If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Matt Whiting wrote: Newps wrote: Nope. First off a Bonanza doesn't break. Not like the tin cans your looking at. That's the first thing I noticed, however that makes the plane a little heavier. I really hate weight but that's the trade off. To compare to the 182 I had doing the same test the Bo with two seats in, myself and 40 gallons only needs an extra 100 feet of runway, 550 feet vs 450. Lands and gets stopped in same distance. The real beauty is once you're in the air it will far outclimb your 182/Cherokee, which is really what you're looking for, right, being there in Colorado? I know it will climb at a higher rate, but is it really a steeper gradient? Yep, the test was when we left Schafer Maedows last July. Your leaving from the valley floor with the mountains 4-5000 feet above you. In the 182 I would take off and then manuver next to the mountains for some lift but would still have to circle back in the valley to get the required altitude to head for home. With the Bo there's no circling required. I've got about 4-500 fpm more real world climb and I'm going 30-40 mph faster in the climb as well as 50 mph faster once levelled out burning less gas on that 470 nm round trip. The Arrow I fly now climbs at a slightly lower rate than my 182 did, but the gradient is much less as best rate on the Arrow is about 100 MPH vs. around 70 in the Skylane if memory serves. If I want to go at the same climb speed as I did in my 182, 80 mph, I would still outclimb the 182. At Schafer I am airborne with gear up in ground effect before the halfway point, about 1800 feet, I accelrate as much as possible at about 50 agl and then zoom climb as the 100 foot trees approcah at the end of the runway, climbing about 2000 fpm for about 30 seconds and then settling back to 13-1500. |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Matt Whiting wrote: Newps wrote: Thomas Borchert wrote: Newps, It's just going to cost more all around. More than something from Beech??? Come on. Let's just say you seem to really like your Bo... ;-) I'm a data point of one but the high prices just don't pan out. It's like shock cooling, more myth than reality. Operational costs maybe, but initial purchase of a Bo isn't inexpensive by any measure. It's not as bad as the conventional wisdom would have you believe. Mine is the first year of the big baggage area and engine and also the fastest of all the normally aspirated models, 1964. I do not have an autopilot, that's the only thing I miss although not too much and I paid $88K. You can buy a lot of Bonanza for less than $100K. |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Matt Barrow wrote: The inverse of price is availability. No, the inverse is market demand. There's no demand for a Trinidad but they're new so the price will be high. There's a huge demand for the 182, of most moel years, so their price will be high. There's no corresponding demand for a 235, their price will be low. |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Matt Barrow wrote: "Newps" wrote in message . .. Beech just announced they are lowering prices on the Bonanza and Baron. Now a typically outfitted glass panel Bo has a suggested retail of $574K down from $667K. The Baron goes from $1.186 million to $1.046 million. Just as I (more or less) predicted in the thread about the Raytheon buyout. The feeling in the Beech crowd is the new owners will generally be good for Beech. |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Ken Reed wrote: But they look cool! Might as well look cool and go fast. I didn't realize that Mooneys were being considered. They weren't. No good off road. |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Douglas Paterson wrote: "Newps" wrote in message . .. Douglas Paterson wrote: The further I get in this process, the more I'm leaning away from the Comanche and toward the Trinidad You said the Bonanza was not the right plane for you but the Trinidad is? Holy Cow. I don't understand this comment. You're obviously a Bonanza fan, and I'm starting to gather you don't care for Trinidads--but am I missing something objective here? I have nothing against the Trinidad, I think it's cool looking. But to say the Bo isn't what you're looking for but the Trinidad is makes no sense whatsoever, from an owners point of view. |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Douglas Paterson wrote: Here again I'm going on what I've read. "Clearly identified" isn't the point--my understanding is that both the engine controls and the flap/gear handles are reversed from a standard setup. Flap and gear are different from others, engine controls are standard. |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Douglas Paterson wrote: "Newps" wrote in message ... The problem you're going to have with the Trinidad is parts. Nobody has them in stock, everything always has to be ordered. That takes time and expense. Plus they aren't very fast for what you're going to pay. Please help me understand this. Are you saying that the Bo (for example) has parts lying in stock at just about every FBO? I find that hard to believe. The Socata folks are committed (they say) to a three-day maximum delivery for parts not in stock (at their service centers--nearest to me is Phoenix), with lots of stuff in stock "in the system" [source: http://www.socata.org/html/upload.as...ir craft.pdf]. Is this significantly sub-standard to the situation with Beech parts? You have to live thru this to understand. I owned a Cessna Cradinal for a while. You call or go up to your favorite FBO parts counter and they look at you strange, they pull out the Cardinal book. You notice it's nearly brand new looking because it doesn't get used. Does the FBO in Burnt Scrotum, Nevada even have the books for a Trinidad? If it takes the guy threee days to figure out what to order you're going to tire quickly of your bird. Very fast vs $$? I don't follow. The Trins cruise around 160ktas at 12-14gph; the highest numbers I've seen for the Bo is 168ktas at the same fuel burn. My S model has a book speed of 178 kts true. I get low 170's on an everyday basis at your fuel flow example. With the $50K you won't have to spend on the Trinidad you can really put in there what you like. Or enjoy the extra $500-$1000 you won't be spending on hull insurance. |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Newps,
Mine is the first year of the big baggage area and engine and also the fastest of all the normally aspirated models, 1964. See? We're talking about a plane that's TWICE the age of the oldest Trinidad you could possibly get. To suggest the two are in the same league without mentioning this difference, well, makes little sense. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
("john smith" wrote)
I think Jay is saying he has 1460 lbs useful load on his airplane. I question that. I cannot believe he has an additional 230 lbs of useful load unless there is a drop in the max gross weight between the 235 and the 236/Dakota. His BEW simply cannot be that much lower. http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/cont...athfinder.html 1974 Piper Pathfinder specs (scroll down) John Smith. For failure to use all available (Google) resources: You are hereby sentenced to ...(1) Little French Girl update! Montblack "Oui" "Oui" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Narrowing it down... Comanche? | Douglas Paterson | Owning | 18 | February 26th 06 12:51 AM |
Cherokee Pilots Association Fly-In Just Gets Better and Better | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 7 | August 8th 05 07:18 PM |
Comanche accident averted last evening | [email protected] | Piloting | 23 | April 13th 05 10:02 AM |
Cherokee National Fly-In & Convention | Don | Piloting | 0 | May 5th 04 08:14 PM |
Cherokee National Fly-In & Convention | Don | General Aviation | 0 | March 20th 04 02:15 AM |