views on Apache 235 twin?

[[email protected]]

I am considering purchasing one of these "cheap" twins but before even
making the long trip to check it out, I am wondering if there are any
views on the flight characteristics and costs of ownership of this
plane. Is it a difficult thing to land? Single engine performance and
stall and other flight characteristics?

Thanks,

Tien

[Jim Burns]

I'd spend a few more bucks and get the Aztec, C model or newer. Mainly
because the systems contain newer components and they were made until 1984 I
believe. I know a lot of the part numbers for our C carry right up through
the F model. You also get 2 more seats.

There's a big prop AD on Apaches requiring some expensive inspections. To
get rid of the AD, the non-AD props are big big bucks, most Aztecs that are
C models or newer do not have this AD.

Maintenance is continual. Don't let anybody fool you. You WILL work on the
plane more hours than you fly it. If you aren't willing to do the work
yourself, you have to be willing to pay for it. Buy lots of screwdrivers.

Check other AD's such as the flap torque tube AD, if it's been replaced with
steel, you're set, if not it's a costly repetitive AD.

Heaters.... Both Janitrol and Southwind have AD's plus TBO limits.

Apache's typically have one generator, look for one with two generators,
better yet 2 alternators. Both Apache's and Aztec's have one hydraulic
pump, look for one with an electric backup.

Rubber fuel bladders. If they haven't been full or pickled, they may need
replacing.

Carburetors on Apaches. Talk to Denny. Aztec C's and newer are fuel
injected.
If you want an autogas STC, you'll need to stick with an Apache.

We figure cost of ownership to run about $200 per hour flying 200 hours per
year. Fuel burn for our fuel injected 250hp IO-540s runs at 25gph on
typical cross country trips.

Landings will spoil you. Throttle back to blue line, or 5 knots under and
it will fly itself on the runway. Short field landings at 85 mph, throttles
closed, then just a tad of power to arrest your decent and you use less than
900 ft of runway, over an obstacle in less than 1300 with practice. A
couple weeks ago, I had ours into a 2000 ft x 30 ft asphalt strip with no
problem what so ever. It seems like no matter how rough or bumpy the
approach is, once you get down into ground effect, the plane becomes stable
as a rock.

Single engine performance on a 55 degree day is about a 250 ft per min
climb. (we're at 1100 ft MSA)

The more we fly our Aztec, the more we like it. A couple weeks ago, I had
ours into a 2000 ft x 30 ft asphalt strip with no problem what so ever.

You mentioned "cheap". They are cheap to get into, not cheap to fly, nor
easy to get out of what you have in them.

There's one on this page that I've watched go from an asking price of $60k
to $30. www.flywausau.com

Good luck.
Jim



> wrote in message
ups.com...
> I am considering purchasing one of these "cheap" twins but before even
> making the long trip to check it out, I am wondering if there are any
> views on the flight characteristics and costs of ownership of this
> plane. Is it a difficult thing to land? Single engine performance and
> stall and other flight characteristics?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tien
>

[NW_PILOT]

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> I'd spend a few more bucks and get the Aztec, C model or newer. Mainly
> because the systems contain newer components and they were made until 1984
I
> believe. I know a lot of the part numbers for our C carry right up
through
> the F model. You also get 2 more seats.
>
> There's a big prop AD on Apaches requiring some expensive inspections. To
> get rid of the AD, the non-AD props are big big bucks, most Aztecs that
are
> C models or newer do not have this AD.
>
> Maintenance is continual. Don't let anybody fool you. You WILL work on
the
> plane more hours than you fly it. If you aren't willing to do the work
> yourself, you have to be willing to pay for it. Buy lots of screwdrivers.
>
> Check other AD's such as the flap torque tube AD, if it's been replaced
with
> steel, you're set, if not it's a costly repetitive AD.
>
> Heaters.... Both Janitrol and Southwind have AD's plus TBO limits.
>
> Apache's typically have one generator, look for one with two generators,
> better yet 2 alternators. Both Apache's and Aztec's have one hydraulic
> pump, look for one with an electric backup.
>
> Rubber fuel bladders. If they haven't been full or pickled, they may need
> replacing.
>
> Carburetors on Apaches. Talk to Denny. Aztec C's and newer are fuel
> injected.
> If you want an autogas STC, you'll need to stick with an Apache.
>
> We figure cost of ownership to run about $200 per hour flying 200 hours
per
> year. Fuel burn for our fuel injected 250hp IO-540s runs at 25gph on
> typical cross country trips.
>
> Landings will spoil you. Throttle back to blue line, or 5 knots under and
> it will fly itself on the runway. Short field landings at 85 mph,
throttles
> closed, then just a tad of power to arrest your decent and you use less
than
> 900 ft of runway, over an obstacle in less than 1300 with practice. A
> couple weeks ago, I had ours into a 2000 ft x 30 ft asphalt strip with no
> problem what so ever. It seems like no matter how rough or bumpy the
> approach is, once you get down into ground effect, the plane becomes
stable
> as a rock.
>
> Single engine performance on a 55 degree day is about a 250 ft per min
> climb. (we're at 1100 ft MSA)
>
> The more we fly our Aztec, the more we like it. A couple weeks ago, I had
> ours into a 2000 ft x 30 ft asphalt strip with no problem what so ever.
>
> You mentioned "cheap". They are cheap to get into, not cheap to fly, nor
> easy to get out of what you have in them.
>
> There's one on this page that I've watched go from an asking price of $60k
> to $30. www.flywausau.com
>
> Good luck.
> Jim


Wish had had 30k Liquid Right Now!!!!

