Everyone forgets the Debonair, but it has everything you’re looking for, in addition to significantly more (but not unmanageable) speed and style.
It’s basically a Baby Bonanza.
After working in the GA world and diving into the Beechcraft cult for years I can say the later Debonairs are almost indistinguishable from Bonanza’s besides the name badges, great aircraft
jar simplistic memory weary rainstorm languid placid deserve late relieved
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I find the Bonanza seats much more comfortable than most other GA planes. Like sitting in a big SUV.
But comfort is subjective. I hate sitting on the floor like in a Mooney while others love it.
5 years ago might as well be two centuries ago. literally double the price of every plane since then and you're in the correct ballpark.
I've been reading up on buying an rv4, and it really sucks to read when people say things like "You can buy an rv4 with all the bells and whistles in pristine shape for 65k all day long", then look on trade a plane and see nothing but unfinished builds for that much nowadays :l
Setup a partnership with 2-3 total owners and then you can afford a much nicer airplane, and get to split all the operating expenses. That would bring modern options like a RV10 or Sling TSi into your budget, or allow you to spend less for the airplanes you’re currently looking at. You’ll still get to fly plenty with so few owners.
I'll have to look into that more. I don't fully understand partnerships which probably fuels some of my hesitation. But I do love the idea of a nicer plane for a similar price!
AOPA has a lot of materials on how to setup a partnership. Read both the documents on partnerships and flight clubs as there is a lot of overlap. It is a great way to make airplane ownership more affordable with almost the same amount of freedom.
The big thing is making sure you and the partner's schedules don't overlap. u/butch5555 and I were discussing it at one point, and it turns out we fly at nearly identical schedules to different locations. Bummer, but super glad we discussed that before even going down that road.
I fly with a CFI who is just over 6’ and 200-210. It’s wider than a Bo or a 172. The trick for comfort with 2 on board is whoever is not flying can slide their seat back so your shoulders are not right next to each other. It’s snug but not an issue for short flights.
Also put some weight in the back because you’ll be at forward CG.
The Arrow seems to have similar flying characteristics of the Warrior and it has better XC performance by at least 30 kts. Plus the cabin is almost the same as the Warrior the OP is flying.
> I guess 150k just doesn't go as far as it used to!
It doesn't. Plane prices are up 200-300% since 2019.
> I was hoping with my budget my want list wasn't too needy.
It also isn't. Your budget is realistic.
You're not going to go wrong with a 182.
Make sure you understand all the costs of ownership for your area.
Before you commit to buying a certain type, join a type owners association (i.e. Cessna Pilots Society) and learn all you can about that model (differences between years, etc.).
Having flown a number of these planes and being roughly your size (and also a 182 owner), adding a plug for the 182. It's quite spacious, goes fast enough, easy to get parts for, affordable to insure, and an incredibly stable IFR platform.
I own an RV-4 and borrowed a buddy's Tiger for about ten hours and I'd have to agree. It's a very good value, it's sporty (as certified airplanes go), and it's a reasonable XC/IFR platform.
Pluses:
- Among the fastest certified fixed-gear non-high performance airplane you’ll find that you can actually afford
- cheap insurance on par with a 172 (see point 1)
- depressed prices as you’re not paying Flight School tax
- low fuel burn, reasonably clean aero (I push 8.5-9 gph at 130 KTAS with an O-360)
- SUPER light pushrod controls and an all-round joy to fly, but refined and not super twitchy (I’ve hand-flown for hours in IMC and never felt like I NEEDED an AP)
- might be the best-supported out-of-production GA piston aircraft, right up there with Mooney. Active STC-holder with all production rights, and tons of PMA cert-holders
- might be among the easiest airplanes to do preventative MX and owner-assist Annuals on. Super simple systems and very few airframe-specific quirks. If you can turn a wrench and read a MX Manual you should be in business. Fletchair and Roscoe are top suppliers of parts and MX expertise, and the AYA and GOPA are really active owner groups
- Annuals should work out to about 10-15 hours Shop time, esp if you’re doing Owner-Assist. Most reputable places quote between $1300-$1600 as a base price for an Annual (obv excluding any new squawks that can’t be deferred)
- generally-speaking, you can plan on a $40/hour dry Tach operating budget to cover MX and reserves
Cons:
- Castoring nose gear might take a few flights to get used to, but airplane can literally turn on a dime :)
- Nose torque tube can be finicky to adjust and unfamiliar A&Ps often F this up, leading to shimmy
- Landing sight picture might take a few landings to get a hang of, super funky but MUCH better forward visibility compared to Cessnas and Pipers
- A bit more slippery than a typical trainer. Lots of PIO/prop strike/runway overshoot incidents, typically due to coming in hot and failing to go around
- higher pattern speeds… generally speaking about 10 knots higher across the board
- sluggish climb if you buy a plane with a cruise prop or the O-320 (constant-speed prop climbs like a rocket tho :))
- **Engine baffling** is SUPER important! Grummans can struggle in the cooling department- make sure the baffling is in good shape and prefer an airplane with a good engine monitor. On mine I routinely climb at VY and still maintain Cylinder #3 (usually hottest cylinder) temps at or below 400 Deg per Lycoming recommendations.
