6 seat piston for under 100K? advice pls

[utahpilot]

I have a student who wants to buy a 6 seat AC to 1. learn to fly in and 2. eventually fly his family around in

anyone done this? I'm an MEI, if he gets a twin I've got 5 hours in, can I do all his training and satisfy his insurance, or will he not be able to even buy/insure a plane like this?

advice is appreciated

 

[BradG]

Cherokee 6 260 or 300.......shouldnt be TOO tough to insure........and will sure haul a load......probobly just under the 100k mark

 

[Steve]

A cessna 206 or 210 should do. Could find a good one for under 100k. Cessna 310's usually go for about the same as the 210's

 

[bigD]

Cherokee Six 300 would be my choice. I flew one for a couple of months, and it's one of the few true 6 placers out there. It can haul a ton. Even the more modern 6 seaters like the Saratoga and A36 can't touch it in terms of hauling ability. I only saw 135 knots on a good day, though.

If your student can only afford 100K, I'm not sure he'd want to spend the money maintaining a twin that costs less than that. You can get 6 in an Aztek for under 100K, but it won't be a very nice one, and it'll probably send him to the poor house in very little time. This is before you start talking insurance, etc...

 

[00Dog]

The Cessna 205's go for a lot less than the 206. Basically the same plane but with an IO-470.

 

[Anaconda]

cool thread...i have a friend that want's to do the same thing. said he prefers a twin, but i told him he was smoking crack, stick with a high-perf single (for $$$ reasons). i'm also interested to see what sort of feedback you get here.

 

[Timebuilder]

Cherokee Six.

 

[Beantown]

T-tail lance, good load (around 1000 lbs full fuel I think), good speed (150kts), T-tail has bad reputation (not deserved in my opinion) so it can be had for a good discount. Good luck, -Bean

 

[Tim47SIP]

PA 32-300

I owned a six for several years. Sorry I sold it. Almost 1700 pounds usefull load (0 fuel). She had tip tanks and could fly longer that I could. Never had a problem loadin her up. If I bought another aircraft, it would deffinitely be another Six! You can get them for well under 100K.

 

[bigD]

The Lance is a nice plane, and Beantown is right - the t-tail has an undeserved reputation. It increases the takeoff and landing distances a little, but unless you're operating out of some VERY small airfields, it's not much of a problem. Just don't treat the thing like a Warrior and you'll be fine. Trim is your friend.

The problem is that most halfway decent Lances are just a bit over the 100K mark. Usually around 110-140K or so. That kind of cash will buy a primo Six and fuel for quite some time.

 

[sabreliner]

Cherokee 6-300.

For a new student, you can't beat it. It is reasonably easy and forgiving to fly. You can pickup a nice one well within your price range. It has simple systems that help keep the operating costs down, and it shouldn't be too hard to insure.

I'd be wary of getting your friend into something complex or with 2 motors for several reasons. Number 1, he'll never be able to get insurance. Number 2, it will be a lot more difficult to learn in and a lot less forgiving, making him more likely to get discouraged and quit. Number 3, it won't cost a bundle and scare him out of the market.

My thoughts anyway.

 

[CF34-3B1]

Gotta add my vote for a -Six (300)

When I was instructing, I had a student wanting to do exactly the same thing, and had exactly the same idea of "I really want a twin..."

Even though he didn't have a $100k limit (he was a Dr. had $ to burn) he DID have a "Value" limit.

After crunching the numbers of not only acquisition and operating/maintenance costs, but especially insurance, he finally settled on a fixed gear Saratoga. Having flown it for close to 100hrs with him, and also having a lot of Seneca time, I gotta tell you, if it were my $ I'd go for the -Toga or the -Six too. The Seneca is a great airplane, but the difference in $ versus the performance is so dramatic I'd have a hard time justifying a light twin.

The added expense of the retractable HP singles or light twins is usually not worth it to someone looking for a family hauler. The main reasons you see so many of them has more to do with emotional decisions (they're sexy) than practicality.

Get the -Six.

 

[Timebuilder]

Right on.

The only reason I would consider the Seneca or a similar plane would be to operate it as a part of a flight school fleet/leaseback, or if I had to build multi time quickly.

For personal flying, where money is no barrier, the Baron is a top notch piston choice. You would pay an insurable instructor to fly with you until you reached the experience necessary for insurance. A lot of MEI's would make themselves available for that, to be sure.

Other than that, the Six is the plane of choice.

 

[capt_zman]

CF34,

Got to disagree with you here. It's off topic here, but I would put my BE58 baron up against anything in the family hauling category. I routinely put 4 adults, 2 kids and baggage on trips from MA to FL (average 5.5 hours of flight time and requires one fuel stop in NC/SC).

Try that in any six place single, it just isn't going to happen. I burn 28-30 gals per hour, which isn't much more than the six or saratoga. I also plan on 185 kts in the summer and 190-195 in the winter. Again, try that in a cherokee six or fixed gear saratoga.

Nothing emotional about this decision, even though it is so much sexier than a cherokee or saratoga

 

[bigD]

Well, in the 300 powered six that I flew, I could easily get 4 adults, 2 kids, and some baggage off the ground with full tanks of gas - I'd just be pushing them through the air at 135 knots instead of 185! And yes, the Baron is far sexier than the Six. It certainly wasn't a great looking plane!

But lemme ask you this - would you be willing to sell your Baron for less than 100K?

 

[capt_zman]

You can't have mine, but at today's prices, you can find something for close to that.

 

[bigD]

D*ammit zman - don't temp me! That LAST think I need to be looking at doing is buying a plane right now.

 

[GuppyPuppy]

The PA32-300 is a great airplane for a family.

