Any Baron 58 owners?

[The Visitor]

Viperdoc?

I am thinking about a new airplane and considering a 58. G58.
Yes, with AC!

Here is my question(s).

What do you really cruise it at.

Airspeed (IAS or TAS)
mp/rpm, what power setting?
leaned to what?
Altitude?

I am trying to get a handle on what the ac really will do as opposed to
marketing claims.

Do the engines really eat cylinders?

Any light on the the subject would be appreciated.

[[email protected]]

I have an A36, 2/3rds of a Baron. Are you interested in my
experience?

Bob

[Dan[_1_]]

For the cost of a G58, I think you're already at the same price point
as a D-jet, Cirrus Jet, etc.... Those aircraft would seem much more
appealing if that's your target price range.

--Dan

[The Visitor]

The future of avgas does have me a bit concerned. Those you mention seem
too 'newfangled' for me. By that I mean unproven, to new to really know
how they are. But getting into jet fuel is something I may well be doing
in the end. I looked at the Seneca V's and although the Baron is a
tighter fit inside, it seems much more capable.

John

Dan wrote:
> For the cost of a G58, I think you're already at the same price point
> as a D-jet, Cirrus Jet, etc.... Those aircraft would seem much more
> appealing if that's your target price range.
>
> --Dan
>
>
>

[The Visitor]

Well thanks, if there is something relevant to my question? I don't know
much about an A36 to say yes or no really. Do they share the same engine?

John

wrote:
> I have an A36, 2/3rds of a Baron. Are you interested in my
> experience?
>
> Bob
>

[Viperdoc]

I fly a B-55, and with VG's (which help the Vmc and low speed performance,
but cost a few knots), along with TKS (known ice certification), I cruise at
174k true, running at 2400 RPM, full throttle at around 8,000, and LOP at
around 24gph.

The fuel burn of course varies with the OAT, and it is possible to lean even
further. Recently, on a long XC where I didn't want to stop for gas, I ran
at 2300rpm, WOT, and was down to less than 22gph, with a TAS of around
165-168. This gave over six hours endurance.

In my opinion, there is little value in a new Baron, and you can get a great
buy on one less than ten years old. Let the original owner pay for the
initial big depreciation. If I were to do it over again, I would get one
without boots, since the TKS has a lot of advantages over boots, although is
very pricey ($40,000). VG's in my opinion are also a must with a light twin.

I don't know much about the G-1000, but I have a Garmin 530/430, both with
WAAS, as well as traffic and XM Nexrad, along with

Stormscope and built in Sperry radar. In combination, this gives a great
nav picture, although I think a digital AP with roll steering would be nicer
than the KFC-200, which has been pretty bullet proof.

You could get a late model B-58 with air for around 400,000 or less, and
then install the TKS, which I think would be a better buy.

There's nothing like having the dual electric and vacuum systems, along with
the extra engine while flying over Lake Michigan, which I would never do in
a single. To me, the safety and redundancy outweighs the added expense of
the twin, which is of course an argument that can be debated forever.

The guy in the hangar next to mine has a late model B-58, with AC, but then
state of the art King instruments. They are pathetic compared to my Garmin
panel. He also has boots, as compared to my TKS, and I would definitely go
with TKS any time. Of course, he does have AC, and can cruise up to 10K
faster, but for the price differential and my own needs, I would take my
plane any time, except for the AC.

[Viperdoc]

It is not just the price of the purchase, but also recurrent training and
the cost of operation, like burning lots of jet A. Plus, a new technology
will still have teething pains, and I personally would wait a while before
getting into a VLJ.

If I had the cash, I would get a TBM, which looks to be a solid airplane. I
was not too impressed with the sales force at OSH- diffident, uninterested,
a bit arrogant, snobbish, etc. However, it still looked to be a good
airplane.

