I'm a newly licensed Private Pilot looking to purchase an aircraft to fit several specific needs. (wants)

1. 4 seats
2. light backcountry flying (forest service strips, etc. I live in NW Montana and love mountains)
3. enough equipment to meet the MEL for IFR flying (would never be used in IMC, I want this aircraft to take me through my IFR training and Commercial License)
4. and this is where everything falls apart, CHEAP. I can't afford to immediately do an overhaul, I don't want to fix a bunch of stuff, I've got a fairly strict budget of $30,000 (currently work at an FBO so I'm not made of money)

I legitimately don't care what the paint or interior look like, as long as it flies (although usually looks are an indicator of how it's been taken care of)

The obvious choices are:

172 (prefer an older one with manual flaps, would plan to eventually put the sportsman STOL kit on and vg's: Stene Aviation is a 30 minute flight from my airport)

PA20 or PA22 (O-290 or O-320 preferably)

Stinson 108 (no franklins (unless someone can make a good case for them, pun intended) this narrows the options drastically)


-I'm very very open to suggestions of other aircraft, comments, any info leading to purchase, general advice...

Thanks in advance!

Early Cherokee 160 or 180 - most likely to meet the MEL for IFR and the budget.

i have been researching for the past 18 months looking for a plane to fit a similar mission. Still waiting on special issuance on my medical before starting my PPL training, so caveat emptor on my advice.

I think if you want to check all the boxes you're most likely going to find it in a low-wing fixed-gear plane - a Piper PA28-140, Grumman AA5, or a Beechcraft A23. There are several currently listed on TAP with IFR equipment and asking price below $35k. You'll also often see C-175 in this price range, sometimes with a 180 hp conversion.

If you're willing to drop one of those mission requirements that opens up so many more options. The Aeronca 15AC doesn't usually come with IFR but otherwise seems a good fit for the mission. Older Maule M4 sometimes list at your target price as well. I don't think it fits the "cheap" requirement when it comes to insurance though.

If you want to fly at high DA then there will be few 4-place planes in your price range.

Stinson 108-3 converted to lyc, Piper PA22/20 150/160hp, Aeronca Sedan, or just get it over with, and leave all the BS issues behind and buy a nice Cessna 185.

Stinson 108 with any of the bigger engines. Even the 220 franklin.

For what you describe, with your budget, you need to look for a well set up tripacer.

I guess since to OP hasn't been back to respond, he might be trolling.

As the one to be the bearer of bad news, Unless you are extremely lucky, you are looking for the proverbial 'needle in the haystack'! I think for you get a 4-place aircraft that is IFR and backcountry cabable with a budget of $30K is asking a LOT. You might get lucky but my experience thinks you can find a fairly decent VFR plane that would fit this criteria for the budget but IFR is going to be a long shot.

As has been mentioned, Tripacer/Pacer, 172, Stinson etc. with basic VFR can be found for under $30K. Actually have a friend selling his Tripacer for $21,500. It's a nice looking aircraft and it would save you enough to start equiping it for IFR if you desire.

The thing I worry about with the PA28's is the prop clearance for grass strips. I know guys use them at a few longer ones around here, I just think I would perpetually be nervous.

I like the advice to "leave all the BS behind" and spend like 6 times my budget

A Stinson with the 220 franklin would be great but I'd be worried about the maintenance when something breaks on that, because let's face it, airplanes break all the time.

There are a few Aero Commander Lark 180 for sale on TAP, little known basically a 172 competitor with a 180hp O-360, IFR certs, My problem with those would, again, be finding parts when something inevitably breaks. That and I've never flown one or talked to anyone who has flown one. If anyone could chime in with some opinions about this one that'd be much appreciated.

Seems like my spotlight planes have been confirmed in a way, pacer, tripacer, 172.

The Grumman American AA5 is a pretty good call but I would probably have to get pretty lucky to find one in my price range.

I'm really bothered by your hard deck of $30,000. Working at an FBO, you have to know that when something breaks on even a "cheap" airplane, the repair costs are anything but cheap. Let's say, for instance, that you pick up a halfway decent 64 172E with a Continental O-300. Then something happens to catastrophically destroy that engine. Have you priced an overhauled O-300 lately? Try $25,000 if you're lucky. Or you discover at the first annual that one of the landing gear boxes is damaged and needs replacing. Any idea what that would cost? Last time I heard, it was about $18,000 including parts and labor (very labor intensive). Or how about a new firewall, because you managed a PIO that bent the nose gear back. There's $16,000, mostly in labor.

Purchase price of an airplane is only the beginning. Routine maintenance when nothing is horribly wrong is pricey enough, but when things break or wear out, they're expensive to repair or replace.

My routine advice for years has been that a prospective owner should have at least 1 1/2 times the purchase price in ready funds before buying. Then you'll need at least a couple thousand each year, just to keep up with the maintenance of a simple airplane. Add to that the price of gas and oil for 80 hours/year (actually, you need to fly at least 110 hours to justify owning over renting the same airplane), which for a 172 will be another $3,000.

