Older Bo's

[The Weiss Family]

All,

I was recently perusing through some of the newer Trade-A-Plane listings,
and I saw tons of old Bonanzas.
Within the last 3 days of listings, there were probably 10 or more.

From previous threads in this newsgroup, I have read that the older Bo's are
expensive to maintain, typically due to the high cost on parts.
So, I was wondering why the parts are so expensive and/or hard to come by if
there are so many planes out there?

Does someone have an older Bonanza who could comment on this?

Adam

[Stu Gotts]

Depends on what you consider "old". Parts for some of the older E225
engines are getting scarce, but airframe parts are pretty much
available. They're really not much more expensive than Piper or
Cessna, and probably last longer with proper maintenance. The real
question you should be asking is how well maintained are the aircraft
you're looking at. I've seen 1960 models go from $40K to $110K. Yes,
those were selling prices,

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 09:46:04 -0700, "The Weiss Family"
> wrote:

>All,
>
>I was recently perusing through some of the newer Trade-A-Plane listings,
>and I saw tons of old Bonanzas.
>Within the last 3 days of listings, there were probably 10 or more.
>
>From previous threads in this newsgroup, I have read that the older Bo's are
>expensive to maintain, typically due to the high cost on parts.
>So, I was wondering why the parts are so expensive and/or hard to come by if
>there are so many planes out there?
>
>Does someone have an older Bonanza who could comment on this?
>
>Adam
>

[Kyle Boatright]

"The Weiss Family" > wrote in message
...
> All,
>
> I was recently perusing through some of the newer Trade-A-Plane listings,
> and I saw tons of old Bonanzas.
> Within the last 3 days of listings, there were probably 10 or more.
>
> From previous threads in this newsgroup, I have read that the older Bo's
are
> expensive to maintain, typically due to the high cost on parts.
> So, I was wondering why the parts are so expensive and/or hard to come by
if
> there are so many planes out there?
>
> Does someone have an older Bonanza who could comment on this?
>
> Adam

As mentioned in another post, supplies of engine components for some models
are becoming problematic. An additional problem is the magnesium control
surfaces on the older aircraft, which sometimes (often?) corrode to the
point where they are paper thin. Unscrupulous people will fill and paint
these surfaces, even when they should be replaced, and replacements *ain't*
cheap. Another problem is that the very early Bonanzas have never had a
major AD on the empennage, which means that the fittings back there have
never been given a good inspection. A final problem is that older wiring
harnesses can crumble into dust when you even look at 'em funny. I saw all
these problems and more when an acquaintance bought a '47 Bonanza.

My guess is that the oldest Bonanzas became ramp queens after 20-30 years,
because newer, better equipped, more capable aircraft were plentiful on the
used market, so why spend the bucks to keep up a more or less obsolete
aircraft. Instead, sell the old bird to someone else and upgrade to a 15
year newer version... After about two annuals, the new owner can't afford
annual #3 on the old Bo, and tries to sell the airplane. Unfortunately, he
can't get his money out of it, so it sits for 1/2 a decade until someone
buys it, restores it to sellable condition, and advertises it in trade a
plane.

Not that this is the tale of *all* old Bonanzas, but I'd be very wary of an
old, cheap Bonanza.

KB

[Roger Halstead]

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 15:09:16 -0400, "Kyle Boatright"
> wrote:

>
>"The Weiss Family" > wrote in message
...
>> All,
>>
>> I was recently perusing through some of the newer Trade-A-Plane listings,
>> and I saw tons of old Bonanzas.
>> Within the last 3 days of listings, there were probably 10 or more.
>>
>> From previous threads in this newsgroup, I have read that the older Bo's
>are
>> expensive to maintain, typically due to the high cost on parts.
>> So, I was wondering why the parts are so expensive and/or hard to come by
>if
>> there are so many planes out there?
>>
>> Does someone have an older Bonanza who could comment on this?
>>
>> Adam
>
>As mentioned in another post, supplies of engine components for some models
>are becoming problematic. An additional problem is the magnesium control
>surfaces on the older aircraft, which sometimes (often?) corrode to the
>point where they are paper thin. Unscrupulous people will fill and paint
>these surfaces, even when they should be replaced, and replacements *ain't*
>cheap. Another problem is that the very early Bonanzas have never had a
>major AD on the empennage, which means that the fittings back there have
>never been given a good inspection. A final problem is that older wiring

On ,mine the tail cone is taken off for every annual. Everything back
there gets a good look.

