Over the last several months I have had my mind made up, pulled my hair out, and been through the gamut of emotions trying to figure out which direction to go.
My mission is 2+ full size adults and gear (rifle, tent, food etc) though 75% of my flying will likely be solo with gear.
I have considered:
M5-235 pricey and expensive to feed and insure
M4-210/220 smaller wing and tail, rudder trim, insurance
J3 O-200 great performer, cheap to feed and insure, no or limited gear
170b not as good short field unless you dump the $$$ on O-360, Cessna parts $$
Experimental Cub variant - see J3
Pacer - needs O-360
Stinson - small flaps, needs 220 or O-470, stiffer gear
I just don't know what the heck to do. Our place has roughly 1000' useable. Thoughts? Would like be be sub $50,000 or close to it.
Help!
Please help me decide!
Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:18 pm
- TxAgfisher offline
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:30 pm
- Location: Mineola
- Aircraft: C180 and Super Cub
Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:28 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
You may be bumping up against GW in the 170/ 180Hp. Not sure about the others
- denalipilot offline
- Posts: 2789
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:53 pm
- Location: Denali
- Aircraft: C-170B+
Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:30 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
I'm a sucker for the 170B.
For the mission you described, it would be fine. Put an 8042 prop on the front and it would be really fine if you don't mind 95MPH cruise.
For the mission you described, it would be fine. Put an 8042 prop on the front and it would be really fine if you don't mind 95MPH cruise.
Wed Oct 21, 2015 2:37 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
I'd suggest sticking with the 4-place airplanes, for the room. Hauling 2 people plus their supplies is difficult in any 2 place airplane.
You're at about 1000' MSL, right? That means on a 90 degree day in the middle of the summer, you're taking off with a 3000' density altitude. With a full load, that 1000' strip will be a bit dicey, so you'll want as much power as possible coupled to a good short field performing airframe.
So which fits the bill for you with those criteria, i.e., a 4 place, powerful, roomy, short field airplane?
Cary
You're at about 1000' MSL, right? That means on a 90 degree day in the middle of the summer, you're taking off with a 3000' density altitude. With a full load, that 1000' strip will be a bit dicey, so you'll want as much power as possible coupled to a good short field performing airframe.
So which fits the bill for you with those criteria, i.e., a 4 place, powerful, roomy, short field airplane?
Cary
"I have slipped the surly bonds of earth..., put out my hand and touched the face of God." J.G. Magee
Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:07 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
Another vote for the 170.
Mine has served me well -with a 120 lb co-pilot and 300 lbs gear in the back - and that been with the stock engine.
Upgrading to a 180 hp this at this time.
You should be able to get a good B model somewhere in the $50's with the upgrade already complete.
Good short field performance - really good when light. User friendly to own and maintain.
Best bang for the buck for sure.
Mine has served me well -with a 120 lb co-pilot and 300 lbs gear in the back - and that been with the stock engine.
Upgrading to a 180 hp this at this time.
You should be able to get a good B model somewhere in the $50's with the upgrade already complete.
Good short field performance - really good when light. User friendly to own and maintain.
Best bang for the buck for sure.
1952 C-170B (with the sexy rounded tail)
Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:46 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
Cary wrote:I'd suggest sticking with the 4-place airplanes, for the room. Hauling 2 people plus their supplies is difficult in any 2 place airplane.
You're at about 1000' MSL, right? That means on a 90 degree day in the middle of the summer, you're taking off with a 3000' density altitude. With a full load, that 1000' strip will be a bit dicey, so you'll want as much power as possible coupled to a good short field performing airframe.
So which fits the bill for you with those criteria, i.e., a 4 place, powerful, roomy, short field airplane?
Cary
Field elevation where I live is about 790', our ranch where the strip is is probably around 350'.
I can get 1400' or so, subtracting to 1000' for obstacles in/out.
