Thoughts on the Aztec?

[minitour]

Anyone? Anything?

-mini

 

[mocaman]

I like it. I used it for my complex requirement for commercial and multi. I flew the E model (1971). I was operating out of a 3500 by 35 foot strip. I went from warrior, 150, to that. It was a handful. But anyway, it feels good, and landings seem very easy in it. I have not flown another twin, so I guess i cant be much help. I was going to either fly a 310 or aztec, per suggestions from this board I chose the aztec. Hope that helps a tad.

 

[Catnhat]

Flys like a big Cherokee. I used to fly freight in them over the Great Lakes. They'll haul a load of boxes for a long time, but you won't go far! Kind of slow and lumbering, but pretty easy to fly.

 

[fokkers&beer]

I flew bank checks with them. Loved the airplane, it could haul a bunch of ice, and then get you home for a few beers. If I could afford the fuel I would probably buy one. That is the down side of them, they are thirsty. As we would say, they may be slow and ougly, but they burn alot of gas.

 

[JimG]

"I flew bank checks with them. Loved the airplane, it could haul a bunch of ice, and then get you home for a few beers...."


I've been told that by more than one Aztec pilot. Never wanted to try it myself. I have this aversion to ice.


I've flown one once.

If you're thinking of buying a twin of this class, I'd consider the C310 first. It's just a much better quality airplane.

I don't think the 310 has the useful load as the Aztec, but you'll get there alot faster, burn less fuel.... and it's alot more fun to fly.

 

[bigD]

I'd consider the 310 to be a different class of airplane, personally. Are you sure it burns less fuel? I thought the 310 had bigger engines.

The Aztec is a great airplane, and one I'd look to buy given the money. The cabin is cavernous.

 

[bugchaser]

Aztec is a good, safe twin. Not too sexy, but it's a good honest airplane. I love 310's but they can be a little more unforgiving and the maintenance costs can be much higher.

 

[DGdaPilot]

Mmmmm....Cessna 310. Now THAT was a fun airplane to learn in.

 

[JimG]

I'd consider the 310 to be a different class of airplane, personally. Are you sure it burns less fuel? I thought the 310 had bigger engines.

The Aztec is a great airplane, and one I'd look to buy given the money. The cabin is cavernous.

The 310's have 285's. I think they're a little bigger than the Aztek's, but airspeed is probably 30+ kts faster, so it will take less getting there was my theory.

 

[DGdaPilot]

I assume you mean 285hp per side. The newer 310's had IO-520s. The older models had 470s. I recommend the R-model 310. Newer and easier to land with the longer nose.

 

[minitour]

More questions...

What kind of performance do they get, as in:
Fuel burn (typical cruise)?
SE Climb (ISA? 5000'?)
SE Handling?
Endurance?
How much crap can they haul with one pilot and VFR reserves?
Takeoff and landing distance?
Cruise (TAS)?

Is 70k for a known ice, no GPS, autopilot equipped Aztec asking too much?
How much is mx going to run? Annual?
Insurance?
Are they single pilot friendly?

Think that's it for now. Any help would be great...estimates are fine for the performance stuff...don't worry about lookin' anything up, I'm just looking for general numbers. Thanks!

-mini

 

[bigD]

You thinking of buying one, mini?

 

[minitour]

You thinking of buying one, mini?

Depends...I'm close to 135 VFR mins, so...maybe. I might have a few in's with the electric company to transport some big-wigs to meetings and such. Plus taking linemen back and forth to disaster areas. I was asked yesterday if I could take 4 guys to NO. I guess they want to see how many guys/trucks they need to take down there and the local charter prices are out of their price range (king air's/lears).

For 70k, I might be able to talk my wife into it...just looking for some specifics.

-mini

*edit*
Plus, if I can add the MEI on, I can probably get 5-6 other guys to go in with me if I give free initial multi-instruction to owners. Then just use photo flights, traffic (I know a few people at the radio stations), rubber dog sh!t flights, etc. as a way to help offset mx, hangar, insurance, etc.

 

[FearlessFreep]

They don't call the Aztec the "Aztruck" for nothing! From my understanding will haul everything including ice, easy to fly. Only have a little time in them including a bit of ice. Considering that the original design was based on the rather underwhelming Apache it's quite an improvement.