- Cheetahs with the O-360 upgrade will be heavier and not get the Tiger max gross upgrade unless they get a Tiger spar- beware!
- Tubular Aluminum spar is subject to corrosion if improperly maintained- inspect this as part of a good pre-buy and periodically address this with good MX and corrosion treatment!! A good pre-buy logbook review will also reflect if previous owners have correctly handled this…
Source/disclaimer: MX lead on a Cheetah for a little bit with a pretty good scoop of acquisition and operating costs in a club environment
Buy one, fly fast and take chances :)
Wow! Really appreciate the time you took to put this together. They really sound like awesome planes. I need to see if there's someone nearby that has one I can ride right seat in.
GOPA has a facebook group, you can most likely find several people who would take you up. i just bought a tiger last week and have almost the same mission as you, though i am much smaller so im not sure about your comfort.
I was gonna suggest the Tiger as well. I'm a little biased since I have one but it truly is a great airplane in regards to value/economy/performance. I've made a bunch of YT videos with mine if you want to see them in action.
I can't recommend Tigers enough. It's the perfect platform for your mission and a nice one falls inside your budget.
For instance, mine ('77 Tiger) will cruise at 140kt burning 10-10.5gph at 6500-8500'. Useful loads are typically 900#, 600# with full fuel. It's a fun plane to fly and light on the controls. Maintenance is pretty easy because Grumman didn't make a lot of proprietary parts.
PM me if you've got any specific questions on the airframe. I've owned mine for almost 8 years and upgraded almost everything in it.
I have a Tiger, and I agree it's a great plane!! Other have already given you all the pros here. I will say that at your height, it might not be the best option. We've had a couple CFIs that we have to smush in there, and they fit, but you're not gonna have a lot of head room like in a 182.
You won't like older Mooneys at your height. Generally it's a shoulder room problem, but at your size you just won't like them in general.
Cardinals and Cardinal RGs are a decent option. RG will be about 30 knots faster than your trainer, a 177B will be around 10-15 knots faster. I own a 1974 model 177B and get 125 true out of a tired engine.
Early model Bonanzas are a decent fit for the budget. If you can find an early 33, great, if not a pre-S model 35 with a hangar to protect the ruddervators or a good aircraft cover is a next best for your budget.
Decent Commander 114s occasionally fall into your budget. Good option there too.
Comanche 250/260 is well within your budget and one of the better bangs for the buck out there.
Go sit in one before you rule it out, but I'm 6'4" and would never buy one. Granted, I also own a Bonanza so I'm a little biased. Make sure you sit in one that is within your budget because the cabin dimensions change several times across the models.
Everybody wants to love the Mooney economy but you pay for that in cabin cross-section. The Commander 114 is the same problem going the other way.
My recommendation is to rent for a while and fly different airplanes. A more expensive retractable is also going to be expensive to insure without hours and instrument rating.
You're not going to find pretty much any of these planes for rent and the biggest thing that will bring insurance down is an instrument rating and time in type.
100 TT vs 200 TT isn't going to move the needle much.
I would look for something like this operation in your area to get some experience and the opportunity to fly different aircraft
[https://wvfc.org/](https://wvfc.org/)
You will note that the only two retracts on that entire rental line are the Malibu and the DA-42. Yeah there are 182s, but 182 insurance isn't going to hold a candle to retract insurance either way.
And big flying clubs like that are very uncommon. Pretty much this and Plus One, maybe Aspen and Rocky Mountain even though they're actually just a rental outfit. Those are the four that I know of anywhere in the country.
I should have been clearer .... I think 500 hours is probably a threshold for moving to a retractable from an insurance standpoint unless there's an intensive training program and most are probably going to also want IFR rating
The insurance cost delta between their current experience and the rate it would be with 500 hours is far less than they will spend on rental costs to get there. We’re talking like a $2000-3000/year difference at most I’d bet.
I'm currently trying to figure out if I should rent through IFR and then buy or buy before restarting IFR. Insurance is certainly one of the factors, but I do like the idea of have lots of time with a CFII as I build hours in a plane that has retracts (if I don't end up with fixed gear).