If all that sounds too difficult, then I suggest that renting isn't all that bad. I've owned and rented, and I love owning my airplane. When I was working on my IR, though, I rented, because the "instrument trainer" was better equipped for instrument training than the airplane I owned (in partnership) at the time. And really, you don't want a bare bones instrument trainer, which would leave you unable to handle today's more complex instrument situations. Yeah, you can still learn in an airplane with one VOR, but you really need to learn how to use an IFR approach-certified GPS, because that's the way things are going. Having duplicate navcoms (or one of them a GPS/navcom, like a 430W), really reduces workload as well.

Oh, by the way, when I decided to add an IFR approach-certified GPS to my 63 P172D, it cost me $15,000.

Airplane ownership is not for the faint of heart or weak of wallet.

Cary

That's all good info to bring up and I've made a pretty extensive cost analysis on budgeting for monthly expenses. It's definitely nerve wracking to be thinking about buying an airplane with my budget. I'm fibbing a little bit with my income, I also work a full time job in construction, then full time at the FBO on the other days. The $30k budget is so I'll have enough money after monthly payments and fixed expenses to still fly it and afford basic living expenses.

Being that I work at an FBO I can rent our aircraft for cheap enough that the company actually loses money when I do.
* I also get a massive discount in maintenance for labor and have a few A&P friends.

An example of my costs is I can currently rent a 172M for $75/ hr.
Buying my own aircraft, the 1st year of expenses per hour breaks down to roughly $112 per hour flying 150 hours per year ( remember I'm on my way to a CPL so I'll be flying A LOT )
After the 1st year and not factoring in the down payment any more my price will be roughly $90 per hour flying 70 hours per year for fun once I get my CPL.

Both these prices include all the fixed costs and a $20 per hour maintenance allowance.

As you can see, financially, it's illogical for me to buy an aircraft. However, no one ever bought an aircraft to be financially logical. Owning your own just has this dreamy romantic feel of freedom to it and that's really why I'm so motivated to have my own.

The caveat is I'm pushing my luck in a big way by hoping nothing important breaks in the first few years of ownership.

I already know it will be much more expensive to buy than rent, so really I'm just trying to figure out which airplane will jive with my interests and stay relatively within my budget.

165hp Stinson 108, preferably a -2 or later. That or a Pacer, both are capable airplanes.

People that are scared of a Franklin have never owned or flown behind one - too much hearsay out there.

Definitely would love a Stinson 108 and if the Franklin had low time I would't have anything against it. And you're correct I haven't flown behind one. What gets me is the low TBO and the mechanic here has told me parts can be hard to come by.

Troy Hamon wrote:For what you describe, with your budget, you need to look for a well set up tripacer.

Amen

Admittedly I chose lightweight/backcountry over IFR (was hoping to get an IFR certified PA22, but the backcountry mods won out as I was looking). But plenty of vacuum systems still intact on PA22s - though not as much of the solid auto pilot setup on those as other platforms, so it's not what I'm hoping to complete IFR training on these days. Waiting for a buddy to buy an RV14 for that

A 172M at $75 an hour is a great bargain! Stick to that!

Cary wrote:...actually, you need to fly at least 110 hours to justify owning over renting the same airplane

I assume that's based purely on financial justifications? I'm not questioning your numbers, but obviously there is more to the value in owning a plane than pure finances regarding owning vs. renting. The freedom in being able to fly when you want without having to schedule the plane in advance, being able to leave the plane at a destination for a day or five without having to coordinate that with others, not being constrained by agreements to not land at off-airport locations, etc.

stolkid94 wrote:
As you can see, financially, it's illogical for me to buy an aircraft. However, no one ever bought an aircraft to be financially logical. Owning your own just has this dreamy romantic feel of freedom to it and that's really why I'm so motivated to have my own.

Of course it's financially illogical, but there's so much more to it than finances. Do it. I'm not nearly as knowledgable as many on here, so I can't give you any insight as to the bird that will fit your mission. As a relatively low-time pilot, though, I can say that there is way more to owning a plane than just finances. I likely couldn't have made most of the memories I've made in recent years if I was renting a plane.

Do it. You won't regret it. And if you do end up regretting it financially, at the very least you'll build a pile of memories in the process.

Just Buy A MAULE

It's great seeing how many people on here own a Pacer / Tri Pacer, especially since I had this idea that no one likes the looks of the funny little plane! A lot of the guys I work with poke fun at Tri Pacers but I always think "Oh yea, where's your airplane?"

On a side note if anyone living around the NW Montana would like their airplanes cleaned in exchange for flight hours, I'm your guy!

Still looking for any info of the Aero Commander Lark 180.

It is becoming apparent as well that my dreams of gravel bar landings will have to wait until I'm making all those nice Commercial Pilot paychecks.

They really are a great compromise airplane. I love mine.

It does a lot of things pretty dang good, but isn’t excellent at anything except affordability.

stolkid94 wrote:It is becoming apparent as well that my dreams of gravel bar landings will have to wait until I'm making all those nice Commercial Pilot paychecks.

Woah woah woah who says a (tri)pacer can't land on a gravel bar? You might offend people with language like that.

I owned several Tri-Pacers because they were the best poor mans mountain airplane. 172s were good as well but had to be flown more carefully. I trained a pilot in, and liked the Lark.

What Cary said is the best advise for limited income pilots with family, however. I was flying 300 hours a year and didn't have access to cost rental rates. I now fly less than 100, all with a legal pilot, and gladly pay the $120 per hour for a 172.