"Slip'er" wrote in message
news:MhoAd.22474$Cl3.13803@fed1read03...
I am going to put a lot of constraints on this question, bear with me. How
much does the size of the engine and airframe contribute to cost of
ownership? I am looking at buying a plane as are many of us. I am stuck
in
the infinite loop of, well if I spend an extra $5K I can get this...but oh
look, another $5K gets me this and WOW for just another $10K I can get
THIS.....repeat. Somethings are obvious, CS prop more maintenance than
fixed prop. Retrac more maintenance than fixed, etc. But, other than
fuel,
is a 180hp much more expensive to maintain than a 160hp or a 115 hp? How
about Continental vs Lycoming vs Franklin vs Ranger radial? I have some
flexibility regarding purchase price. What is more likely to burn me
later
on is month to month expenses This is what a need an sensitivity analysis
on.

Thanks.


There is a 3 times the cost of fuel rule that works pretty well. In other
words, your cost to operate a plane is pretty much 3 times the hourly fuel
burn times the number of hours you fly it. Its just a rule of thumb though.

Unless you know someone that is happy to work on a particular engine type,
stick with Lycoming or Continental. Nothing is wrong with the others, just
you want to know an AP before you buy one.

Several folks here will give you good advice on choosing a plane if you tell
us more about your mission and budget.