On 2008-03-03, Alan wrote:
I don't fully disagree that they are different, but in many of the
factors I was thinking of, the 152 can come out on top. For example,
some have objected to the Rotax engines, preferring Lycoming or
Continental. The 152 (or 150) is well known by service folks, pretty
much anywhere. You can take the 152 out of the country if you wish.

A lot of these things are reasons I picked the Zodiac as my LSA.

Yes, the 150/152 is not sexy. However, most all I have seen have at
least attitude indicator, heading indicator, and turn coordinator.
(These were popular to have in planes that might be trainers.) It
seems that many LSAs don't have any of these.

Mine will.

Now, the LSA has the *NEW* feature, somewhat different, some may be
more fun to fly. Yes, I even probably want one. However, at the price,
I need to convince myself it makes more sense than a cessna for half the
price (or less).

Less, certainly. My Zodiac will cost six times or more what a used 152
would. OTOH, for that, I'm getting a very well equipped aircraft that will
outperform a 152 with the same engine, and it will be my airplane in a way
that a 152 would only be if I sunk $20K or more into the paint and panel and
interior. That's an intangible that really attracts me. It'll also have been
built in 2008, not 1978.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (getting ready to order)