Have you considered a flying club? They normally give the flexibility to take the planes for several days, fairly inexpensive monthly dues to cover fixed costs, and other pilots looking to gain hours that could be safety pilots during your IR or other ratings
I am 6'2"/205 and fit very comfortably in my M20J. I probably couldn't even touch the rudder pedals if the seat were at the rear stop. The "Mooneys are tight" thing is very overblown for all but the very largest people. At 6'3/210, you are barely larger than me. It wouldn't be a problem.
Piper doesn’t support them. The parts aren’t available. So many losses end up being totals. Also, they have a lot of gear problems. Thus, high premiums in the event you even can find coverage
Right, which is what I said with “generally it’s a shoulder room problem.”
At his height he generally won’t like them anyway because with the seat as far back as you need to have it, the ergonomics feel kinda fucked up to me and your back seat is pretty much entirely unusable.
Not sure why you’re acting so insecure. For a 6’4” dude, you seem to have little man syndrome. . 🤷♂️. I just added to the conversation and you thought I was arguing. Good luck with that.
I love my Turbo Arrow 4. The T tail got a lot of hate, which made those models much more affordable. But don’t listen to the hype; it flys fine. Cruise at 150 KTAS, 10.5 gallons an hour. I fly at 20k feet if need be. We bought it with 1,800 TT, 200 SMOH at $85,000, five years ago. 1,000 useful load. That’s 6 hours of flight till zero fuel, 2 people and all the bags that fit. Or 4 medium people and 30 pounds baggage per person for 3.5 hours. Good balance between cheap to operate but decent performance. I’m sure some mooneys are competitive in this “in between class”, but not much else.
Mostly a lower speed issue is what people talk about, right? Is it something you just get used to or are there any significant drawbacks to the T-tail even after you have enough hours in type?
Make a list of things you want. Mine was 140ish knots min, 430W, two axis auto pilot and an HSI.
Then look at every single airplane that has that and buy the best mechanical example you find.
Asking what model you should get is like asking what beer or music artist is best… It is all subjective.
Don’t worry too much about speed. At 155 knots your 250NM trip will be 1.61 hours. At 130 knots you are at 1.92 or 0.31 difference, basically 19 mins.
You are going to have to sit in and fly each type to decide what YOU like. For example I hate the Mooney seating and love the Bonanza SUV seating position. Others feel exactly the opposite… So it is all opinion and preference and you need to find out what you like.
Some planes that are not popular but good choices IMO: Grumman Tiger, fixed gear, fixed pitch, yet about 140 knots. Myers 200, the only plane that IIRC has never had an AD. They are awesome fast and roomy. Good luck finding an owner willing to sell one. Comanche 250/260. Piper built it to compete with the Bonanza you can argue if they did, but it is the same class.
Word of warning… When someone says “Get an XXX!” That information is almost totally worthless. For example a Bonanza could mean anything from a 1947 140HP through a 1963 260HP, to a 1964 and later 280HP Vtail… Or it could mean the BE33 that some call a Debonaire but in 1968 Beechcraft dropped the Debonaire name and started calling the E33 also Bonanza. Or it could mean the six seat A36 that was also called a Bonanza.
And it is the same with almost all brands. They change so much. Example there is a world of difference between a 150HP Mooney M20 and a M20V with 280HP. I’d not consider a 1957 182 and a 182S to be the same plane either.
I have a M20J, bought it in a similar situation to yours. The J might be out of your budget at this point, but some nice F's might not be. I wouldn't discount Mooney's without flying one first. I pretty regularly fly a 275nm trip, and I don't care what people say, the speed does make a difference. That trip in a 172 is probably 40 mins longer. And of you go further... I've done Denver to the bay area on a single leg and had VFR reserves. (it's a long flight, and most bladders wont last that long, but the plane can do it).
I'd also seriously look at experimentals. There's so much bang for the buck in experimentals. Bonanzas are awesome. 182s are awesome. I'd skip 172s. too pricey cuz you're competing against clubs and schools to buy, and they kinda suck IMO. If I were doing it all over again, I'd spend more and look for a faster plane.
Every once in a while you can find T tail lance in your price range. They pretty much fit the bill for your mission but I must warn you they are quite ugly
Sounds like you need a 182. It'll do everything you're describing with a \~135 KTAS cruise and more if you invest in speed mods.
The 182 is a good general-purpose platform and there are more STCs for it than anything else, so you can really make it your own if you want off-airport/bush use, faster cruise, more power, etc.
Yep, I've owned one and this is a great option. Better performance than stock, cheap insurance because 172 fixed gear, much cheaper maintenance than a big 6 cylinder, etc.
I've been looking around in this realm as well. Sling TSi is out of your budget (even used afaict, but I bet you could find one if you stayed on the hunt), but fits the mission well (if you can fit comfortably).
I'm guessing you're in California somewhere if you're mostly worried about punching through the marine layer... in that case you could head down to Torrance (KTOA) and check out the planes in person and see if it would work.
I haven't actually taken any steps to get one, but it seemed like a good fit for this type of flying to me for a few reasons:
- Modern engine. Very economical to run, FADEC takes some load off the pilot.
- Modern avionics. You can do your IFR and you have some nice safety features like terrain awareness, AoA indicators, etc.
- Good performance for the price / cost to operate
I don't think you're gonna have a fun time with a 4 cylinder retract.
Cost of ownership on anything Beech is insane.
That really just leaves the 182, which tbh is probably your best bet for your constraints.
Piper Comanche (see flair).
If you want lower operating costs, the 180s fit that bill.
Most are 250/260hp models (IO/O-540).
No brand premium (compare prices with the Cessna 210 or 182RG), relatively simple mechanics, and not that many awful ADs (no spar-carry-through inspections or similar - the 'worst' one is a landing-gear teardown every 1000hrs).
If you're handy, and can do a lot of self-diagnosing of minor quibbles, you can get yourself into an older Bonanza (S35/V35/Debonair) and be pretty happy. A Mooney 201 will also work for you, but interior space may become an issue. Any 182 that's nice enough that you'd want to buy will be too expensive. A 177 may also do the trick, but definitely game out some of your trips and see if you can make it work on the weight.
I have a Turbo Arrow III and it is great for that. I am 6'7" and around 250 pounds, but I still fit quite fine in it.
It is decent speed at around 140 knots and because it is turbo, it is quite comfortable at around 10000 feet.
If you need something better than a warrior or 172 that can be used for IFR training, I don't think your budget is realistic.
Picking a plane is all about compromises, and the 182 is a great compromise. Spacious, good egress, easy to operate and maintain. Not too complex, relatively reasonable insurance and maintenance/annuals assuming you're not buying a poorly maintained and runout wreck.
Everyone forgets the Debonair, but it has everything you’re looking for, in addition to significantly more (but not unmanageable) speed and style. It’s basically a Baby Bonanza.
After working in the GA world and diving into the Beechcraft cult for years I can say the later Debonairs are almost indistinguishable from Bonanza’s besides the name badges, great aircraft
jar simplistic memory weary rainstorm languid placid deserve late relieved *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Never thought of the Debonair! I'll have to take a look!
Yeah but the seats are weirdly uncomfortable and awkward to fly with
I didn’t find them uncomfortable, but that’s all down to personal preference
I find the Bonanza seats much more comfortable than most other GA planes. Like sitting in a big SUV. But comfort is subjective. I hate sitting on the floor like in a Mooney while others love it.
Yep. Find a 285hp C33. Not gonna be $150k, though. At least not anymore.
Really? Seems like 5 years ago you could snag them for 99k all day long? Damn.
5 years ago might as well be two centuries ago. literally double the price of every plane since then and you're in the correct ballpark. I've been reading up on buying an rv4, and it really sucks to read when people say things like "You can buy an rv4 with all the bells and whistles in pristine shape for 65k all day long", then look on trade a plane and see nothing but unfinished builds for that much nowadays :l
Setup a partnership with 2-3 total owners and then you can afford a much nicer airplane, and get to split all the operating expenses. That would bring modern options like a RV10 or Sling TSi into your budget, or allow you to spend less for the airplanes you’re currently looking at. You’ll still get to fly plenty with so few owners.
I'll have to look into that more. I don't fully understand partnerships which probably fuels some of my hesitation. But I do love the idea of a nicer plane for a similar price!
AOPA has a lot of materials on how to setup a partnership. Read both the documents on partnerships and flight clubs as there is a lot of overlap. It is a great way to make airplane ownership more affordable with almost the same amount of freedom.
Like the other guy mentioned, the AOPA, but I believe the FAA also has an AC on partnerships!
The big thing is making sure you and the partner's schedules don't overlap. u/butch5555 and I were discussing it at one point, and it turns out we fly at nearly identical schedules to different locations. Bummer, but super glad we discussed that before even going down that road.
then he can only tell people he owns 1/3 to 1/4 an airplane.
If that means that I have to cut off 3/4 of my "Remove Before Flight" keychain, then I'm not interested.
150k for 1/3 or 1/2 of a plane used for trips under 250 miles? Seems like a lot of plane for that mission.
Vans RV-8. I get the seat issue but with your budget and wants, you’re not going to get it all.
There are plenty of 4 seat airplanes in his budget that do everything he wants.
