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

I am going to do it again! A Piper Seneca?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 12th 03, 12:05 AM
Michelle P
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default I am going to do it again! A Piper Seneca?

Hi all,

Several of us have been renting twins are seriously looking into buying one.

We have been renting a Seminole but are looking at a Seneca. I
understand the Seneca I is to be avoided. The Seneca II is better and
the III is the best in the batch. Our budget appears to be no more than
200K, but prefer the upper 100s.

I would be interested in hearing any thoughts good or bad on the
Airframe and engines. We are particularly concerned about the turbo
charged Continentals.

Thanks in advance,

Michelle
--

Michelle P CP-ASMEL-IA, and AMT-A&P

"Elisabeth" a Maule M-7-235B (no two are alike)

Volunteer Pilot, AirLifeLine

Volunteer Builder, Habitat for Humanity


Ads
  #2  
Old August 12th 03, 01:36 AM
Dan Thompson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Not much difference between many 2s and 3s. Many 2s have been legally
modified to have the single piece windshield, long range tanks and club
seating of the 3. VG kits up the weight carrying ability of the 2 to match
that of a 3, and look for an upgrade of the E engines to the EB version,
1400 tbo vs. 1800 tbo. What is more important now is TTAF and the features
of specific planes. You'll pay full retail for any changes you make,
whereas if you find one that has everything you want already, you'll pay the
used price and not have to go through the time and hassle of upgrades.

I've put about 1200 hrs on my 2 since 1998, and gone through having the
engines overhauled. No particular concerns about the engines.
"Michelle P" wrote in message
...
Hi all,

Several of us have been renting twins are seriously looking into buying one.

We have been renting a Seminole but are looking at a Seneca. I understand
the Seneca I is to be avoided. The Seneca II is better and the III is the
best in the batch. Our budget appears to be no more than 200K, but prefer
the upper 100s.

I would be interested in hearing any thoughts good or bad on the Airframe
and engines. We are particularly concerned about the turbo charged
Continentals.

Thanks in advance,

Michelle

--

Michelle P CP-ASMEL-IA, and AMT-A&P
"Elisabeth" a Maule M-7-235B (no two are alike)
Volunteer Pilot, AirLifeLine
Volunteer Builder, Habitat for Humanity


  #3  
Old August 12th 03, 02:30 PM
Steve Robertson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Michelle,

The Seneca I is no more to be avoided than the Seminole. Neither one has
much of a single-engine ceiling. The Seneca I flys just fine. As long as
you don't think you need turbos, then you should at least consider it.
The Lycoming engines are a bit less problematic than the Conts. in the
IIs and IIIs. (mainly because no turbos.)

As others have said, there isn't that much difference between the IIs
and IIIs.

I got my ME in a Seneca I and my CFI ME in a turbo Seminole. I used to
work at Piper (not as a pilot, though) and got the full factory checkout
in Seneca III and thereafter rented the 2 that were in the company
fleet. So, based on that, here is my impression:

Think of a Seneca I as a retractable Cherokee 6 that will come down more
slowly than the Cherokee 6 if the engine fails. The Seminole is just
delightful to fly. Just like flying an Arrow, but with extra power (as
long as both mills are turning). The Seneca III flys a lot more like the
Seminole than a Seneca I. The handling was much less truck-like,
especially with full flps on landing. The difference in power and engine
smoothness between the I and III is striking.

Best regards,

Steve Robertson
N4732J 1967 Beechcraft A23-24 Musketeer Super III

Michelle P wrote:

Hi all,

Several of us have been renting twins are seriously looking into
buying one.

We have been renting a Seminole but are looking at a Seneca. I
understand the Seneca I is to be avoided. The Seneca II is better and
the III is the best in the batch. Our budget appears to be no more
than 200K, but prefer the upper 100s.

I would be interested in hearing any thoughts good or bad on the
Airframe and engines. We are particularly concerned about the turbo
charged Continentals.

