even consider a tandem seat plane….that back seat can be an evil place for anyone, and right front is much friendlier.
Good luck.
MTV
Tue Sep 13, 2022 10:13 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
OK I will be the odd guy out. I love my Stinson 108-3, great useful, well supported and a wonderful off airport performer.
- soaringhiggy offline
- Posts: 711
- Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:22 pm
- Location: Kimberly, ID
48 Stinson 108-3
Tue Sep 13, 2022 11:00 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
A Pacer or often overlooked Stinson Station Wagon are both great options, almost as good as The Mighty Round Tail.
Tue Sep 13, 2022 11:07 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
S108 would be my vote
Mine served me very well
Took a 185 to get me out of my 108
Mine served me very well
Took a 185 to get me out of my 108
Last edited by NineThreeKilo on Tue Sep 13, 2022 3:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- NineThreeKilo offline
- Retired
- Posts: 1679
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:16 pm
- Location: _
Tue Sep 13, 2022 11:33 am
Re: New-ish intro and question
Slowandlow wrote: so it has to be something I can load the two of us, full fuel, and some luggage.
Your mission profile sounds very specific, but actually, it is not. Therefore, I have some suggestions for you to consider as you search for that plane. I will break these up into your own mission components.
You don't have to disclose your personal size or weight, but different airplanes may be more or less appropriate for your size. A husky, for example, is not the best plane for two 200+ pound individuals in my opinion.
Come up with a mission distance. Full fuel doesn't really mean anything as you compare planes. Filling a 182 with 92 gal of fuel versus a cub at 36 gal is totally different both in terms of overall weight and distance for the mission. If you know your distance, then you can figure out how much fuel it would take for any of your candidates because you actually don't always want to fill the tanks.
"Some luggage" is vague. When I go on a 4 day camping trip with my wife, I plan for 150 lbs of gear, and this is on the light side. If you want dutch oven cookware, coolers of beverages, and other conveniences, you may need to plan for more. If you are a backpacker, you might plan for less.
After you figure out your weight, distance, gear, etc., you can come up with a fixed and variable load. For example, you need a plane that will comfortably haul 560 lbs of people and stuff, plus enough gas to go 250 NM plus reserves. For a four cylinder something that goes about 100 kts, that would be about 30 gal of gas or 180# for climb, cruise, and reserves. In this example, the total is 740 lbs. I know you aren't in the market for a husky, but based on this analysis, the plane wouldn't satisfy the mission anyway.
I know that my numbers are made up, but you get the idea. It might help this community focus you in on a suitable family of airplanes and quickly move you away from those that clearly won't work.
Tue Sep 13, 2022 12:10 pm
Re: New-ish intro and question
108 Stinson!!! For that money, you can get into a big engined Stinson and have a real performer, with doors on both sides!! (my only real complaint about the "pacer", and yes I know they can be modified...$$$$) That Stinson is built wonderfully rugged and as an old mentor of mine said, is a gentleman of an airplane!!!
John
John
- hardtailjohn offline
- Posts: 924
- Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 7:06 pm
- Location: Marion, Montana
God put me here to accomplish a certain amount of things...right now I'm so far behind, I'll never die!!
Tue Sep 13, 2022 1:12 pm
Re: New-ish intro and question
hardtailjohn wrote:108 Stinson!!! For that money, you can get into a big engined Stinson and have a real performer, with doors on both sides!! (my only real complaint about the "pacer", and yes I know they can be modified...$$$$) That Stinson is built wonderfully rugged and as an old mentor of mine said, is a gentleman of an airplane!!!
John
All agreed 100% the Station Wagon might not be a Round Tail but it sure is BIG.
Tue Sep 13, 2022 1:22 pm
Re: New-ish intro and question
Trying to reply to @Squash
Great post and questions, and, you're right about specifics. Here's how I'd hone in a little more...
From an endurance/fuel standpoint, I'd want to be able to fly 3 or so hours, with reserves. At 9 or so gph, I think carrying 35+ gallons would be plenty. Call it 220 lbs with un-useable.
So after fuel, a payload of 550 lbs should suffice fine and here's why. If the wife is with me, I don't see hauling a bunch of camping gear to build a camp. If she's with me, we're likely packing a 2-3 day bag each, and staying in a cabin, hotel, etc. Combined we weigh about 425 lbs. so allowing over 100 lbs for our luggage, is an insane amount to me. But then again...she's a woman who never knows 'what she'll want to wear each day'.
