AirTalk.org

Slip'er · Guest

I am going to put a lot of constraints on this question, bear with me. How
much does the size of the engine and airframe contribute to cost of
ownership? I am looking at buying a plane as are many of us. I am stuck in
the infinite loop of, well if I spend an extra $5K I can get this...but oh
look, another $5K gets me this and WOW for just another $10K I can get
THIS.....repeat. Somethings are obvious, CS prop more maintenance than
fixed prop. Retrac more maintenance than fixed, etc. But, other than fuel,
is a 180hp much more expensive to maintain than a 160hp or a 115 hp? How
about Continental vs Lycoming vs Franklin vs Ranger radial? I have some
flexibility regarding purchase price. What is more likely to burn me later
on is month to month expenses This is what a need an sensitivity analysis
on.

Thanks.

Helen Woods · Guest

Take a look through the center fold of trade-a-plane and you can get a
basic idea of overhaul cost on individual engines. Overhaul is the main
cost of engine care. Cost of engine overhaul for a give type of engine
will also give you some idea of cost of individual cylinder overhaul
since you'll probably need to pull a jug or two and maybe even do a top
overhaul before TBO. A lot of that depends on how you or the previous
owner have been running the engine, how good the last overhaul was, and
what type of cylinders were used.

Aside from that, you'll need to have some specific engine models in mind
to get an idea of quirks associated with that type of engine. Some
engine types are prone to going through cylinders at greater rates than
others, etc. Horse power and manufacturer don't have as much to do with
that as just the individual model of engine.

You might want to put some queries about specific engines out on this
newsgroup and get some feed back from owners of those. When you get
narrowed down to a speciic plane manufacture - say Cessna - join the
type club and talk to those folks too.

Helen

Marco Leon · Guest

You'll need to analyze your requirements from the airframe (speed vs. useful
load) with the engine. My Warrior fits my mission with the ability to carry
three adults (sometimes 4) and one of the cheaper engines to
maintain/overhaul. In comparison, a friend of mine has a Cherokee 6 300 hp,
cruises 5 knots more than me, and has an engine costing over twice as much
to overhaul ($14K vs $29K). However, he really wants the spacious cabin.

Do what Helen said and check out the overhaul prices. I don't think
Airpower's ad in Trade-A-Plane lists prices anymore so you may need to check
an older copy. Then analyze your mission requirements and crunch some
numbers. Getting a good plane--like having a good marriage--is about
compromising effectively.

Marco Leon

"Slip'er" <cjhixon1 (AT) cox (DOT) net> wrote

Mike Rapoport · Guest

Difficult question to answer. There are two issues. The first is the
obvious increased overhaul cost and increased fuel consumption of the larger
engine. The second is that airplanes with larger engines tend to have more
"stuff".

The best approach is probably to decide what you are realisticaly going to
do and then find a suitable airplane.

Mike
MU-2

"Slip'er" <cjhixon1 (AT) cox (DOT) net> wrote

phkmn2000@yahoo.com · Guest

The 6 cylinder engines tend to be quite a bit more expensive to
maintain than the 4s. - 50% more things to go wrong, extra plugs, etc.
Both Lycoming and Continental have had more recent problems with their
6 cylinder models than on the 4s. Within 4 cylinder models, depending
on where you live parts availability may be an issue for Franklins and
Rangers. Whether it's a 180 or 200 hp Lycoming matters little, though
you will appreciate the extra 200 hp climbing and you can always
throttle back in cruise to control fuel consumption. So for sheer
practicality, I like the 4 cylinder models if they will provide the
performance you need.

Having said that, a 6 cylinder engine with a 3 blade prop provides more
power and speed with less vibration.

Dude · Guest

"Slip'er" <cjhixon1 (AT) cox (DOT) net> wrote

PaulaJay1 · Guest

In article <MhoAd.22474$Cl3.13803@fed1read03>, "Slip'er" <cjhixon1 (AT) cox (DOT) net>
writes:

Helen Woods · Guest

In defense of 6 cylinders, many are older low compression ones like mine
which means one can burn auto fuel. Asuming one has an airport with
auto fuel available the cost difference is about $1/gallon which at 9g/h
leads to a savings of $16,200 over an 1800h TBO period. This pays for
the cost of the overhaul.