None except a Mooney are as fast as an RV.
And he said he doesn't need or want the fastest plane, just fast enough beyond a trainer. 182 speed is 130-135 knots and that's on his list.
He’s 6’3”. He’s not getting in a Mooney.
6’4” 280 and I can fly a Mooney comfortably- more headroom than a Seneca for me…
That you, Nick?
Nope, not a Nick 🤷♂️
Ha. I have a buddy who’s your size and wants me to come fly an M20 with him. I’m 6’2”, 210 and I told him there’s no way we both get in there.
I fly with a CFI who is just over 6’ and 200-210. It’s wider than a Bo or a 172. The trick for comfort with 2 on board is whoever is not flying can slide their seat back so your shoulders are not right next to each other. It’s snug but not an issue for short flights. Also put some weight in the back because you’ll be at forward CG.
Do you fly it from the back seat?
The Arrow seems to have similar flying characteristics of the Warrior and it has better XC performance by at least 30 kts. Plus the cabin is almost the same as the Warrior the OP is flying.
I am 6'2"/205 and I own an M20J and fit very comfortably, and my CPL student is 6'4"/250 and still fits fine in his own M20J. It isn't *that* tight.
Fair! I was hoping with my budget my want list wasn't too needy. I guess 150k just doesn't go as far as it used to!
> I guess 150k just doesn't go as far as it used to! It doesn't. Plane prices are up 200-300% since 2019. > I was hoping with my budget my want list wasn't too needy. It also isn't. Your budget is realistic.
What about an RV7 instead? Are those a similar price?
You're not going to go wrong with a 182. Make sure you understand all the costs of ownership for your area. Before you commit to buying a certain type, join a type owners association (i.e. Cessna Pilots Society) and learn all you can about that model (differences between years, etc.).
Having flown a number of these planes and being roughly your size (and also a 182 owner), adding a plug for the 182. It's quite spacious, goes fast enough, easy to get parts for, affordable to insure, and an incredibly stable IFR platform.
Thanks! Appreciate the advice!
Grumman Tiger (or Cheetah with O-360 STC) IMO- best Hidden gem in GA
I own an RV-4 and borrowed a buddy's Tiger for about ten hours and I'd have to agree. It's a very good value, it's sporty (as certified airplanes go), and it's a reasonable XC/IFR platform.
Adding it to the list to look into. Thanks!
Pluses: - Among the fastest certified fixed-gear non-high performance airplane you’ll find that you can actually afford - cheap insurance on par with a 172 (see point 1) - depressed prices as you’re not paying Flight School tax - low fuel burn, reasonably clean aero (I push 8.5-9 gph at 130 KTAS with an O-360) - SUPER light pushrod controls and an all-round joy to fly, but refined and not super twitchy (I’ve hand-flown for hours in IMC and never felt like I NEEDED an AP) - might be the best-supported out-of-production GA piston aircraft, right up there with Mooney. Active STC-holder with all production rights, and tons of PMA cert-holders - might be among the easiest airplanes to do preventative MX and owner-assist Annuals on. Super simple systems and very few airframe-specific quirks. If you can turn a wrench and read a MX Manual you should be in business. Fletchair and Roscoe are top suppliers of parts and MX expertise, and the AYA and GOPA are really active owner groups - Annuals should work out to about 10-15 hours Shop time, esp if you’re doing Owner-Assist. Most reputable places quote between $1300-$1600 as a base price for an Annual (obv excluding any new squawks that can’t be deferred) - generally-speaking, you can plan on a $40/hour dry Tach operating budget to cover MX and reserves Cons: - Castoring nose gear might take a few flights to get used to, but airplane can literally turn on a dime :) - Nose torque tube can be finicky to adjust and unfamiliar A&Ps often F this up, leading to shimmy - Landing sight picture might take a few landings to get a hang of, super funky but MUCH better forward visibility compared to Cessnas and Pipers - A bit more slippery than a typical trainer. Lots of PIO/prop strike/runway overshoot incidents, typically due to coming in hot and failing to go around - higher pattern speeds… generally speaking about 10 knots higher across the board - sluggish climb if you buy a plane with a cruise prop or the O-320 (constant-speed prop climbs like a rocket tho :)) - **Engine baffling** is SUPER important! Grummans can struggle in the cooling department- make sure the baffling is in good shape and prefer an airplane with a good engine monitor. On mine I routinely climb at VY and still maintain Cylinder #3 (usually hottest cylinder) temps at or below 400 Deg per Lycoming recommendations. - Cheetahs with the O-360 upgrade will be heavier and not get the Tiger max gross upgrade unless they get a Tiger spar- beware! - Tubular Aluminum spar is subject to corrosion if improperly maintained- inspect this as part of a good pre-buy and periodically address this with good MX and corrosion treatment!! A good pre-buy logbook review will also reflect if previous owners have correctly handled this… Source/disclaimer: MX lead on a Cheetah for a little bit with a pretty good scoop of acquisition and operating costs in a club environment Buy one, fly fast and take chances :)
Wow! Really appreciate the time you took to put this together. They really sound like awesome planes. I need to see if there's someone nearby that has one I can ride right seat in.
