A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What about Brand "X"?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 7th 03, 12:57 AM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What about Brand "X"?

There's (understandably) a lot of discussion about Piper vs. Cessna vs.
Mooney...

I'm considering a (Rockwell) Commander 114B. Their marketing hype makes it
seem that the Commanders have a much better safety record than their
competition. Anyone have any input on that?

How about maintenance history or operating costs?

I figure to allow $125 an hour for direct costs; is that reasonable for this
breed?

Thanks,

Tom


  #2  
Old September 7th 03, 02:21 AM
Stu Gotts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Commander never had a good customer service history and parts were
very hard to obtain. Hell, it was hard to get them on the phone! Now
that they're out, I would imagine that it's even more of a chore. Way
underpowered, but comfortable as an easy chair and strong as a
Rockwell should be.

But they're certainly the sexiest airplanes, no?

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 16:57:43 -0700, "Tom S." wrote:

There's (understandably) a lot of discussion about Piper vs. Cessna vs.
Mooney...

I'm considering a (Rockwell) Commander 114B. Their marketing hype makes it
seem that the Commanders have a much better safety record than their
competition. Anyone have any input on that?

How about maintenance history or operating costs?

I figure to allow $125 an hour for direct costs; is that reasonable for this
breed?

Thanks,

Tom


  #3  
Old September 7th 03, 03:50 AM
MikeM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My buddy has one. He has had major engine/turbocharger expenses.
He wishes he had a "simple" 182, which is nowhere near as sexy, but
is way easier on the pocketbook and lands damn near anywhere...

MikeM


"Tom S." wrote:

There's (understandably) a lot of discussion about Piper vs. Cessna vs.
Mooney...

I'm considering a (Rockwell) Commander 114B. Their marketing hype makes it
seem that the Commanders have a much better safety record than their
competition. Anyone have any input on that?

How about maintenance history or operating costs?

I figure to allow $125 an hour for direct costs; is that reasonable for this
breed?

Thanks,

Tom

  #4  
Old September 7th 03, 04:17 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 6-Sep-2003, "Tom S." wrote:

I'm considering a (Rockwell) Commander 114B. Their marketing hype makes it
seem that the Commanders have a much better safety record than their
competition. Anyone have any input on that?

How about maintenance history or operating costs?

I figure to allow $125 an hour for direct costs; is that reasonable for
this
breed?



I logged a couple of hours in a 114 owned by a colleague some years ago.
(This was the original 114, not the new 114B.) Very nice airplane to fly,
and very comfortable, but surprisingly noisy. Of course, the newer ones are
probably more refined and thus quieter. A few knots slower than others in
its class (e.g. Cessna 182RG, Beech 33), but the 114, unlike the old 112, is
certainly not underpowered.

My colleague had several problems obtaining parts, particularly for the
landing gear. Before I bought any Commander I would do extensive research
on the parts availability/cost situation.

The parts issue probably makes it tough to predict direct operating costs,
if you assume that includes replacing things that break or wear out.

I don't know anything about their safety record relative to others in its
class.

--
-Elliott Drucker
  #5  
Old September 7th 03, 07:23 AM
Craig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Tom S." wrote in message ...
There's (understandably) a lot of discussion about Piper vs. Cessna vs.
Mooney...

I'm considering a (Rockwell) Commander 114B. Their marketing hype makes it
seem that the Commanders have a much better safety record than their
competition. Anyone have any input on that?


I've had a friend with a 114 GT and he loved it. It was the only a/c
that he flew regularly besides his SF-260. Huge cockpit, very
comfortable and good vision. Parts can be a bit hard to find and some
are expensive, but if you go with one, join the 112/114 club and they
can be a huge help. I'm just getting set to go and recover my 680 Twin
Commander project this fall.

Craig C.

  #6  
Old September 7th 03, 03:11 PM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"MikeM" wrote in message
...
My buddy has one. He has had major engine/turbocharger expenses.


Lycoming problem?

He wishes he had a "simple" 182, which is nowhere near as sexy, but
is way easier on the pocketbook


Should be, being AT LEAST ten years older (I'm looking at a 1994 model).

and lands damn near anywhere...