>harnesses can crumble into dust when you even look at 'em funny. I saw all
>these problems and more when an acquaintance bought a '47 Bonanza.

That is one of the biggest problems with any old airplane. The old
rubber covering on things like the throttle, mixture and prop controls
gets hard and brittle. I finally had to replace the throttle cable on
mine.


>
>My guess is that the oldest Bonanzas became ramp queens after 20-30 years,

Nope, some of the originals are still flying.
Olive Beech's personal plane is still flying and that is an *old*
V-tail.

Do a search on the FAA database and you should find lots of them.

I'm flying the first straight tail off the line.

>because newer, better equipped, more capable aircraft were plentiful on the



>used market, so why spend the bucks to keep up a more or less obsolete
>aircraft. Instead, sell the old bird to someone else and upgrade to a 15
>year newer version... After about two annuals, the new owner can't afford
>annual #3 on the old Bo, and tries to sell the airplane. Unfortunately, he

My annuals on average are a bit less than a thousand. Some times more
and some times less. Course the whole airframe which was built in 59
still has less than 4000 hours on it. It is getting time to have the
paint redone though even if it does look pretty good.

>can't get his money out of it, so it sits for 1/2 a decade until someone
>buys it, restores it to sellable condition, and advertises it in trade a
>plane.
>
>Not that this is the tale of *all* old Bonanzas, but I'd be very wary of an
>old, cheap Bonanza.

I'd be wary of any old, cheap airplane. <:-))

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>KB
>

[Michael]

Stu Gotts > wrote
> airframe parts are pretty much
> available. They're really not much more expensive than Piper or
> Cessna

Not my experience. A friend of mine just bought an older Baron.
Elevator trim tab is a bit loose, needs a new Clevis fork. On a
Cessna or Piper, that would be a standard AN part, maybe $10-$20. On
the Baron, it's a Beech-specific part. Sure, it's available. $156.

Beech-specific parts ARE more expensive, often by an order of
magnitude. Whether they last longer or not is debatable.

Michael

[Frank Stutzman]

Michael > wrote:
> Stu Gotts > wrote
> > airframe parts are pretty much
> > available. They're really not much more expensive than Piper or
> > Cessna

[snip]

> Beech-specific parts ARE more expensive, often by an order of
> magnitude. Whether they last longer or not is debatable.

I concur with Michael. I'm not a master of what Piper prices are, but my
wallet has felt the hit of Raytheon (Beech) prices are. I personally have
shelled out $400 for a cabin door hinge, $120 for a single landing gear
bushing. And those are just my personal experiances. I think the worst
I've heard about is ~$4,000 for the sheet metal baffleing on an E-powered
plane. The real insult on that bit of slightly stamped sheet metal was
that the owner had to wait 6 months for it.

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl" (A '49 A35)
Hood River, OR

[Frank Stutzman]

{sorry I've lost track of the attributions}
> >cheap. Another problem is that the very early Bonanzas have never had a
> >major AD on the empennage, which means that the fittings back there have
> >never been given a good inspection. A final problem is that older wiring

Dunno what you mean by no major AD on the empennage. There is the AD for
inspecting ruddervator push rods. There is the the "speed restriction" AD
that calls for skin thickness testing and ruddervator rebalance. Are
these major? Depends upon your definition, I suppose.

> On ,mine the tail cone is taken off for every annual. Everything back
> there gets a good look.