[Denny]

ummm, Jim, you will need more than $30K liquid if you intend to fly it,
because one engine is run out and likely will not go much further...
Low compression isn't the only thing that brings you to overhaul
time...
The airframe also needs a static check ... Lots of INOP equipment
which costs heavy bucks to repair or replace...
Notice that the props are low time SOH... It looks like he started
bringing it up to snuff and discovered his pocket book wasn't deep
enough... Then he tried to recover the cost of the airframe plus his
investment in the props and found he couldn't sell it at that price
level...
Possibly, he now has hangar fees building up, knows he can't afford
another annual, and just wants out... There is no mention of the AD
status, or the condition of the fuel bladders... You need to wonder
about the Powerpak seals if it has been sitting for a couple of years -
which is not the end of the world if it needs new seals, roughly $500
for parts and labor... The condition of the mufflers is unknown... The
heater is prominently not mentioned - I solved my heater problems by
spending $3800 for a brand new C&D with no AD's...

Having said this, it could be a fine airplane for the owner who is
willing to get dirty and hold down the labor cost of getting it
airworthy... But you need to go into it with your eyes wide open... It
will be a bargain only in the sense that you will have a fine, cross
country, airplane after you invest sweat and money...

denny

[Jim Burns]

"Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> ummm, Jim, you will need more than $30K liquid if you intend to fly it,

Yep, that was NW_Pilot's response, not mine. I'd figure to throw at least
another $30k at it if you really want it up to snuff. That amount wouldn't
include an engine rebuild either. I also don't think this plane has been
flying lately.

Jim

[Denny]

They do cost money to keep aloft... This last annual in November was
an expensive waltz with Matilda - not all forced expenditures, I could
have cut the $$ in half, but I got rid of two major AD's permanently
(he sez squeezing his eyes shut and crossing his fingers) and made
other upgrades... Since then it has been just fill the tanks and go
flying - zero maintenance items have come up...

denny

[STEVEN MCCONNELL]

He has owned it since 1985 apparently. His address is now at an apartment.
HMMMM> Maybe a bit of a money crunch in his like possibly


Regards,
Steve McConnell
Cherokee Dream Inc


> wrote in message
ups.com...
> I am considering purchasing one of these "cheap" twins but before even
> making the long trip to check it out, I am wondering if there are any
> views on the flight characteristics and costs of ownership of this
> plane. Is it a difficult thing to land? Single engine performance and
> stall and other flight characteristics?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tien
>

[NW_PILOT]

"Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> ummm, Jim, you will need more than $30K liquid if you intend to fly it,
> because one engine is run out and likely will not go much further...
> Low compression isn't the only thing that brings you to overhaul
> time...
> The airframe also needs a static check ... Lots of INOP equipment
> which costs heavy bucks to repair or replace...
> Notice that the props are low time SOH... It looks like he started
> bringing it up to snuff and discovered his pocket book wasn't deep
> enough... Then he tried to recover the cost of the airframe plus his
> investment in the props and found he couldn't sell it at that price
> level...
> Possibly, he now has hangar fees building up, knows he can't afford
> another annual, and just wants out... There is no mention of the AD
> status, or the condition of the fuel bladders... You need to wonder
> about the Powerpak seals if it has been sitting for a couple of years -
> which is not the end of the world if it needs new seals, roughly $500
> for parts and labor... The condition of the mufflers is unknown... The
> heater is prominently not mentioned - I solved my heater problems by
> spending $3800 for a brand new C&D with no AD's...
>
> Having said this, it could be a fine airplane for the owner who is
> willing to get dirty and hold down the labor cost of getting it
> airworthy... But you need to go into it with your eyes wide open... It
> will be a bargain only in the sense that you will have a fine, cross
> country, airplane after you invest sweat and money...
>
> denny
>


I am able to get down and dirty and do most all my work under supervision on
my A&P IA

[Scott Skylane]

Jim Burns wrote:
/snip/
> There's one on this page that I've watched go from an asking price of $60k
> to $30. www.flywausau.com
>
> Good luck.
> Jim
>
>
Holy Carp! I'm not interested in the Aztec, but I would be willing to
give that guy a few bucks to invest in website design!!!

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane

[Kyler Laird]

"Jim Burns" > writes:

>Both Apache's and Aztec's have one hydraulic
>pump,

Aztecs have two. One just requires a lot more effort from the pilot.

>The more we fly our Aztec, the more we like it.

Agreed. Mine has been sitting quite a bit since I stopped commuting to
California (from Indiana) but I just made the trip again a couple weeks
ago. I got bumped the whole way west but it still feels like the right
plane to use for the job. It's a joy to handle, even when banging
around in IMC and operating from smaller strips.

('course I'm still waiting for the bill from my annual, including the
turbo tanks switch...)

--kyler

[Jim Burns]

JUST got our Aztec home from it's week long annual. $2500 including extra
labor to put in the one piece windshield. (All three of us helped with the
annual, so it cut our labor bill way down.) No surprises, just a few
gaskets, nuts, screws, and bolts replaced. Cable spring tail pipe bracket
needed to be replaced on one engine.... $475 from Piper!! Some 1/4"
aluminum stock, new stainless steel cable and 3 hours of my labor later we
were back in business. Pulled the tail to comply with a Piper SB, no
corrosion on the tube or any of the hardware. Found 2 shims/bearings for
the flap torque tube rolling around in the belly. Obviously they were put
in backwards and worked their way out. Now we need to re-tweak the
flap/aileron rigging so it fly's a little straighter.

Anyway, it's done and we didn't even have any extra parts left over!! (other
than the old windshield)
Jim