I feel like an M5-235 fits the bill but the operating and insurance costs are through the roof. Any brokers on here? What would it cost for a 50hr pilot with 30hrs tailwheel? I bet it's north of $3500.
- TxAgfisher offline
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:30 pm
- Location: Mineola
- Aircraft: C180 and Super Cub
Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:58 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
I might have missed it, but what's your budget?
I see concerns about $$ for insurance, fuel consumption, etc.... For a sub 100 hour pilot, insurance on a Maule is going to be high regardless, same with a C180/C185.
If you can afford more money up front (finance), you can get a plane that does 80% of it. Some with less insurance cost and fuel cost than a 6 cylinder anything. Your 2 people but mostly solo requirement is a plus. I'd warn though that insurance and fuel is rarely a huge part of overall aircraft ownership.
Bill
I see concerns about $$ for insurance, fuel consumption, etc.... For a sub 100 hour pilot, insurance on a Maule is going to be high regardless, same with a C180/C185.
If you can afford more money up front (finance), you can get a plane that does 80% of it. Some with less insurance cost and fuel cost than a 6 cylinder anything. Your 2 people but mostly solo requirement is a plus. I'd warn though that insurance and fuel is rarely a huge part of overall aircraft ownership.
Bill
- fiftynineSC offline
- Posts: 390
- Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 11:41 am
- Location: Frisco
- Aircraft: Cessna 185F
Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:11 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
fiftynineSC wrote:I might have missed it, but what's your budget?
I see concerns about $$ for insurance, fuel consumption, etc.... For a sub 100 hour pilot, insurance on a Maule is going to be high regardless, same with a C180/C185.
If you can afford more money up front (finance), you can get a plane that does 80% of it. Some with less insurance cost and fuel cost than a 6 cylinder anything. Your 2 people but mostly solo requirement is a plus. I'd warn though that insurance and fuel is rarely a huge part of overall aircraft ownership.
Bill
- TxAgfisher offline
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:30 pm
- Location: Mineola
- Aircraft: C180 and Super Cub
Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:12 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
fiftynineSC wrote:I might have missed it, but what's your budget?
I see concerns about $$ for insurance, fuel consumption, etc.... For a sub 100 hour pilot, insurance on a Maule is going to be high regardless, same with a C180/C185.
If you can afford more money up front (finance), you can get a plane that does 80% of it. Some with less insurance cost and fuel cost than a 6 cylinder anything. Your 2 people but mostly solo requirement is a plus. I'd warn though that insurance and fuel is rarely a huge part of overall aircraft ownership.
Bill
I've been researching it and fuel burn + insurance are the unknowns. Fuel will depend on how much I'm at the controls obviously, but payment after 20+% down isn't that much/month. I'm thinking more long term - overhaul on 360 vs 540 etc. Insurance will likely be the biggest variable.
Hangar wI'll be free if I get to move back to Houston because I would build one at the ranch and keep the plane there.
Fuel, maintenance, oil, insurance, annual, payment, hangar - what else?
- TxAgfisher offline
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:30 pm
- Location: Mineola
- Aircraft: C180 and Super Cub
Wed Oct 21, 2015 5:08 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
TxAgfisher wrote:I've been researching it and fuel burn + insurance are the unknowns. Fuel will depend on how much I'm at the controls obviously, but payment after 20+% down isn't that much/month. I'm thinking more long term - overhaul on 360 vs 540 etc. Insurance will likely be the biggest variable.
Hangar wI'll be free if I get to move back to Houston because I would build one at the ranch and keep the plane there.
Fuel, maintenance, oil, insurance, annual, payment, hangar - what else?
Here's something I built when researching my ACTUAL budget:
An average fuel burn should be pretty easy to research for the airplane you're looking at.