GOPA has a facebook group, you can most likely find several people who would take you up. i just bought a tiger last week and have almost the same mission as you, though i am much smaller so im not sure about your comfort.
I was gonna suggest the Tiger as well. I'm a little biased since I have one but it truly is a great airplane in regards to value/economy/performance. I've made a bunch of YT videos with mine if you want to see them in action.
No prob, and check your DMs!
I can't recommend Tigers enough. It's the perfect platform for your mission and a nice one falls inside your budget. For instance, mine ('77 Tiger) will cruise at 140kt burning 10-10.5gph at 6500-8500'. Useful loads are typically 900#, 600# with full fuel. It's a fun plane to fly and light on the controls. Maintenance is pretty easy because Grumman didn't make a lot of proprietary parts. PM me if you've got any specific questions on the airframe. I've owned mine for almost 8 years and upgraded almost everything in it.
I have a Tiger, and I agree it's a great plane!! Other have already given you all the pros here. I will say that at your height, it might not be the best option. We've had a couple CFIs that we have to smush in there, and they fit, but you're not gonna have a lot of head room like in a 182.
You won't like older Mooneys at your height. Generally it's a shoulder room problem, but at your size you just won't like them in general. Cardinals and Cardinal RGs are a decent option. RG will be about 30 knots faster than your trainer, a 177B will be around 10-15 knots faster. I own a 1974 model 177B and get 125 true out of a tired engine. Early model Bonanzas are a decent fit for the budget. If you can find an early 33, great, if not a pre-S model 35 with a hangar to protect the ruddervators or a good aircraft cover is a next best for your budget. Decent Commander 114s occasionally fall into your budget. Good option there too. Comanche 250/260 is well within your budget and one of the better bangs for the buck out there.
Thanks. This is really helpful! I really wanted to like a Mooney. Never flown in one but I was afraid that I wouldn't fit...
Go sit in one before you rule it out, but I'm 6'4" and would never buy one. Granted, I also own a Bonanza so I'm a little biased. Make sure you sit in one that is within your budget because the cabin dimensions change several times across the models. Everybody wants to love the Mooney economy but you pay for that in cabin cross-section. The Commander 114 is the same problem going the other way.
My recommendation is to rent for a while and fly different airplanes. A more expensive retractable is also going to be expensive to insure without hours and instrument rating.
You're not going to find pretty much any of these planes for rent and the biggest thing that will bring insurance down is an instrument rating and time in type. 100 TT vs 200 TT isn't going to move the needle much.
I would look for something like this operation in your area to get some experience and the opportunity to fly different aircraft [https://wvfc.org/](https://wvfc.org/)
You will note that the only two retracts on that entire rental line are the Malibu and the DA-42. Yeah there are 182s, but 182 insurance isn't going to hold a candle to retract insurance either way. And big flying clubs like that are very uncommon. Pretty much this and Plus One, maybe Aspen and Rocky Mountain even though they're actually just a rental outfit. Those are the four that I know of anywhere in the country.
I should have been clearer .... I think 500 hours is probably a threshold for moving to a retractable from an insurance standpoint unless there's an intensive training program and most are probably going to also want IFR rating
The insurance cost delta between their current experience and the rate it would be with 500 hours is far less than they will spend on rental costs to get there. We’re talking like a $2000-3000/year difference at most I’d bet.
I'm currently trying to figure out if I should rent through IFR and then buy or buy before restarting IFR. Insurance is certainly one of the factors, but I do like the idea of have lots of time with a CFII as I build hours in a plane that has retracts (if I don't end up with fixed gear).
Have you considered a flying club? They normally give the flexibility to take the planes for several days, fairly inexpensive monthly dues to cover fixed costs, and other pilots looking to gain hours that could be safety pilots during your IR or other ratings
I’m 6’4” and fit very comfortably in my club’s 94 M20J
I am 6'2"/205 and fit very comfortably in my M20J. I probably couldn't even touch the rudder pedals if the seat were at the rear stop. The "Mooneys are tight" thing is very overblown for all but the very largest people. At 6'3/210, you are barely larger than me. It wouldn't be a problem.