[ I think this is Rich Hare talking about his Debonair ]
The tail cone should always be removed for annual. However, the fittings
back there are significantly different between the bonanza and the
Debonair.

> Nope, some of the originals are still flying.
> Olive Beech's personal plane is still flying and that is an *old*
> V-tail.

Yup, saw serial number 12 last summer in Seattle. Looked pretty good.
There are still older ones still flying. I had a belly laugh a few years
ago when I saw that A35 hanging in the Spruce Goose Museum in McMinville
Or had a later serial number than mine.

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl" ('49 A35, serial number D-1514)
Hood River, OR

[Rich]

Hey! Hey! Hey!
Don't nobody go around saying that _I_ fly a Debonair!

I fly a gen you wine "V" tail! (My third one!)

Bonanza parts _are_ expensive... but sturdier than most other brand "P"
and "C" parts. Therein lies the Bonanza curse. Things last so long
that people successfully forego maintenance for a long while because
"it's still working pretty good"... and then it finally goes out of
serviceable tolerance and you have to buy the $109 bushing (or eight of
them in the main landing gear scissors) that you wouldn't pay 69 cents
for at Ace Hardware. Lots of older used Bonanzas are at that point in
their service life.


Rich



Frank Stutzman wrote:
> {sorry I've lost track of the attributions}

> [ I think this is Rich Hare talking about his Debonair ]
> The tail cone should always be removed for annual. However, the fittings
> back there are significantly different between the bonanza and the
> Debonair.
>

[Roger Halstead]

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:59:19 -0400, Rich > wrote:

>Hey! Hey! Hey!
>Don't nobody go around saying that _I_ fly a Debonair!

No, Now... Let's not confuse such a modern design as the Deb with an
antique! <:-)) I mean, you're compairing a 1947 design to a 1959
design, even if it is the same airplane with a different empenage.
They even call mine a 35-33

OTOH Frank's 49 makes my 59 look positively modern.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>I fly a gen you wine "V" tail! (My third one!)
>
>Bonanza parts _are_ expensive... but sturdier than most other brand "P"
>and "C" parts. Therein lies the Bonanza curse. Things last so long
>that people successfully forego maintenance for a long while because
>"it's still working pretty good"... and then it finally goes out of
>serviceable tolerance and you have to buy the $109 bushing (or eight of
>them in the main landing gear scissors) that you wouldn't pay 69 cents
>for at Ace Hardware. Lots of older used Bonanzas are at that point in
>their service life.
>
>
>Rich
>
>
>
>Frank Stutzman wrote:
>> {sorry I've lost track of the attributions}
>
>> [ I think this is Rich Hare talking about his Debonair ]
>> The tail cone should always be removed for annual. However, the fittings
>> back there are significantly different between the bonanza and the
>> Debonair.
>>

[Frank Stutzman]

Rich > wrote:
> Hey! Hey! Hey!
> Don't nobody go around saying that _I_ fly a Debonair!

> I fly a gen you wine "V" tail! (My third one!)

Sorry, I stand corrected. Rich Hare/Roger Halstead. At least I got the
initials correct.



--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Hood River, OR

[Frank Stutzman]

Roger Halstead > wrote:

> OTOH Frank's 49 makes my 59 look positively modern.

Uh, well mine doesn't *exactly* look like a museum piece (any reputable
museum at least *washes* their plane occaisonally ;-)

On the other hand, the fellow who owns Cannon avionics at Arlington, WA
has a A35 which is a few hundred serial numbers newer than mine. I saw it
for the first time this weekend, during the airshow. Walking past it I
was going to disregard it as one of the newer models, probably a N or a P.
Wasn't until I noticed the landing lights that I realized it was an
earlier model. Wasn't until I read the data plate I realized it was a
massivly modified A model. Long side windows, speed sloped winshield,
fully modern panel (complete with avionics worth more than my plane),
extended baggage area. It also no longer had an E-series engine it it,
although I don't know exactly what it did have.