The 310 is a great aircraft as well but is very different. I got my MEL in the 310 and my instructors would say that if you can land a 310 you can land anything.

The 310 speaks big airplane, it sits high on the gear and seems very substantial. It flys and behaves like a bigger plane. If you are stepping up from a 172 or similar aircraft you will have fun as you enter the pattern downwind at about 120 Kts, that's faster than what the 172 cruises at! Some do not like the way the 310 flys as it has a pronounced dutch roll that many people complain about. I would say that the Baron has a bit more harmonious control response, but you are constantly rubbing elbows with whomever you sitting next to or banging you head on the upper side wall. The 310 has a much nicer cabin. I have flown both the short snout and long snouted models. Personally I never saw what the big deal was in landing any of the 310's.

The earlier model 310's I believe were 240 HP pressure carb O-470's. Later models have a fuel injected IO-470 260 HP engine. The R models have IO-520 285 HP engines. They will drink more fuel and have some cracking problems from what I have heard. My favorite model is the 310Q, the last model with the IO-470's.

The Aztec and 310 are a few of the light twins that were from the beginning designed as such. Many others light twins are basically single aircraft that have be "twinned" like the Travelair, Baron, Seminole, Seneca, Twin Comanche, Dutchess.

One of the most interesting design concepts that I have seen is that the basic Bonanza wing section has been used in nearly the entire later Beech line. You can see it in everything from the Bonanza, Baron, King Air and the 1900.

Oh well, so much for discussion on the Aztec!

 

[JimG]

"The R models have IO-520 285 HP engines. They will drink more fuel and have some cracking problems from what I have heard. My favorite model is the 310Q, the last model with the IO-470's."


And they have some exaust problems too.

I think every airplane built has "something".

I was in the market looking for a T310Q/R, when I came across a deal for a C340 that was too good to pass up. I liked the looks of the R model with that long nose (still think it's nicer looking than mine), but the later model Q's do just about everything the R's do for alot less money.

I never really considered a Baron, even though I'd flown and loved my Bonanza for almost 20 years. Their price tags were too high for what you got (elbow to elbow and low ceilings as previously written).

If you're looking for a cheap twin to haul heavy loads and don't mind burning 30gph for 160 kts, the Aztek is the better deal over the 310.

If you can find a decent one for 70K....that's a great price. A decent 310 will be almost twice that for the earlier models and nearly 3x that for a later model R.

 

[bigD]

I'm not sure that it's quite 30gph, Jim. I remember it being more like 25. But regardless, like you said, it's a good amount of gas for 160 knots or so. But that's the price you pay to be able to fill it with gas, carry six and all their luggage, and still be under gross.

I never flew one with long range tanks, but even with 192 gallons of gas, you can still fill the thing with people, a bunch of bags, and be under gross. That's amazing. And the cabin is huge and comfortable. I really like the Aztec.

 

[Flight_Line]

I flew around with a crazy doctor in an Aztec for a while. It's a good plane. You are looking at 165Kts and 26-30 GPH. I also did a guy's multi rating in his Aztec. As far as weight and ballance goes I remember the example we used was full seats @ 170 Lbs. full baggage (300 Lbs) and as much fuel as you could carry. I think we would have had to leave out 4 gallons (140 Gal total). Just on a side note. I think the Aztec is to official bird of the Bahamas.

 

[Vector4fun]

Mini, you really need to find an a/p or a/i who's familiar with them and get a list of things to check out. Systems, fuel bladders, prop ADs, airframe ADs, etc. New bladders, a couple props, and some ADs not documented could cost you another $25K easy...

 

[JAFI]

IMHO an Aztec is a (now old) pick up truck. Not very fast, not very sexy, but it will haul a bunch of stuff and prople for short distances. How economical it is will take some home work to decide. Remember they are 40 years old. Like any fourty year old pick up the up keep may be more than it is worth. Before you by one to haul big wigs around, they may want THEM take a look at what you have to see if they want to fly in an Aztec.

Good luck in your venture.

Remember: The way to make a small fortune in aviation is to start with a big one.....

