I've decided to buy a T210. Advice is welcom

Matt Barrow wrote:




I had a 1981 T210...it was fast, comfortable and a maintenance hog. It spent
almost as much time in the shop as it did in the air. Not sure I got a
lemon, but 210's are "noted" for high upkeep.

Yep, that's what I've heard too. With a 210 you get the newest one you
can find. When I decide I need to go fast no way do I buy a Cessna
retract, and I'm a Cessna guy. Bonanza all the way with me.

"Newps" wrote:
I had a 1981 T210...it was fast, comfortable and a maintenance hog. It
spent
almost as much time in the shop as it did in the air. Not sure I got a
lemon, but 210's are "noted" for high upkeep.

Yep, that's what I've heard too. With a 210 you get the newest one you
can find. When I decide I need to go fast no way do I buy a Cessna
retract, and I'm a Cessna guy. Bonanza all the way with me.


The gear usually isn't where the maintenance money goes, unless you have an
older 210 with the main gear doors still on it. Engine and turbocharger
problems are what eat up my 210-owning friend.

In 600+ hours of owning a Cessna retract, the only money I've spent on the
gear (outside of whatever it costs to swing them for the annual) was a
one-time AD inspection that revealed no problems. Early Cardinal RGs are
known for troublesome gear, but later ones are ok in that respect. 172 and
182 RGs are not notably troublesome as long as proper maintenance is done and
their actuators and pivots have had the relevant AD and SB done.

Still rather have a Bonanza, though.

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM