Feeling the Need For Speed

Blueskies wrote:

"mbremer216" wrote in message
. ..
I agree. There are a lot of speedy experimentals out there, buy there
is no way my other half will go along.

I can build a pretty good bookcase, but I wouldn't want to ride in it
at 200 mph!

Mike
"Newps" wrote in message
. ..
There's a lot of fast planes that can be built. No way, no how am I
a builder however, so I would never consider doing that.





So buy one from someone...

Most experimentals have that unfinished look to me. Especially the
interior. Like the designer got it done enough to fly and then said
screw it.

"Newps" wrote in message . ..
Blueskies wrote:

"mbremer216" wrote in message
. ..
I agree. There are a lot of speedy experimentals out there, buy there
is no way my other half will go along.

I can build a pretty good bookcase, but I wouldn't want to ride in it
at 200 mph!

Mike
"Newps" wrote in message
. ..
There's a lot of fast planes that can be built. No way, no how am I
a builder however, so I would never consider doing that.





So buy one from someone...

Most experimentals have that unfinished look to me. Especially the
interior. Like the designer got it done enough to fly and then said
screw it.


Well, the nice thing about the experimental is if you don't like the way the
interior is finished, you can re-do it yourself...even if you did not build
it originally...

Here I thought we were talking about going faster for less money. For
the money you can save on the operating costs you dress up the
interior any way you want.

DF

"Newps" wrote

Most experimentals have that unfinished look to me. Especially the
interior. Like the designer got it done enough to fly and then said screw
it.

When is the last time you looked at the airplanes on the experimental line
at Oshkosh?

I would say your observation is the exception, rather than the rule.

My observation is that the majority of the homebuilts at OSH make the
factory built planes look 3rd class.

At any rate, there is a Tango II for sale on teamtango that looks very much
finished, and carries a price fit to a very fast very finished airplane.
--
Jim in NC

Frank Stutzman wrote:
Edward A. Falk wrote:


Any other Bonanza owners here? Do you really get 11.5 gph at 159 kts?


No, I don't.


I get 135 knots at about 9 gph. However, if I remember correctly my
Bonanza has something like 60 less HP and is 30 years older than Scotts.



Hey Frank,

I still remember you showing me the AC system on your bo! I think it was
a rec.aviation/socafi event in Oceano perhaps 10 or 15 years go. Every
plane I've flown on a hot summer day since then without AC has made me
wonder why they didn't use that design more widely.

Glade to hear you still have her.

Steve

That is the advantage of the Velocity. I purchased a Velocity built
by someone else, had him fly it to the factory, had a factory
inspection, then had the factory give me transition training. Plane
goes back to Florida each year for the annual - let the experts look
it over. It is a lot of plane for the money. About $80k will get you
1000lb useful load, 4 seats and a nice IFR set up (think standard
steam gages + Garmin 430 + AP). Performing regular maintenance
yourself is a huge advantage. For a fixed gear plane, you can count
on around 150-160 knots. I regularly plan 2-3 hour flights with 2
adults, 2 kids, small dog + light weekend of luggage. Add in the fact
that the plane simply won't stall and you have a combination of low
cost (purchase and on-going), good speed, significant load carrying
and safety that is hard to beat. You do give up grass & dirt strip
capability and (in my opinion) need to plan on at least a 3500 ft
runway at gross on an 85 degree day (regular profile for me in the
summer). I'd strongly suggest you consider it - my dad had an M20J
that I flew regularly and I still prefer my Velocity.
Jeff

On Jun 15, 12:27 am, Newps wrote:
There's a lot of fast planes that can be built. No way, no how am I a
builder however, so I would never consider doing that.

wrote:
Mike,
As an alterantive, have you considered any of the
experimentals? Depending on your needs, that may be worth looking in
to. I have 1520 hours in my Tango 2 and love it. In round numbers, I
get better than 200 mph at 8 gph, or 25 mpg. I can load two 200 pound
plus adults, forty gallons of gas, 100 pounds of baggage, takeoff
comfortably on a 2,000 foot grass strip, climb to 12,500, and land 750
nm later with a vfr reserve. Last summer I flew a 1,744 nm cross
country from north Florida to California against some headwind and
around some weather in 11.3 flying hours while burning 83.6 gallons of
gas. I made two fuel stops. I have flown a few times in solid ifr,
single seat without an autopilot, but a wing leveler would be nice
sometimes. Passing Bonanzas is fun, too.
I am biased because I am part owner of the company, but I doubt
if you can find many other cross country airplanes that can beat our
performance numbers in our price range.

Denny Funnemark
www.teamtango.com
I have been looking at Mooney (M20J).

Any pros, cons, alternate suggestions?

Thanks in advance

Mike

How does it glide with the engine out?