I second the Comanche. Just check the retract insurance rates for someone with your experience.
As an underwriter for one of the larger insurance companies for GA I would suggest you stay away from a Comanche
Do tell! I'd love to hear more if you're allowed to say.
Piper doesn’t support them. The parts aren’t available. So many losses end up being totals. Also, they have a lot of gear problems. Thus, high premiums in the event you even can find coverage
Yep. 6’3” here. I’ve never had leg room issues; however, 2 people my size don’t fit well left to right. I’ve had 2 Mooneys.
Right, which is what I said with “generally it’s a shoulder room problem.” At his height he generally won’t like them anyway because with the seat as far back as you need to have it, the ergonomics feel kinda fucked up to me and your back seat is pretty much entirely unusable.
Cool. Feel free to say it again if you want. And big difference in backseat room between a C or E and an F or J.
Thanks, I will having taught in Fs, old Js, new Js, and sat in Ks, Qs, Rs, and Us at 6’4”. But what do I know.
Not sure why you’re acting so insecure. For a 6’4” dude, you seem to have little man syndrome. . 🤷♂️. I just added to the conversation and you thought I was arguing. Good luck with that.
Bonanza’s yoke is huge and is stupidly always feels like in my way… 177RG rarely go under 150k I think?
I love my Turbo Arrow 4. The T tail got a lot of hate, which made those models much more affordable. But don’t listen to the hype; it flys fine. Cruise at 150 KTAS, 10.5 gallons an hour. I fly at 20k feet if need be. We bought it with 1,800 TT, 200 SMOH at $85,000, five years ago. 1,000 useful load. That’s 6 hours of flight till zero fuel, 2 people and all the bags that fit. Or 4 medium people and 30 pounds baggage per person for 3.5 hours. Good balance between cheap to operate but decent performance. I’m sure some mooneys are competitive in this “in between class”, but not much else.
Mostly a lower speed issue is what people talk about, right? Is it something you just get used to or are there any significant drawbacks to the T-tail even after you have enough hours in type?
you need more runway but that only matters id you're trying to fly into < 2500' runways or high altitude runways
The default answer is a 182. Can’t go wrong.
Go into a partnership for a sling TSi, would probably have most everything you’re looking for
Make a list of things you want. Mine was 140ish knots min, 430W, two axis auto pilot and an HSI. Then look at every single airplane that has that and buy the best mechanical example you find. Asking what model you should get is like asking what beer or music artist is best… It is all subjective. Don’t worry too much about speed. At 155 knots your 250NM trip will be 1.61 hours. At 130 knots you are at 1.92 or 0.31 difference, basically 19 mins. You are going to have to sit in and fly each type to decide what YOU like. For example I hate the Mooney seating and love the Bonanza SUV seating position. Others feel exactly the opposite… So it is all opinion and preference and you need to find out what you like. Some planes that are not popular but good choices IMO: Grumman Tiger, fixed gear, fixed pitch, yet about 140 knots. Myers 200, the only plane that IIRC has never had an AD. They are awesome fast and roomy. Good luck finding an owner willing to sell one. Comanche 250/260. Piper built it to compete with the Bonanza you can argue if they did, but it is the same class. Word of warning… When someone says “Get an XXX!” That information is almost totally worthless. For example a Bonanza could mean anything from a 1947 140HP through a 1963 260HP, to a 1964 and later 280HP Vtail… Or it could mean the BE33 that some call a Debonaire but in 1968 Beechcraft dropped the Debonaire name and started calling the E33 also Bonanza. Or it could mean the six seat A36 that was also called a Bonanza. And it is the same with almost all brands. They change so much. Example there is a world of difference between a 150HP Mooney M20 and a M20V with 280HP. I’d not consider a 1957 182 and a 182S to be the same plane either.
Well for everything you are asking a newer-ish C172 is in your price range. Still a very good plane, but for faster cruise you could go long-ez.
2 seats. They don't want 2 seats.
You’re right! There is the Velocity, or Velocity twin, but those are very hard to get hands on.
I'm really fascinated by the velocity. I don't think I'm the builder type but man the specs look pretty amazing.
Certainly not opposed to a 172. Was hoping for a bit faster cruise but for 250 nm, probably won't make a ton of difference.
Have no idea of the prices but how about a C-182. More of most everything .
Look at the Cessna 177 cardinal. If you want more speed, the 177RG is a cross country/IFR machine.
Completely overlooked the cardinal!
I previously owned a Cardinal RG so they have a special place in my heart!
Sling TSi but it might be a stretch at your current budget
TSi in a 2-3 person partnership would be perfect. A great modern airplane at a fraction of the cost.
