Small plane with the best range?

(Bob) wrote:
-The number of seats is irrelevant, I don't intent to carry
passengers;
-the payload is irrelevant( except for fuel), I travel light;
-the speed is not a major item;
-I don't like taildagger, the crosswind can be strong up there;
-range is the major item, avgas or mogas is harder to get in the small
airport the northern community (You often have to buy the whole 45
gallons drum)so refuelling is very time-consuming;
-Price range would be less than 55,000 canadian $ (about 40,000 us$)

Try to find a 172 with the optional 50 gallon long-range tanks. At 45%
power (about 95 KTAS), you get 750 nm (860 statute mile) range with 45
minute reserve. I suspect if you can find one for 40,000 USD, though,
it'll be in pretty sorry shape.

You could tear out the back seats and replace them with an additional
gas tank. Probably double your range doing that, but now you're into
custom modifications and that's sure to blow your budget.

I think some model years of the 172 offered tanks even bigger than 50
gallons, but those will be harder to find and probably command a premium
price.

Advantages of the 172 is it's very easy to fly, has simple mechanical
systems, and very rugged landing gear (good for unpaved runways). It's
about the most common light airplane in the world so parts are easy to
get and most mechanics are familiar with them.

In article ,
Roy Smith wrote:

(Bob) wrote:
-The number of seats is irrelevant, I don't intent to carry
passengers;
-the payload is irrelevant( except for fuel), I travel light;
-the speed is not a major item;
-I don't like taildagger, the crosswind can be strong up there;
-range is the major item, avgas or mogas is harder to get in the small
airport the northern community (You often have to buy the whole 45
gallons drum)so refuelling is very time-consuming;
-Price range would be less than 55,000 canadian $ (about 40,000 us$)

Try to find a 172 with the optional 50 gallon long-range tanks. At 45%
power (about 95 KTAS), you get 750 nm (860 statute mile) range with 45
minute reserve. I suspect if you can find one for 40,000 USD, though,
it'll be in pretty sorry shape.

You could tear out the back seats and replace them with an additional
gas tank. Probably double your range doing that, but now you're into
custom modifications and that's sure to blow your budget.

I think some model years of the 172 offered tanks even bigger than 50
gallons, but those will be harder to find and probably command a premium
price.

Advantages of the 172 is it's very easy to fly, has simple mechanical
systems, and very rugged landing gear (good for unpaved runways). It's
about the most common light airplane in the world so parts are easy to
get and most mechanics are familiar with them.

I would go with either a Bonanza or a Comanche (both with installed tip
tanks). Either one has more than enough range to satisfy the mission,
plus reasonable speed.

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
I would go with either a Bonanza or a Comanche (both with installed tip
tanks). Either one has more than enough range to satisfy the mission,
plus reasonable speed.

V35 Bonanza with tip tanks... 125 US gallons.
18 gph at 160 kts gives 1040 nm or seven hours to zero fuel.