Mike
"jsbougher" wrote in message
...
That is the advantage of the Velocity. I purchased a Velocity built
by someone else, had him fly it to the factory, had a factory
inspection, then had the factory give me transition training. Plane
goes back to Florida each year for the annual - let the experts look
it over. It is a lot of plane for the money. About $80k will get you
1000lb useful load, 4 seats and a nice IFR set up (think standard
steam gages + Garmin 430 + AP). Performing regular maintenance
yourself is a huge advantage. For a fixed gear plane, you can count
on around 150-160 knots. I regularly plan 2-3 hour flights with 2
adults, 2 kids, small dog + light weekend of luggage. Add in the fact
that the plane simply won't stall and you have a combination of low
cost (purchase and on-going), good speed, significant load carrying
and safety that is hard to beat. You do give up grass & dirt strip
capability and (in my opinion) need to plan on at least a 3500 ft
runway at gross on an 85 degree day (regular profile for me in the
summer). I'd strongly suggest you consider it - my dad had an M20J
that I flew regularly and I still prefer my Velocity.
Jeff

On Jun 15, 12:27 am, Newps wrote:
There's a lot of fast planes that can be built. No way, no how am I a
builder however, so I would never consider doing that.

wrote:
Mike,
As an alterantive, have you considered any of the
experimentals? Depending on your needs, that may be worth looking in
to. I have 1520 hours in my Tango 2 and love it. In round numbers, I
get better than 200 mph at 8 gph, or 25 mpg. I can load two 200 pound
plus adults, forty gallons of gas, 100 pounds of baggage, takeoff
comfortably on a 2,000 foot grass strip, climb to 12,500, and land 750
nm later with a vfr reserve. Last summer I flew a 1,744 nm cross
country from north Florida to California against some headwind and
around some weather in 11.3 flying hours while burning 83.6 gallons of
gas. I made two fuel stops. I have flown a few times in solid ifr,
single seat without an autopilot, but a wing leveler would be nice
sometimes. Passing Bonanzas is fun, too.
I am biased because I am part owner of the company, but I doubt
if you can find many other cross country airplanes that can beat our
performance numbers in our price range.

Denny Funnemark
www.teamtango.com
I have been looking at Mooney (M20J).

Any pros, cons, alternate suggestions?

Thanks in advance

Mike

It glides surprisingly well actually. Not sure exact glide ratio, but
well over 12:1 even with fixed pitch prop and no wheel pants (I'd
guess somewhere in the 17:1 range, definitely not 20:1 without the
wheel pants). Lands off field pretty well also, but the speed is up
there. I unfortunately lost an intake gasket as I was practicing slow
flight / stalls and had the opportunity to land her in a wheat field
(I learned that 3000 AGL isn't that high when you are in a deep stall
and the engine packs it in - lesson learned). No damage except some
paint abrasion on the leading edge of the landing gear and a sh*tpot
of wheat in the pitot. Pulled the wings, trailered to a close by
airport, replace the gasket and wings and flew her home. Not
something I'd ever want to repeat, but at least power off is no longer
an unknown. The higher landing speed is really the only disadvantage
to the Velocity relative to speed equivalent counterparts. It is very
manageable and is more than made up by the docile flying
characteristics. I can slow her to a complete stall (pitch buck) then
roll her over 45 degrees and pull the stick to my lap - nothing. Not
something you do regularly, but nice to know that the stall is
absolutely harmless (other than the associated high decent rate).
Jeff

On Jun 26, 10:59 pm, "mbremer216" wrote:
How does it glide with the engine out?

Mike"jsbougher" wrote in message

...

That is the advantage of the Velocity. I purchased a Velocity built
by someone else, had him fly it to the factory, had a factory
inspection, then had the factory give me transition training. Plane
goes back to Florida each year for the annual - let the experts look
it over. It is a lot of plane for the money. About $80k will get you
1000lb useful load, 4 seats and a nice IFR set up (think standard
steam gages + Garmin 430 + AP). Performing regular maintenance
yourself is a huge advantage. For a fixed gear plane, you can count
on around 150-160 knots. I regularly plan 2-3 hour flights with 2
adults, 2 kids, small dog + light weekend of luggage. Add in the fact
that the plane simply won't stall and you have a combination of low
cost (purchase and on-going), good speed, significant load carrying
and safety that is hard to beat. You do give up grass & dirt strip
capability and (in my opinion) need to plan on at least a 3500 ft
runway at gross on an 85 degree day (regular profile for me in the
summer). I'd strongly suggest you consider it - my dad had an M20J
that I flew regularly and I still prefer my Velocity.
Jeff

On Jun 15, 12:27 am, Newps wrote:
There's a lot of fast planes that can be built. No way, no how am I a
builder however, so I would never consider doing that.

wrote:
Mike,
As an alterantive, have you considered any of the
experimentals? Depending on your needs, that may be worth looking in
to. I have 1520 hours in my Tango 2 and love it. In round numbers, I
get better than 200 mph at 8 gph, or 25 mpg. I can load two 200 pound
plus adults, forty gallons of gas, 100 pounds of baggage, takeoff
comfortably on a 2,000 foot grass strip, climb to 12,500, and land 750
nm later with a vfr reserve. Last summer I flew a 1,744 nm cross
country from north Florida to California against some headwind and
around some weather in 11.3 flying hours while burning 83.6 gallons of
gas. I made two fuel stops. I have flown a few times in solid ifr,
single seat without an autopilot, but a wing leveler would be nice
sometimes. Passing Bonanzas is fun, too.
I am biased because I am part owner of the company, but I doubt
if you can find many other cross country airplanes that can beat our
performance numbers in our price range.

Denny Funnemark
www.teamtango.com
I have been looking at Mooney (M20J).

Any pros, cons, alternate suggestions?

Thanks in advance

Mike