[[email protected]]

A new baron is certainly a beautiful airplane but for that kind of
money I would choose a used turboprop for the engine reliabiliy and
performance compared to a reciprocating engine, which is taking
nothing away from the IO550-I believe the best made recip currently
made. The availability of avgas also worries me but I would not dwell
on this point too much. Love the big doors on the Baron but they are
simply tight shoulder to shoulder in the cabin, at least for me.

Good luck.

Andy

[Nathan Young]

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 02:12:30 GMT, "Viperdoc"
> wrote:

>I fly a B-55, and with VG's (which help the Vmc and low speed performance,
>but cost a few knots),

<snip>

> VG's in my opinion are also a must with a light twin.

Does a stock B55 have a small spread between Vyse and VMC ?

-Nathan

[The Visitor]

Yes it is tight, I am used to a Seneca.

wrote:
> A new baron is certainly a beautiful airplane but for that kind of
> money I would choose a used turboprop for the engine reliabiliy and
> performance compared to a reciprocating engine, which is taking
> nothing away from the IO550-I believe the best made recip currently
> made. The availability of avgas also worries me but I would not dwell
> on this point too much. Love the big doors on the Baron but they are
> simply tight shoulder to shoulder in the cabin, at least for me.
>
> Good luck.
>
> Andy
>

[The Visitor]

I did consider the tbm850. Great operating costs after you get over
buying it. I will have to join the CBAA as it is a pressurized turbine
aircraft. Meaning $$$ each year for membership. I think it is a few
thousand. Also obtain a private operators certificate. Training I don't
mind though. Same price is the Cessna Mustang. A real winner but again a
new aircraft, but if anybody does, Cessna knows what they are doing. If
I use it for business, I very well may go to a turboprop.

Viperdoc wrote:

> It is not just the price of the purchase, but also recurrent training and
> the cost of operation, like burning lots of jet A. Plus, a new technology
> will still have teething pains, and I personally would wait a while before
> getting into a VLJ.
>
> If I had the cash, I would get a TBM, which looks to be a solid airplane. I
> was not too impressed with the sales force at OSH- diffident, uninterested,
> a bit arrogant, snobbish, etc. However, it still looked to be a good
> airplane.
>
>

[The Visitor]

Thank you.



Viperdoc wrote:

> I fly a B-55, and with VG's (which help the Vmc and low speed performance,
> but cost a few knots), along with TKS (known ice certification), I cruise at
> 174k true, running at 2400 RPM, full throttle at around 8,000, and LOP at
> around 24gph.
>
> The fuel burn of course varies with the OAT, and it is possible to lean even
> further. Recently, on a long XC where I didn't want to stop for gas, I ran
> at 2300rpm, WOT, and was down to less than 22gph, with a TAS of around
> 165-168. This gave over six hours endurance.
>
> In my opinion, there is little value in a new Baron, and you can get a great
> buy on one less than ten years old. Let the original owner pay for the
> initial big depreciation. If I were to do it over again, I would get one
> without boots, since the TKS has a lot of advantages over boots, although is
> very pricey ($40,000). VG's in my opinion are also a must with a light twin.
>
> I don't know much about the G-1000, but I have a Garmin 530/430, both with
> WAAS, as well as traffic and XM Nexrad, along with
>
> Stormscope and built in Sperry radar. In combination, this gives a great
> nav picture, although I think a digital AP with roll steering would be nicer
> than the KFC-200, which has been pretty bullet proof.
>
> You could get a late model B-58 with air for around 400,000 or less, and
> then install the TKS, which I think would be a better buy.
>
> There's nothing like having the dual electric and vacuum systems, along with
> the extra engine while flying over Lake Michigan, which I would never do in
> a single. To me, the safety and redundancy outweighs the added expense of
> the twin, which is of course an argument that can be debated forever.
>
> The guy in the hangar next to mine has a late model B-58, with AC, but then
> state of the art King instruments. They are pathetic compared to my Garmin
> panel. He also has boots, as compared to my TKS, and I would definitely go
> with TKS any time. Of course, he does have AC, and can cruise up to 10K
> faster, but for the price differential and my own needs, I would take my
> plane any time, except for the AC.
>
>