It looked *WAY* more modern than some inverted t-tail thing from 1959 ;-)

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Hood River, OR

[Roger Halstead]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 04:48:54 +0000 (UTC), Frank Stutzman
> wrote:

>Roger Halstead > wrote:
>
>> OTOH Frank's 49 makes my 59 look positively modern.
>
>Uh, well mine doesn't *exactly* look like a museum piece (any reputable
>museum at least *washes* their plane occaisonally ;-)
>
>On the other hand, the fellow who owns Cannon avionics at Arlington, WA
>has a A35 which is a few hundred serial numbers newer than mine. I saw it
>for the first time this weekend, during the airshow. Walking past it I
>was going to disregard it as one of the newer models, probably a N or a P.
>Wasn't until I noticed the landing lights that I realized it was an
>earlier model. Wasn't until I read the data plate I realized it was a
>massivly modified A model. Long side windows, speed sloped winshield,
>fully modern panel (complete with avionics worth more than my plane),
>extended baggage area. It also no longer had an E-series engine it it,
>although I don't know exactly what it did have.
>
>It looked *WAY* more modern than some inverted t-tail thing from 1959 ;-)

I gota admit that mine is a bit austere inside although it has had a
few mods. 1/2 inch Speed sloped windshield, 1/4 inch side windows,
extended baggage compartment with long third rear windows, dorsal fin
with cabin air inlet. (outlets are like cabin air on DC-9), gap seals,
Deshannon flight extender tip tanks, aileron and flap gap seals,
complete King silver Crown stack with KNS-80 RNAV (well it was modern
20 years ago <G>), 260 HP IO-470N, 3-blade Hartzell prop and rudder
hinge mode to do away with the rudder spar AD and a bunch of other
stuff I don't seem to remember now.

On a good day cruise is 180 MPH on 14 GPH at 24 square and... It has
less than 4000 hours total time on the airframe.

S# CD-2 although all the parts say CD-1. They tell me it was the
prototype used to set up the tooling, then taken apart and reassembled
on the line. The airframe log shows 30 hours of pre production flight
testing.

I normally fly it in enough rain to keep it clean although that's a
bit hard on the paint. Those thick windows really quiet it down in
heavy rain.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger Halstead]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 04:36:52 +0000 (UTC), Frank Stutzman
> wrote:

>Rich > wrote:
>> Hey! Hey! Hey!
>> Don't nobody go around saying that _I_ fly a Debonair!
>
>> I fly a gen you wine "V" tail! (My third one!)
>
>Sorry, I stand corrected. Rich Hare/Roger Halstead. At least I got the
>initials correct.

<:-)) and we all tend to do a little more transposing as we age.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Bill Hale]

"The Weiss Family" > wrote in message >...
> All,
>
> I was recently perusing through some of the newer Trade-A-Plane listings,
> and I saw tons of old Bonanzas.
> Within the last 3 days of listings, there were probably 10 or more.
>
> From previous threads in this newsgroup, I have read that the older Bo's are
> expensive to maintain, typically due to the high cost on parts.
> So, I was wondering why the parts are so expensive and/or hard to come by if
> there are so many planes out there?
>
> Does someone have an older Bonanza who could comment on this?

There are fewer mechanics who are very expert on taking care of the
older ones and mistakes are very expensive. So either you need a real
guru or you have to become the expert yourself to make the ownership
practical. There is plenty of info available for the enthusiast.

Older Bonanzas are NOT that expensive to *maintain.* But if they haven't
been cared for since about the 3rd owner, it will be *breathtaking* to bring
them up to snuff. So you need a very fine prepurchase.

If you keep them well lubricated and rigged, you need very few parts.

A friend runs D-1000. It has been the most economical cross country
airplane imaginable. Goes about 155kts on 8-9 gph of car gas. Always
ready to go.

Bill Hale BPPP instructor

>
> Adam