With the tip tanks full and the mains to the tabs you still have over 4 hours of fuel onboard. It burns 16gph in cruise and will true out in the 130-140kt range.

One thing not mentioned yet on this thread is the fact that the Cherokee Six is roomy. I am a big guy (6'6", 230lbs) and have plenty of space except when I have to put someone directly behind me. It has more room than a 206 and a Bonanza/Baron.

One interesting consideration about the Six is that it has a max zero-fuel weight of 3112lbs. Coupled with an empty weight of about 1965lbs that leaves you a max payload of 1147lbs. There is no zero fuel weight in the Saratoga.

I will routinely take the Six into a 1900' gravel strip up here in AK with 5 or 6 onboard.

If I had the money and the need to haul a family around, the Six would definitely be the aircraft at the top of my list.

Good luck.

Cheers!

GP

 

[hyper]

Another thumbs up for the PA-32-300 . Excellent all-purpose plane. Keep it simple and stay away from retracts for now. Higher insurance and higher maintenance costs.

Although a Baron would be nice, it just ain't in the price structure. If he's a new student (as you said) the insurance would be almost as much as the plane, if you could even get it. High performance twin-low/no time, etc., etc.. Not to mention the risk. Not to belittle you or your skills, but how much time do you have in a Baron, or hi-perf twin for that matter? Would you truly feel competent enough to teach a fresh student in such an aircraft that would be as new to you as well, without any kind of transitional progression? 5 hrs may make you legal, but unless you have more time in some other hi-perf twin, it ain't much. Teaching someone to fly in a 190kt aircraft is more like a rectal exam if you ask me.

Just some things to ponder. Many people get caught up in the regs, but fail to consider the safety and realism.

 

[hyper]

P.S. If you find a Baron for under $100k.....it's a basket case.

 

[capt_zman]

The baron is a better solution for me, whereas it might not be attractive to others. For instance, going into and out of an 1900 ft strip with 5 or 6 is not an option for me.

Like I said, I routinely fly from the Northeast to FL. IMO, doing that in a six is not a (routine) option due to no ice protection and limited weather protection. It also lacks the second engine (maybe start this in another thread). The six is a great airplane, it just serves a different set of needs.

As for the 100k limitation, your right, there isn't another airplane that can come close.

Good luck in your search.

 

[SDdriver]

2 planes in my opinion.

Cherrokee 6, they don't fly them in Alaska all the time for no reason. GREAT load. no retracts means less MX.

Cessna 210, Good load also and fast...lots of 135 operators use the 210 and for very good reason. I personally would go with a 210...I just think Cessna always did it right when it comes to building a plane that FLIES, on the other hand Piper only had one really good plane in my opinion and that was the J3. I have flown lots of Pipers and Cherokees, I like the better speed than their Cessna counterparts, but god help you when the engine quits, definantly can't beat a cessna when it comes to glide performance.

I would stay well away from a T-Tail lance...I have 300 or so hours in one and I think the tail sucks. It was a fun plane, but stall and slow flight characeristics just aren't up to par.

Good luck!

 

[TDTURBO]

Sddriver,

I agree with you on the 210 but allot of people don't know that a PA-28-1xx WILL outglide a 172. Check the POH's, I did out of curiosity and many people have lost money to me betting on the Cessna.

I routinely fly from Chicago to Orlando non-stop in my 182rg at 156 kts, I could put 2 kids and 4 adults in it but they would have to be very small kids. I think a P210 with known icing would work just as well as a Baron at half the cost.

 

[wingnutt]

interesting thread...

i cant really comment on the Piper family as 99% of my time has been in Beechcraft hardware. i will however say that a competing 135 company here locally flies the -6 and everyone (and i mean everyone) moans and gripes about them...mostly from the aspect of speed (or lack thereof) but that is just the tip of the iceburg. of course, they are comparing themselves to the bonanza line that we run, and frankly i dont think its much of a comparison.

sure, to be able to fly your family from point A to point B is nice, but is speed not the name of the game? for that reason, i hafta go with the Bonanza. we routinely run 600 pounds of freight (granted, thats a stripped out model) and average about 172K across the ground...theres my recomendation right there.

that being said, ive met quite a few Flight Express guys flying the 210, and all i can say is wow. i had no idea that little puppy could move that much freight. im told approx 1,000 pounds and similar speed to the Bonanza.

but...for the ultimate in everything, i agree the Baron rules. its fast, it hold its weight well, and yes, it does have a bit of sex appeal.

 

[supsup]

Toga Toga Toga

Go with the fixed gear Toga. As a student pilot learning in a plane with the tapered wing (toga) vs. the hershey bar (lance) is much easier. I made a few long x-c trips in the toga with 5 adults, both baggage compartments full and about 65-70 gallons and was completely within c.g. limits. Cruise speed 150-155 kts. As previously mentioned in another post the lance is very sloppy at slow airspeeds. I think the toga would be much more forgiving for a low time pilot. Plus i just like saying, toga toga toga toga toga.

supsup

 

[desert pilot]

Only one mentioned the c-206,am I missing something here? Is the c-206 not as good as the cherokee 6???

 

[LR25]

Have to disagree with some of the cherokee 6 guys.

The Cherokee 6 -260 has a better usefull load I believe than the 300, and you dont have to worry with the fuel injection.

Its been a few years since I was flying the 6-260 but I will check the #'s when I get back into town.

But I do agree, the 6 is one of the better chioces out there for a single to haul with.

As far as the T tail Lance, I would disagree also, them things dont like to get off the groung to easy.

I used to operate a 6 on short grass runway's, I would not even entertain the thought of doing that with a T-tail lance, plus it has retracts, you really dont need them, the 6 proves it.