Helen

e.drucker.remove@verizon. · Guest

On 29-Dec-2004, Helen Woods <Helen_Woods (AT) cavtel (DOT) net> wrote:

C Kingsbury · Guest

<e.drucker.remove (AT) verizon (DOT) net> wrote

C Kingsbury · Guest

If it's your first plane, the simpler/more common, the better. You have a
whole load of things to learn about and there's nothing better to learn on
than something like a 172, 182, Cherokee, or Arrow. Every mechanic knows how
to work on them and annuals won't break the kids' college fund. Avionics are
flukey and problems in the stack can drive you batty, OTOH if your autopilot
goes TU you can usually just placard it INOP until you feel like paying the
piper. Not so much an option when the engine starts coughing.

IMHO it's hard to do much better than a 180HP 172 for a first plane, though
a good case can be made for the 182 or Arrow class for a more-experienced
pilot who knows he'll get the benefit of the higher cruise speeds or useful
load.

-cwk.

"Slip'er" <cjhixon1 (AT) cox (DOT) net> wrote

e.drucker.remove@verizon. · Guest

On 29-Dec-2004, "C Kingsbury" <cwkingsbury (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote:

Slip'er · Guest

All great feedback so far. Keep it coming. I have made a few posts about
my efforts to select a plane. I am definitely caught in analysis paralysis.
I am also caught up with fear of selling my stock when it is doing so well.
I sold 500 shares to buy Christmas presents, two weeks after I sold them
those 500 shares were worth an additional $3500. I know this matters little
in the big scheme, you can't time the market...etc. But I'm still planning
to hold out until the fall and review my plans. Back to the plane.

I have only flown Citabrias and Decathalons with a little bit of Piper
PA-140 / PA-180 and a PT-23. I love the Citabria/Decathalon but am luke
warm at best about the Archer/172/etc. This bird will be parked outside,
most likely.

I started my quest thinking that a Champ or a Luscombe would fit the bill
for a first plane. But I get caught up in the "a 7ECA isn't that much more
and I get aerobatics and a bigger engine" which is true but, " a 150hp
Citabria isn't much more and I love the extra power" and "wow there are a
few nice examples of 8KCABs out there with a CS prop which is nice for
aerobatics and cruise, AND they don't cost much more..." So this is my main
dilema aside from purchase price, what is the difference in relative
maintenance from each of this family when comparing models of similar
condition. They typically don't have a lot of "extras" which is fine for
me. I am VFR only and don't plan to get instrument rated. (although I have
done and will continue to do a bit of training in my friends plane for a
margin of safety should I need it someday) If I buy into this group I'd
really like to get the metal spar and heavy lift struts.

Then more skitzophrenai...Should I really hold fast to taildraggers and
stick? Yes! I dream about bush flying all of the time and with my own
plane, 3-4 day weekend trips will actually be possible. (ever try to rent a
Citabria for a 3 day weekend? Good luck!) Wait, if I go for a faster
plane, I have access to more places. If I had say a Long-Eze or other
slippery plane in my price range I could really explore America.

Wait, I have kids. How often will I be able to realistically take off for
3-4 day trips. That probably isn't a good selection criteria. Best to
stick with day trips, again though speed is distance. Hmm, I love the
tandem seating but, my kids would really like to be up front and that would
be nice for them to learn more and enjoy each others company.

OMG, Look at that Great Lakes! No, wait, later! Wait until the kids are in
College. That cannot be a good idea right now.

So, I really think I'll be looking at a Citabria type aircraft. It seems
to be where my "comfort" zone is, probably because I soloed in a 7ECA and
most of my time is in Citabrias. The question is, should I buy the absolute
minimum aircraft that meets my "needs" or buy what I can afford for maximum
fun? One thing is true with Motorcycles, Cars, Boats, and Airplanes....you
can never have too much horse power.

Part of me says buy the minimum plane ie 7ECA for two reasons. Put the
minimum money at risk and use this first purchase as a learning experience.
This will increase reserves in case I really screw up and said reserves can
also hide some of the real expense from my wife who supports me in this but
is also an accountant...and I hear about my excessive hobbies. But if say a
150 HP Citabria is about the same to maintain...why not spend a little extra
money?

When I really think about it, this wouldn't be such a difficult decision if
I were single. The real pain I feel is that buying a plane feels so
selfish! This is a huge, expensive hobby for ME. Yes, my kids will enjoy
it but I doubt my wife will fly with me until the kids are out of the house.
My kids have flown with me and enjoy it but truth be told...they'd rather
have a boat (my wife would too). Which clearly means...this is for me. But
darn it, I have wanted this all of my life. They just "want" a boat because
I brought it up one day when I took them sailing on a friends 28 ft
sailboat.

Time for my medication...

Stealth Pilot · Guest

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 01:38:56 -0800, "Slip'er" <cjhixon1 (AT) cox (DOT) net>
wrote:

Matt Whiting · Guest

C Kingsbury wrote: