![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Our club is getting ready to purchase another airplane. To keep insurance
costs low, we're leaning strongly towards fixed gear. But if we want higher performance than we get from our 172s and our DA40 (hoping for 150kts or better), it seems we're limited to 182's, Cirrus, and Columbia. The last 2 probably blow the insurance budget and insurance would also probably require a lot of instructor time for club members... Suggestions? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 10/18/2011 7:06 PM, Robert Barker wrote:
Our club is getting ready to purchase another airplane. To keep insurance costs low, we're leaning strongly towards fixed gear. But if we want higher performance than we get from our 172s and our DA40 (hoping for 150kts or better), it seems we're limited to 182's, Cirrus, and Columbia. The last 2 probably blow the insurance budget and insurance would also probably require a lot of instructor time for club members... Suggestions? Grumman Tiger. 140+ kts with lower fuel burn than the 182. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Curt Johnson wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:06 PM, Robert Barker wrote: Our club is getting ready to purchase another airplane. To keep insurance costs low, we're leaning strongly towards fixed gear. But if we want higher performance than we get from our 172s and our DA40 (hoping for 150kts or better), it seems we're limited to 182's, Cirrus, and Columbia. The last 2 probably blow the insurance budget and insurance would also probably require a lot of instructor time for club members... Suggestions? Grumman Tiger. 140+ kts with lower fuel burn than the 182. I agree, though I'm biased as I own a Tiger. For a 150 nm trip, the difference between 150 kts and 140 kts is 4 minutes. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ... Curt Johnson wrote: On 10/18/2011 7:06 PM, Robert Barker wrote: Our club is getting ready to purchase another airplane. To keep insurance costs low, we're leaning strongly towards fixed gear. But if we want higher performance than we get from our 172s and our DA40 (hoping for 150kts or better), it seems we're limited to 182's, Cirrus, and Columbia. The last 2 probably blow the insurance budget and insurance would also probably require a lot of instructor time for club members... Suggestions? Grumman Tiger. 140+ kts with lower fuel burn than the 182. I agree, though I'm biased as I own a Tiger. For a 150 nm trip, the difference between 150 kts and 140 kts is 4 minutes. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. I agree on the speed difference, but the difference from the DA40 to the Tiger isn't much. It's hard to "sell" the difference to renters. There's something magical about breaking 150kts. To be honest, I'm kind of pushing the rest of the board to a really nice Columbia 300 but it's a hard sell. I'd have the Columbia over the Cirrus any day. They'll probably end up with a retract like a Mooney Rocket or something similar. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
From an insurance point of view, I agree with the Grumman Tiger. Especially with today's fuel prices. However insurance prices have been falling this year so the rate should be very competitive.
Bill Check out our NEW SITE!! Quote:
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Logger Choice | Jamie Denton | Soaring | 10 | July 6th 07 03:13 PM |
Headset Choice | jad | Piloting | 14 | August 9th 06 07:59 AM |
o2 drug of choice?? | houstondan | Piloting | 10 | February 7th 05 12:40 AM |
!!HELP GAMERS CHOICE | Dave | Piloting | 0 | September 3rd 04 12:01 AM |
Aircraft Choice delemma | Bonza | Owning | 4 | January 14th 04 03:47 AM |