When solo, I'm definitely a primitive camping guy and I can see myself doing just that. Or maybe even flying to Oshkosh on my own and camping under the wing for a week (I've already done this once in my life). But with her out of the plane, weight should literally never be an issue.
Hope this clarifies a bit. Thanks for your post.
Great post and questions, and, you're right about specifics. Here's how I'd hone in a little more...
From an endurance/fuel standpoint, I'd want to be able to fly 3 or so hours, with reserves. At 9 or so gph, I think carrying 35+ gallons would be plenty. Call it 220 lbs with un-useable.
So after fuel, a payload of 550 lbs should suffice fine and here's why. If the wife is with me, I don't see hauling a bunch of camping gear to build a camp. If she's with me, we're likely packing a 2-3 day bag each, and staying in a cabin, hotel, etc. Combined we weigh about 425 lbs. so allowing over 100 lbs for our luggage, is an insane amount to me. But then again...she's a woman who never knows 'what she'll want to wear each day'.
When solo, I'm definitely a primitive camping guy and I can see myself doing just that. Or maybe even flying to Oshkosh on my own and camping under the wing for a week (I've already done this once in my life). But with her out of the plane, weight should literally never be an issue.
Hope this clarifies a bit. Thanks for your post.
- Slowandlow offline
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2018 6:26 pm
- Location: New Braunfels
Tue Sep 13, 2022 1:49 pm
Re: New-ish intro and question
I was in the same boat in 2019 before the pandemic. My Budget was around 50K . I looked at 170's and Pacers. I bought this one for 32K
1956 PA22/20 150HP Lycoming that the owner had rebuilt by Penn Yan in 2013.
I have added 26 inch tires, VG's ,new upholstery and an AV30. 8.5 GPH at 100mph. 850 pound useful load. Back Seat is easy to remove. Lots of available Mods and a good support community.
I got Lucky as a first time /know nothing buyer. I love it. Its fun. It does suffer from short wings so it will never by a STOL aircraft but it will work easily on 1200 foot strips
Im still working on skills but have progressed . Lots of pattern work on windy days
Last edited by sierrasplitter on Tue Sep 13, 2022 1:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- sierrasplitter offline
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2017 11:55 am
- Location: Lakeside
- Aircraft: 56 PA 22/20
Tue Sep 13, 2022 1:52 pm
Re: New-ish intro and question
Another vote for the 170 round tail. I was in your exact same place when I started looking years ago, had part of a 172, but wanted to be able to play more. I bought a 170B thinking eventually I'd upgrade the motor. After the 8042 prop went on I found that while slow, I could go most anywhere I wanted as long it was cool and I was light. I took the rear seats out the first day I flew it home and they never went back in. The 170 is a sweet flying bird, a good light frame will go most anywhere when the conditions are right. Flew mine for 900 hours with wife and camping gear all over the Idaho back country, but I agree in today's market a good one will be tough to find for a bargain. I'm now in the Bushmaster camp, and they are tough to beat.
DISPLAY OPTIONS
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
Latest Features
-
Live to Tell
A Minnesota pilot is surprised to learn that the sudden asymmetric drag of an out-of-rig ski can…Read More -
Creators
Working in some of the Yukon's most beautiful and remote environments, photographer Simon Blakesley captures aircraft in…Read More -
Aircraft Ownership and Maintenance
Upgrading to big tires can make a huge difference in backcountry performance, but with those gains come…Read More -
Tales from Yesteryear
In this tale from bush flying yesteryear, Don Cogger signs up to help Atlee Dodge Jr recovery…Read More
Latest Knowledge Base
-
Destinations
A regional guide with ideas for winter camping destinations in California, Nevada, New Mexico, and Arizona.Read More -
Aircraft
Finding an affordable aircraft that can handle the backcountry for $80K or less? A challenge for sure, but with the…Read More -
Aircraft
01.29.2018 - Zane - Updated tire diameter graphic to add 8.50x10 Guide to tires for use in the backcountry and off-airport landing…Read More -
Pilots
12.22.2013 - Initial article format Operating aircraft on skis and negotiating a snow-covered landscape is an entirely unique skillset and environment.…Read More
