Thinking of buying a C-172...

[Sleek-Jet]

Hey fireflyer... I figured you'd be backing me up on the Tri-Pacer idea...

I think Chuck would look good in a perky little 3 Pacer. 

[madpilot44]

Hey mike, my dad used to own a C-172 in partnership over here, I don't have the figures now but will get them to you. it was a C-172N and it flew out of MGGT wich is at 5,000 ft with no problems. I recall once a guy flew it with 3 passengers and slight baggage. I used to fly on it, often with an instructor and it climbed nice (it had a climb prop)...

memories just came flooding back jaja

anyway, I'll get back to you with the numbers (should have them here somewhere...)

[SkyKing]

Soooo, I am thinking of buying a Cessna 172P if I can get one for a reasonable price. What do you guys think my costs would be per month not including gas and oil changes (I am an A&P so I can do all that myself)? ? ? 
 Just thinking annual, materials, insurance, tie-down fees, and basic operating costs for a P-model...

Any thoughts?

Your major expense will be replacing the rubber on the training wheels every other week.

If you are seriously interested in commuting by plane, buy a PLANE.  The Skyhawk is known in the upper desert as the CHICKENHAWK, good at low altitudes but not a really good bird for going anywhere in a hurry or where the DAs are 9,000 on a July afternoon!  You should be looking for something like a Bellanca, Swift, Mooney or something else faster than the 172.  The only high-wing Cessna that I'd consider for aerocommuting from LV to SoCal would be the Skymaster.   

. . .of course, I can recommend the older 310 . . !  There are things to be said about sleek fuselage, straight tail and tuna tanks!   

If you can get away without a lot of carrying capability, you might even think outside the box a bit, and look at the hot one-holers.  You could even get one of those little racers, and be-bop along at 200 knots plus . . .inverted . . .

[SkyKing]

You've got lots of options when looking for this type of equipment.  Don't discount the Grumman Cheetah, I've grown rather fond of those.  Very good speed for the power.  And you get to fool everyone on unicom when you announce your position as "Grumman 1234, 10 east for landing"... Everyone expects a GV to show up.

Better than that, the Grummans are FUN to fly!  Just don't get the camo "Boredom Fighter" paint scheme, those are kind of hard to spot sometimes.  Add the Grummans to the list of "look at" planes.

Maybe what you need is a little single-seater to commute, and a Grumman two- or four-place for your other flying.

[Mike]

Thanks for the very honest input again SkyKing.

I am totally with you and I would like a Skymaster and, like I mentioned before, a Skylane but cost is also an issue.
A C-310 is completely out of the question. Think "parts"!!

I am primarily a mechanic and intend to work on my own plane and I just don't want to deal with maintenance issues all the time. I can deal with something going slower and not being as much "fun" to fly if I get something that works every time and is easy to maintain. How much time am I really going to save?
It's 200nm to LA from Vegas and if I fly 130tks instead of 100kts...

And when it comes to "fun to fly".... come on! are you serious?
I fly helicopters into fires for a living!!

. . . This would be simply a commuter for me (AND as I mentioned a means for my girl to get her license too, so no Mooney, no Bonanza, no Taildragger.... even though I would like it)

I really love the way the Skymaster flies but I used to maintain them and let me tell you....the mechanics call it "Skybastard" for a reason.

I guess I could look at the Grumman though.
And no, I would never have that camo paint scheme

[Mike]

Hey mike, my dad used to own a C-172 in partnership over here, I don't have the figures now but will get them to you. it was a C-172N and it flew out of MGGT wich is at 5,000 ft with no problems. I recall once a guy flew it with 3 passengers and slight baggage. I used to fly on it, often with an instructor and it climbed nice (it had a climb prop)...

memories just came flooding back jaja

anyway, I'll get back to you with the numbers (should have them here somewhere...)

Thanks MAD!
I am looking forward to reading the details...

[fireflyr]

Hey fireflyer... I figured you'd be backing me up on the Tri-Pacer idea...

I think Chuck would look good in a perky little 3 Pacer.

YA YOU BETCHA!  De leetle "flying milk stool" would be a good honest airplane---I can tell ya they'll fly 4 big guys and baggage out of a 1'000 foot beach strip in Mexico--been there done that---AND the cruise is respectable but for what Mike wants, I believe the 172 or 172/180 is more appropriate.     I love them little Pipers!

[Mike]

How much are them little Tri-Pacers?

I noticed that there is about a $20,000 price difference between a C-172 M and one with the O-360 conversion...

I was thinking of spending something between $40,000 and $60,000 . . .
but depending on the financing I can get I might be able to go higher.

[Inept]

Have you considered a Cutlass?   They fly like a skyhawk, but with the gear in the belly, you get an extra 15 kts for free.   With a constant speed, three bladed prop, you'll get good climb performance and cruise numbers as well.    The problem may be in using it as a primaty trainer for your girl, since it's complex.

[Mike]

hmmm...
No I haven't. Thanks for the input.
But if I go with extra gears and more blades and stuff it again would leave me more open to maintenance problems, at least I think....
I have maintained one and flown it once. I really remember much about it.
How much do they cost?

[Sleek-Jet]

Trivia alert....

The Cessna Cutlass is actually a fixed gear, 180 hp 172, there were only a small number made... the "Cutlass" that everyone thinks about and trained in is the RG model of that airplane... check it out on the cowling, they are Cutlass RG's. 

Every once in a while you'll see a f/g Cutlass come up for sale.  It would be a pretty nice airplane to have, but they are rare.

[Inept]

That's a neat bit of trivia, thanks, Sleek.   I'd have never guessed that or relaized that the Cutlass was it's own f/g model.   I always assumed that it was just the name given the the r/g skyhawk, but then that goes to show what happens when you assume...

Aerotrader has several Cutlass RGs listed, ranging in price from 49K to 72K.   Another thing to consider about the Cutlass RG is that most of them are equipped with a 2 bladed prop... I am fortunate enough to be spoiled by a 3-blader to train in.   

http://adcache.aerotraderonline.com/2/0/2/83518402.htm

http://adcache.aerotraderonline.com/2/9/8/82142198.htm

http://adcache.aerotraderonline.com/2/1/5/79952415.htm

[C310RCaptian]

DON’T GET A 172RG!!!!  Not worth it. Maintenance sucks on them and yet they are still used as the primary commercial pilot trainer. They have a lower useful load than a 172 fixed gear 2 people full fuel your at gross. Performance wise they are crappy. They drop like a rock in the dirty configuration and on hot days they drag there butt (way underpowered).

If you want a really good high wing airplane that has retractable gear and cruises get a Cessna 210. They can haul a ton of gear or people. Try and get one with the continental 550 engine and you will cook over the ground (150kt easy). Doesn’t have to be the pressurized kind but it’s an option and more expensive. I would dare to say they are as great as a 310 only with 3 differences. 20 knots slower than the old 310, only 1 engine to worry about maintenance and it sips the gas, slightly lower useful load by maybe 50lb. Other than that they are great!

I have time in both aircraft. Would love to own a 210 but you couldn’t pay me to keep a 172RG.

[Mike]

I am with you there Captain.
I will try to avoid anything retractable, turbo charged, pressurized, and twin engined.
It's because of my maintenance background. I know how much headache this can be (even if you get paid to work on it).
Just to put it on the jacks with everything checking out right is too time consuming for me. Again, I want to buy this plane to SAVE time, not to spend it.

I used to maintain a pressurized, turbocharged, retract gear, airconditioned (!) 337 Skymaster. That thing spent 6 months in the shop on one occasion. No Thank you!
(although they do fly nice...)

A 210 might be a little out of my price range. I am figuring that with a plane that costs up to 70k I can totally save money versus owning an RV (it's a long story why I am comparing the two) but a 210 would use more fuel and cost more to buy...

[Sleek-Jet]

Mike, don't let us get you to far off track...

Your original idea of a 172 or the like will fit the bill nicely.  If you can find one with a 180 hp conversion, that would probably be ideal.  Don't count out the Archer, it's got the semi-tapered wing and 180 hp so it'll perform better at the alititudes we run out here in the west and it's got more fuel than the 172.

One trip to OSH a year doesn't justify a fire breathing six seat retract, and the flight from So-Cal to Vegas isn't going to be that much faster anyway.   

Ask 12 different pilots what the perfect airplane would be and you'll get 12 different answers.  There's a reason Cessna sold 30 some thousand 172's... they get the job done.