What about Brand "X"?

wrote in message
news
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 10:15:32 -0500, Stu Gotts
wrote:

snip

Tom, it sounds like you've made up your mind, so good luck with it.

snip

I'm just curious how many different makes/models of singles he's flown
around in, and how much time he's spent in the Commander.

I have 90 hours in the 112TC, and 230 in the 182RG. I have no PIC time in
the 114B, but I've got about 20 hours with an associate and his 114B. I
am/was also considering a 114TC.

Pretty much has the highest specific fuel consumption of any
comparable single, seems under-powered from the driver's seat, and
personally, I don't like the way they handle.

How much time do you have in the 112/112TC/114B ?

Different strokes for different folks, but I wouldn't think about
buying a relatively expensive, complex, everyday flyer that wasn't
either in current production or very well-supported concerning parts.

And that's why I asked to ascertain anyone's experience or objective
knowledge of theri maintenance. As it is, I am pretty much eleiminating them
from my perspective list.


BTW have bopped around in a couple of 112's also, they seemed like a
totally different (hard to quantify "better") handling airplane.

How many hours? 112 or 112TC?

BTW, My take on the 114B vs 182RG is that the 114 was MUCH more comfortable
(I'm 6'1" and very wide in the shoulders), the 182RG seemingly more like a
Chevy in terms of fit and finish and a feeling of being _solid_, where the
114's seem more like my Acura. I find the 114 much more comfortable in
turbulence.

"Tom S." wrote in message ...



I notice that everybody that dinged them has dinged them regarding parts.

Tom: Only reason for the ding is the low production numbers of the
112/114. I don't know exactly how many were built, but if they were
around in the same numbers as Pipers and Cessnas, it wouldn't be a
problem at all. Big/long production runs drive replacement parts costs
down for the common items. Lots of the type clubs are solving that
with obtaining the TC and what ever STC's they can as well as PMA's
for replacement parts. The Twin Commander is a good example. One
company now owns the TC's and will produce any part needed for
virtually any of the twins. Might cost a bit, but they are obtainable.

Craig C.

"Craig" wrote in message
om...
"Tom S." wrote in message
...



I notice that everybody that dinged them has dinged them regarding
parts.

Tom: Only reason for the ding is the low production numbers of the
112/114. I don't know exactly how many were built, but if they were
around in the same numbers as Pipers and Cessnas, it wouldn't be a
problem at all. Big/long production runs drive replacement parts costs
down for the common items. Lots of the type clubs are solving that
with obtaining the TC and what ever STC's they can as well as PMA's
for replacement parts. The Twin Commander is a good example. One
company now owns the TC's and will produce any part needed for
virtually any of the twins. Might cost a bit, but they are obtainable.

Yes, I contacted the FBO that would service it and he suggested that parts,
while available, and in a LONG chain (meaning it might takes WEEKS).

So, it looks like I'm back to square #1.

"Tom S." wrote in message ...


So, it looks like I'm back to square #1.

At least you aren't driving a 400 series Cessna. Just got an email
with a warning about an AD getting ready to come out on all 400 series
Cessnas with a projected parts cost of 14,000$, but with a 700 manhour
install time... Lots of 400 series birds are going to get grounded....

Craig C.