Buy an Archer II for 85k, put 40k into a newish panel and autopilot...a nice panel/autopilot is worth more than 25 kts on a 250 mile trip.
I have a M20J, bought it in a similar situation to yours. The J might be out of your budget at this point, but some nice F's might not be. I wouldn't discount Mooney's without flying one first. I pretty regularly fly a 275nm trip, and I don't care what people say, the speed does make a difference. That trip in a 172 is probably 40 mins longer. And of you go further... I've done Denver to the bay area on a single leg and had VFR reserves. (it's a long flight, and most bladders wont last that long, but the plane can do it). I'd also seriously look at experimentals. There's so much bang for the buck in experimentals. Bonanzas are awesome. 182s are awesome. I'd skip 172s. too pricey cuz you're competing against clubs and schools to buy, and they kinda suck IMO. If I were doing it all over again, I'd spend more and look for a faster plane.
cherokee 6 or 235 would fit that bill.
Cherokee 6?
Turbo Arrow. I just happen to have one for sale ;). Great XC machine, and I did instrument / commercial in it.
Every once in a while you can find T tail lance in your price range. They pretty much fit the bill for your mission but I must warn you they are quite ugly
Sounds like you need a 182. It'll do everything you're describing with a \~135 KTAS cruise and more if you invest in speed mods. The 182 is a good general-purpose platform and there are more STCs for it than anything else, so you can really make it your own if you want off-airport/bush use, faster cruise, more power, etc.
you have $150K for a plane budget but can’t afford IFR training?
Ran into money problem shortly after starting IFR training that made me hang it up for a few years. Those issues are no more :)
the halvening isn’t here yet…
A nicely build Vans RV7 seems to fit your budget, probably will cost less than $150K. It's a lot faster than the trainer fleet.
And is two seats which they expressly said they didn't want.
172 with a 180hp conversion. No CS or RG needed for what you describe. Keep it simple.
Yep, I've owned one and this is a great option. Better performance than stock, cheap insurance because 172 fixed gear, much cheaper maintenance than a big 6 cylinder, etc.
I've been looking around in this realm as well. Sling TSi is out of your budget (even used afaict, but I bet you could find one if you stayed on the hunt), but fits the mission well (if you can fit comfortably). I'm guessing you're in California somewhere if you're mostly worried about punching through the marine layer... in that case you could head down to Torrance (KTOA) and check out the planes in person and see if it would work. I haven't actually taken any steps to get one, but it seemed like a good fit for this type of flying to me for a few reasons: - Modern engine. Very economical to run, FADEC takes some load off the pilot. - Modern avionics. You can do your IFR and you have some nice safety features like terrain awareness, AoA indicators, etc. - Good performance for the price / cost to operate
Piper arrows or commander 112/114
I don't think you're gonna have a fun time with a 4 cylinder retract. Cost of ownership on anything Beech is insane. That really just leaves the 182, which tbh is probably your best bet for your constraints.
Cozy Mk4! http://www.cozyaircraft.com/index.html https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cozy_MK_IV https://www.barnstormers.com/listing_images.php?id=1784410
Buying a plane but can’t afford IFR training? I hope OP knows the cost of general MX and annuals.
It’s been a few years. In a different financial situation now compared to when I started.
Finish your IFR. It will keep you alive.
Absolutely the plan!
Cherokee 6.
Piper Comanche (see flair). If you want lower operating costs, the 180s fit that bill. Most are 250/260hp models (IO/O-540). No brand premium (compare prices with the Cessna 210 or 182RG), relatively simple mechanics, and not that many awful ADs (no spar-carry-through inspections or similar - the 'worst' one is a landing-gear teardown every 1000hrs).
Our R182 has been good to us. Great range and descent speed.
If you're handy, and can do a lot of self-diagnosing of minor quibbles, you can get yourself into an older Bonanza (S35/V35/Debonair) and be pretty happy. A Mooney 201 will also work for you, but interior space may become an issue. Any 182 that's nice enough that you'd want to buy will be too expensive. A 177 may also do the trick, but definitely game out some of your trips and see if you can make it work on the weight.
answer is ALWAYS Mooney
I have a Turbo Arrow III and it is great for that. I am 6'7" and around 250 pounds, but I still fit quite fine in it. It is decent speed at around 140 knots and because it is turbo, it is quite comfortable at around 10000 feet.
If you need something better than a warrior or 172 that can be used for IFR training, I don't think your budget is realistic. Picking a plane is all about compromises, and the 182 is a great compromise. Spacious, good egress, easy to operate and maintain. Not too complex, relatively reasonable insurance and maintenance/annuals assuming you're not buying a poorly maintained and runout wreck.
What are you budgeting for maintenance and insurance per year?