What I did was take the data here (it's been pretty accurate so far in my short ownership) and work backwards to see how many hours I could afford to fly per month based on the monthly overhead plus hourly operating cost, kind of like what I sketched out in the bottom of the spreadsheet. I worked it out that I could afford to fly 8 hours per month, though we've been over that the last two months with trips. Those are easy to justify if you take the money you would have spent on gas for the car or commercial tickets and put it toward the hourly operating costs.
My insurance on an experimental pacer is $1320 per year, but I have a good number of hours total time and have a couple of commercial and instrument ratings. I did start off with low TW time (15 hours when I purchased), though.
My "tie-down" is actually a hangar, and until the plane is paid off I'm not putting any money toward my upgrade reserves in the hourly operating expenses.
The miscellaneous $2k is spread monthly over 5 years, and I spread the annual condition cost evenly over the year as well. This is all just "book-kept" money in the family savings account. No separate accounts, just a spreadsheet to keep track of it.
The perf figures were just from when I was researching different models to see what fit my mission the best. They're kind of just leftover tables now.
Hope it helps a little.
- CamTom12 offline
- Posts: 3705
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 1:08 pm
- Location: Huntsville
- FindMeSpot URL: https://share.delorme.com/camtom12
- Aircraft: Ruppe Racer
Experimental Pacer
home hand jam "wizard"
Wed Oct 21, 2015 5:50 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
I used a very similar spreadsheet when I was buying my Cub, it'll make you throw up when you see what you really spend! Completely worth it though, nothing better than owning your own plane. I also shoveled money away for emergency funds in case anything came up unexpectedly. Very glad I did, my engine overhaul came about 2 years sooner than I was hoping.
I've probably went through the same stages you are as I've been looking for a 2nd plane. I initially wanted a Mooney, cause nothing pencils out better for travel, but I really don't wanna be stuck landing at airports (I can't fly like piperpainter). Then I looked at the 180's, they're my favorite but I can't justify that big of a plane for my mission. An early Maule or Pacer is probably what I'll end up with, although I'm keeping an open mind in case I find a Stinson or 170 I can't pass up. The big engines and bigger planes are great, but if you can't afford the mx or fuel to fly enough to stay proficient, what good does it do? The exception to the big hp cheaper plane seems to be the M5-235, 540's are fairly economical in an aviation sense.
I've probably went through the same stages you are as I've been looking for a 2nd plane. I initially wanted a Mooney, cause nothing pencils out better for travel, but I really don't wanna be stuck landing at airports (I can't fly like piperpainter). Then I looked at the 180's, they're my favorite but I can't justify that big of a plane for my mission. An early Maule or Pacer is probably what I'll end up with, although I'm keeping an open mind in case I find a Stinson or 170 I can't pass up. The big engines and bigger planes are great, but if you can't afford the mx or fuel to fly enough to stay proficient, what good does it do? The exception to the big hp cheaper plane seems to be the M5-235, 540's are fairly economical in an aviation sense.
- CenterHillAg offline
- Posts: 204
- Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 3:13 pm
- Location: Texas Coast
- Aircraft: J3 Cub
'56 182
Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:03 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
I vote Pacer, definitely best bang for your buck. As long as you have happy rudder feet, they are great airplanes. Also partial to tube and fabric maintenance over Cessna when it comes to cost. Lot's of options out there with the O-320 and a few with the O-360. If money isn't the major deciding factor, O-360 C-170B would be a great choice. I know insurance can be spendy when referring to Maule's...
- TradeCraft offline
- Posts: 364
- Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 9:23 pm
- Location: Anchorage
Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:04 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
Just buy a Maule?
I didn't think you needed to analyse it - it's the right answer by default!
Jokes aside, a 180hp Maule probably is the best answer IF you won't want to do any mods.
If you do like heavily modifying and aircraft, the Pacer idea appeals to me.
To insure the 260hp Bear (like a Maule in all respects) I am paying 1.5% of purchase cost per annum, through Lloyds of London brokered locally. That's full hull. WAY less than the cost you guessed in your earlier post. It was about 2% when I had your level of tailwheel experience. It can be really affordable.