JAFI

 

[Publishers]

I owned a number of them. The Baron and Cessna 310 were good airplanes and maybe a better pilot's aircraft, however, the Aztec was a great terrific family aircraft. As stated, it can haul not only the weight but the dimensions as well. Try putting some golf clubs and people in a Baron versus the Aztec. Good engines, reasonable speed, can carry the ice that is advertised, and maintains as good as anything.

 

[JimG]

"I think the Aztec is to official bird of the Bahamas."

__________________
That's where I got my experience to/from Abaco/Ft. Lauderdale.

 

[CDVdriver]

We fly an Aztec.
Sweet plane, I flightplan 160 kts @65% pwr (21MP 2300rpm)
Ours will actually do 185kts TAS if you firewall it and give it 10 min to accelerate.
It gained 10kts after the paintjob and another 10 kts with the new engines.
160kts @24 gallons/hr total.
It's nice and light on the flight controls in the air, and a bit of a big baby on one engine. By far the most pleasant SE characteristics of any multi I've flown.
Single engine with 20mp 2300rpm on the working one the speed is still 110-120kts TAS and ours climbs with 500fpm past 8000' .
Meaning you'll overtake and outclimb a 172 or even an Arrow on one engine at 8000'
Not at MTOW, never tried it but weight doesn't really seem to make a difference with this plane.
Wouldn't really trust anything for sale for 75K seems low to me.
A good plane with decent avionics should get about 120K and I've seen totally tricked out ones for 175K.
Are the engines over time or what?
Does it have a damage history, has it been flown recently or sitting on a ramp somewhere?
I looked at an Aztec some time ago with a "new" paintjob, corrosion coming through already and serious corrosion in the tanks, I'm talking quarter inch stalagtites. Tanks need to be put away wet, full fuel, to prevent corrosion.
Once that happens your whole fuel system is FUBAR and needs to be replaced.
Find an old and wise A&P that has a lot of experience with them and that can tell the model years apart. Minor differences and different AD's for them.
Since they're generally 40+ years old there might be some not so legal anymore modifications done years and years ago.
Really pay somebody to do this right.

 

[FN FAL]

Anyone? Anything?

-mini

They were designed back in the day when pilots wore flannel shirts...and they liked it.

 

[empenage]

Loved the Aztec. Used to haul cats in one from MMU to LNK. If it fit through the door you could haul it. The heater was funny though, ran on avgas.

Good airplane though.

 

[flyinlow67]

Good airplane that won't get you into trouble unless you really try. Flew freight in Aztrucks for a year. All of it single pilot and mostly at night. Flew countless IFR hours in the plane. Picked up all kinds of ice in the thing, and made it home every time.
The airplane does great on one engine, but as stated before, they are kinda thirsty.
I flew a 5.5 hour leg in one one night and still had 1.5 left in the tank. I wouldn't recommend doing that because of bladder and back restrictions, but the aircraft will handle it fine.
The only squawk I really have on the bird, is that the engines can be kind of tempermental on a hot start. There is a trick to doing it unless you want to crank your battery down.

 

[fokkers&beer]

I forgot about trying to hot start those stupid lycomings. I recall the engines are the lycoming 540, or is it 520?, I remember one is in the big Lycoming, and the other is the big Continental, but its been more than a few years since I have dealt with that side of aviation.
It brings back long forgotten memories of new hires, on a muggy summer midwest night, fresh out of IOE trying to start those things and the pyrotechnics show that followed out of the exhaust. Those were the days.

 

[Publishers]

If I remember right, no fuel pump on a hot start. Get the cranking with everything back and bring mixture up with a slight crack in throttle.

 

[Geronimo4497]

Aztecs are a great machine. I remember flying my whole family in a 1972 E model from BOS to someplace near the finger lakes in upsate NY. 27 GPH is the normal fuel flow that I saw.

Hot start problems? - "Be one with the engine"

Aztecs are nice, but hate the fuel bill. I'm currently restoring a 1961 Geronimo Apache with 180 Lycomings. I always enjoyed that machine, and can't wait to get it flying again. SE performance is not as good as the Aztec at gross weight, but it does just fine with full tanks and 2 people on board.

 

[flyinlow67]

If I remember right, no fuel pump on a hot start. Get the cranking with everything back and bring mixture up with a slight crack in throttle.

El correcto!
And the engines are Lycoming IO-540's