Thanks in advance,

Michelle
--
Michelle P CP-ASMEL-IA, and AMT-A&P

"Elisabeth" a Maule M-7-235B (no two are alike)

Volunteer Pilot, AirLifeLine

Volunteer Builder, Habitat for Humanity


  #4  
Old August 12th 03, 04:53 PM
Nathan Young
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Michelle P wrote in message ...
Hi all,

Several of us have been renting twins are seriously looking into buying one.

We have been renting a Seminole but are looking at a Seneca. I
understand the Seneca I is to be avoided. The Seneca II is better and
the III is the best in the batch. Our budget appears to be no more than
200K, but prefer the upper 100s.

I would be interested in hearing any thoughts good or bad on the
Airframe and engines. We are particularly concerned about the turbo
charged Continentals.


Seneca I is non-turbo'd, so take off performance, cruise, and
engine-out performance are a bit doggish. The Seneca II and up are
turbo'd. I have never flown a III, but have spent about 50 hrs in a
Seneca II and enjoy it. Easy to fly, land, and engine out procedures
are straight-forward.

Long-range tanks are a must.

If any of the pilots are tall, beware that front seat room is
compromised by the club seating. At 6'3", I find the legroom very
uncomfortable in the one club-seat Seneca I've flown. The normal 6pax
configuration is fine.

My in-laws have a Seneca II and it always seems like they replace a
few cylinders each annual... Not sure if this is par for the course,
or just reflective of that particular plane.

-Nathan
  #5  
Old August 19th 03, 11:46 PM
Michelle P
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I just wanted to thank you all for your responses. They were quite helpful.

At this time it appears that we are going for a well equipped Seneca III.

Michelle

Michelle P wrote:

Hi all,

Several of us have been renting twins are seriously looking into
buying one.

We have been renting a Seminole but are looking at a Seneca. I
understand the Seneca I is to be avoided. The Seneca II is better and
the III is the best in the batch. Our budget appears to be no more
than 200K, but prefer the upper 100s.

I would be interested in hearing any thoughts good or bad on the
Airframe and engines. We are particularly concerned about the turbo
charged Continentals.

Thanks in advance,

Michelle
--

Michelle P CP-ASMEL-IA, and AMT-A&P

"Elisabeth" a Maule M-7-235B (no two are alike)

Volunteer Pilot, AirLifeLine

Volunteer Builder, Habitat for Humanity


--

Michelle P CP-ASMEL-IA, and AMT-A&P

"Elisabeth" a Maule M-7-235B (no two are alike)

Volunteer Pilot, AirLifeLine

Volunteer Builder, Habitat for Humanity


  #6  
Old August 20th 03, 01:59 AM
Craig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Michelle P wrote in message k.net...
I just wanted to thank you all for your responses. They were quite helpful.

At this time it appears that we are going for a well equipped Seneca III.


You might want to take a look at Aero Commanders before you commit to
the Seneca. A nicely equipped 500 or 600 piston Commander is well
within the price range that you are looking at. Geared engines are not
that big of a thing on them except at overhaul time. Commanders are
also hard to beat on load capacity....generally 2500-3500 pounds
usefull. Rock stable handling and engine outs are pretty ho-hum...dial
in a bit of trim. The 680 that I just bought to rebuild will get off
the ground in 1600 feet at 7000 pounds gross and burn about 35 gallons
an hour total at cruise.

Check www.aerocommander.com for complete specs. I know of one really
nice one that is for sale right now.

Craig C.

 




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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA: Piper J3 Cub Parts BFC Aviation Marketplace 0 September 24th 04 03:20 PM
Want to purchase PA34-200 Seneca Grasshopper General Aviation 11 July 7th 04 05:09 PM
Piper 6.00x6 Nose Wheel and Fork? mikem General Aviation 5 March 5th 04 11:34 PM
Piper Cub: "A Reflection in Time"... fine art print highdesertexplorer Aviation Marketplace 0 January 13th 04 03:47 AM
The Piper Cubs That Weren't Veeduber Home Built 5 August 28th 03 04:38 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.