In terms of total cost of ownership, the many of older Cessna fleet have a bad habit of needing regular and expensive unplanned maintenance (parts)... compared to say, a Maule. Every time I see a 180/85 it seems to have just had / having / needing some expensive work. Something to keep in mind with your cost forecasting.
I didn't think you needed to analyse it - it's the right answer by default!
Jokes aside, a 180hp Maule probably is the best answer IF you won't want to do any mods.
If you do like heavily modifying and aircraft, the Pacer idea appeals to me.
To insure the 260hp Bear (like a Maule in all respects) I am paying 1.5% of purchase cost per annum, through Lloyds of London brokered locally. That's full hull. WAY less than the cost you guessed in your earlier post. It was about 2% when I had your level of tailwheel experience. It can be really affordable.
In terms of total cost of ownership, the many of older Cessna fleet have a bad habit of needing regular and expensive unplanned maintenance (parts)... compared to say, a Maule. Every time I see a 180/85 it seems to have just had / having / needing some expensive work. Something to keep in mind with your cost forecasting.
Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:18 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
I visited the Maule Factory. I was coming home from Iraq, was in Atlanta (14 hours from Kuwait) and looking for a small tailwheel to fly. I flew with Ray and met the Maule family. Great people. Liked the birds very much.
Fast forward...
I however fly 99.99 % solo these days and LOVE a tandem stick beyond belief! It was CC or ACA for me. The Scout had a bit more room and more fuel. Happy!
Fast forward...
I however fly 99.99 % solo these days and LOVE a tandem stick beyond belief! It was CC or ACA for me. The Scout had a bit more room and more fuel. Happy!
CFII, MEI, CFISES, ATPME, IA/AP, RPPL, Ski&Amphib ops, RHC mechanic cert, RHC SC— 3000TT
Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:24 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
Why not a 182? You can get an straight tail 182 that will do what you want, be cheap to insure, and below 50k...
Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:32 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
A1Skinner wrote:Why not a 182? You can get an straight tail 182 that will do what you want, be cheap to insure, and below 50k...
182 has the wrong wheel configuration unless you are Skalywag!
- TxAgfisher offline
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:30 pm
- Location: Mineola
- Aircraft: C180 and Super Cub
Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:35 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
TxAgfisher wrote:A1Skinner wrote:Why not a 182? You can get an straight tail 182 that will do what you want, be cheap to insure, and below 50k...
182 has the wrong wheel configuration unless you are Skalywag!
Not with these
ha ha ha!!http://www.wipaire.com/wipline-floats/3000.php
Just a thought.
CFII, MEI, CFISES, ATPME, IA/AP, RPPL, Ski&Amphib ops, RHC mechanic cert, RHC SC— 3000TT
Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:39 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
8GCBC wrote:TxAgfisher wrote:A1Skinner wrote:Why not a 182? You can get an straight tail 182 that will do what you want, be cheap to insure, and below 50k...
182 has the wrong wheel configuration unless you are Skalywag!
Not with these
http://www.wipaire.com/wipline-floats/3000.php
Just a thought.
Don't think those will fair too well where I am... Lol
- TxAgfisher offline
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:30 pm
- Location: Mineola
- Aircraft: C180 and Super Cub
Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:41 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
I tried. 
CFII, MEI, CFISES, ATPME, IA/AP, RPPL, Ski&Amphib ops, RHC mechanic cert, RHC SC— 3000TT
Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:42 pm
Re: Please help me decide!
TxAgfisher wrote:A1Skinner wrote:Why not a 182? You can get an straight tail 182 that will do what you want, be cheap to insure, and below 50k...
182 has the wrong wheel configuration unless you are Skalywag!
Ya it does, but it's cheap, gets you flying, and meets your mission very well. I fly a 180, but if it came down to it, I'd get a 182 if that meant I could fly twice as much.
DISPLAY OPTIONS
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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
