which fast single prop to buy

[deadstick]

Why would you need to depend on the chute?

Sorry, didn't complete the thought: ...to recover from a spin.

Back to the planes...

Mooney: wouldn't go near them right now. I don't know how THIS will affect parts supplies.

FWIW:
Conklin & deDecker DOC:
350: $106/hr
SR22: $109/hr
T182T: $103/hr

This is based on a 300nm trip:
Time:
350: 1.6 hrs
SR22: 1.7 hrs
T182T: 1.9 hrs

STD Useful Load:
350: 1100 lbs
SR22: 1150 lbs
T182T: 1037 lbs

 

[ALIMBO]

We should get some numbers for insurance for each of those planes plus fuel burn. I take it you took an average for the speeds but the difference in those times is minimal. I think people would be more concerned over the fuel burn than a 20 min difference. None the less awesome post I wish I had time to look it up myself.

 

[deadstick]

We should get some numbers for insurance for each of those planes plus fuel burn. I take it you took an average for the speeds but the difference in those times is minimal. I think people would be more concerned over the fuel burn than a 20 min difference. None the less awesome post I wish I had time to look it up myself.

The fuel burn is factored into the DOC (Direct Operating Cost).

The insurance will the best on the 182. I have seen one pilot's quotes for the SR22 and the T182T. The Cirrus was almost 4x that of the Cessna. Resale value tends to favor Cessnas. Also, if you break somewhere, everybody can fix a 182.

 

[ALIMBO]

I think if it was me I would grab the T182. Then again I would need something with more seats and a useful load.

 

[belchfire]

I think that there are some Alison powered 210's out there, but even the piston, non-turbo, unpressurized C-210 is a good and honest machine. And you don't need an autopilot. If you trim it up it will stay put.

If you only need two seats, Glasair III!

 

[Publishers]

Take the Cirrus G3 everytime. New Technology, great speed, visability, passenger comfort, and enough there is product support.
While the Cessna 400 is good, not as comfortable, and a bit more truckish than the Cirrus.Flown them both and Cirrus is it.

 

[eagle06]

Demonstrated parachute performance is 135 kts. That's just the speed at which the CAPS has been shown to work. If you are above and can't bleed off airspeed, pull the chute anyways. Personally I'm not sure if its ever been pulled above that speed or what the outcome was. As far altitude needed it needs 400 feet in normal flight 800 in a one turn spin.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20050222X00211&key=1

I believe there is at least one more but I am too lazy to search for it. High speed CAPS deployment can be very bad in these airplanes.

 

[eagle06]

To the OP
The cirrus is a fantastic airplane for trips within 400-500 miles. It is by far the best single pilot IFR plane I have ever flown (provided you have reasonable instrument skills, can handle somthing a bit faster then a cessna, and can manage the automation properly). The cirrus is not an honest 4 seater in my opinion but most arnt. The only experience I have with Mooneys is with older C and J ? models. I would highly recommend the Cirrus compared to both of those. Newer models may change my mind but i dont know.

 

[Knob]

There are some great deals on used 231 mooney's right now. 13 GPH and 170 kts down low is hard to beat. Ceiling of FL240 will get you over alot of wx also. Also ckeck out the 252 rockets-www.aso.com