My impression is the gear on a Commander is indestrucible, particularly with
the trailing link.


MikeM



  #7  
Old September 7th 03, 03:22 PM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
...
On 6-Sep-2003, "Tom S." wrote:

I'm considering a (Rockwell) Commander 114B. Their marketing hype makes

it
seem that the Commanders have a much better safety record than their
competition. Anyone have any input on that?

How about maintenance history or operating costs?

I figure to allow $125 an hour for direct costs; is that reasonable for
this
breed?



I logged a couple of hours in a 114 owned by a colleague some years ago.
(This was the original 114, not the new 114B.) Very nice airplane to fly,
and very comfortable, but surprisingly noisy.


I've flown in 112's and 114's and the 114's are noticably quieter. Compared
to a 182, a 182 is like my daughter stereo. :~)

Of course, the newer ones are
probably more refined and thus quieter. A few knots slower than others in
its class (e.g. Cessna 182RG, Beech 33),


148kts for the 182RG, 160 for teh 114B at 75% (IIUC)

but the 114, unlike the old 112, is
certainly not underpowered.

My colleague had several problems obtaining parts, particularly for the
landing gear. Before I bought any Commander I would do extensive research
on the parts availability/cost situation.


They seem to be working on their parts distribution, but since so many
people have mentioned it, they'd have to REALLY prove to me that the probelm
is solved. Fortunately, there is a distributor/dealer at my field (SDL).


The parts issue probably makes it tough to predict direct operating costs,
if you assume that includes replacing things that break or wear out.

I don't know anything about their safety record relative to others in its
class.


They brag up that their aircraft received their certification under FAR 23
standards, which is much higher than the standards that the 182 and others
on the market were built under. They quote stats on their website claiming
that their accident record is from 40% (182) to 226% better (Saratoga and
Beech) than others.

Tom


  #8  
Old September 7th 03, 03:31 PM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Craig" wrote in message
om...
"Tom S." wrote in message

...
There's (understandably) a lot of discussion about Piper vs. Cessna vs.
Mooney...

I'm considering a (Rockwell) Commander 114B. Their marketing hype makes

it
seem that the Commanders have a much better safety record than their
competition. Anyone have any input on that?


I've had a friend with a 114 GT and he loved it. It was the only a/c
that he flew regularly besides his SF-260. Huge cockpit, very
comfortable and good vision. Parts can be a bit hard to find and some
are expensive, but if you go with one, join the 112/114 club and they
can be a huge help. I'm just getting set to go and recover my 680 Twin
Commander project this fall.

Craig C.


I notice that everybody that dinged them has dinged them regarding parts.

Tom



  #9  
Old September 7th 03, 04:11 PM
Stu Gotts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 07:08:04 -0700, "Tom S." wrote:


"Stu Gotts" wrote in message
.. .
Commander never had a good customer service history and parts were
very hard to obtain. Hell, it was hard to get them on the phone! Now
that they're out, I would imagine that it's even more of a chore.


"Out"?


Aren't they bankrupt and the doors closed?


Way
underpowered,


260 HP is "underpowered"?


HP isn't the factor. Look at the speeds those 260 ponies are taking
you.

but comfortable as an easy chair and strong as a
Rockwell should be.


That's my impression from the flights I've had in it, particularly the
shoulder room.


But they're certainly the sexiest airplanes, no?


That they are.

Thx,

Tom


  #10  
Old September 7th 03, 04:15 PM
Stu Gotts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 07:31:18 -0700, "Tom S." wrote:

I notice that everybody that dinged them has dinged them regarding parts.

Tom


Tom, it sounds like you've made up your mind, so good luck with it.
Maybe you should look at joining the type club to get a better feel
for the airplane, and all the problems Commander has been going
through for the past few years. And if you're looking at that recent
of a model, maybe you should try to contact someone at the factory if
there's a phone still connected to see if you could get a factory
refurb. They had a program of taking trade-ins at a fantastic deal.
I'm sure someone has possession of that inventory.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.