Conti Malibu.

I ran one for a few years. Reliable, smooth and the range was amazing. Over 1000 miles it’s faster than most 250kt tprops bc you don’t have to stop.

I flew at fl240 and fl250 all the time. Plane was fine.

Climb rates are not as bad as people report.

I averaged 193kts the time I owned it.

Costs detailed here:
viewtopic.php?f=49&t=101558

The real gotcha is the windshields, but that is manageable with a good prebuy.

It is a personal airliner. I flew all over the country in it. Really never canceled flights due to weather. Easy to go around things at fl250. I really loved that plane.

Depends on the mission. I have a 1995 mirage. 350hp. 180ktas at 3,000ft. 205kt true at 23,000ft. FIKI. Very capable. Burns around 24gph if running her gently. Great range. Great plane. But more expensive than a bonanza. I also don’t agree that parts are readily available. Some parts are built to order. If you want one, join MMOPA, call Kevin mead. Get to know the downsides to the mirage/Malibu before you purchase. Runway length is one for sure.

Compared to a p210 or a duke, parts are readily available!

Jim,

I took my ME exam two days after closing deal on Aerostar.
SAFELY operating an Aerostar is mostly about SPEED CONTROL
If your hangar is tall enough for an Aerostar then investigate a 601P.

RUN...do not walk from hangar queens!
Buy one that has been flown a bit lately.

No. IMHO, nor would you want to. The Lyc is a great reliable engine and has 40 more HP.

P baron would be my choice. I had one.

Least surprise airframe issues, only big maintenance is Continental turbo or cylinder related...all the FIKI pistons will have that issue.

Twin redundancy is worth the extra cost...to me. I am sure the Piper pressurized single would be cheaper to operate.

KJ

The Continental is a nice aviation engine. Runs smooth, does well LOP, with good efficiency. That big Lycoming is expensive. 130K. Well it is is over 100 lbs heavier than the continental, and that is all metal. Flying a big single engine piston aircraft, one of the most important things to me is will it have a catastrophic failure. The Lycoming outside of a run of bad cranks early in the Mirage history, has proven very resistant to catastrophic failure. They do blow oil control rings and turbos, but the power making parts seem to hold together. The record of that aircraft with respect to engine related fatal accidents is very low. That is due to several things, including a good engine, good training and a spectacular glide range. There have only been 2 engine related fatals in the Lyc powered PA46, spanning about 30 years of production. Quite a few more engine related fatals in the Continental powered Malibu. Perhaps that fact is even more impressive when you consider there are only a fraction of Conti powered Malibus flying compared to the number of Lyc powered Mirages. If I had to fly behind a piston single, the TIO-540AE2A would be high on my list. Expensive, heavy, sometimes blows oil, every now and then shreds a turbo, but rarely completely gives up.

The PA46 wins the best value in Pressurized FIKI aircraft.

I have been trying to upgrade for a year and can’t find anything better unless I go double to triple the cost. And even if I do that the operating cost are also double to triple.

I am leaning towards a King Air. It will take that kind of move to make
It worth the jump from the Mirage.

If I didn't have such tall and heavy family I would stick with the Mirage for sure. Can’t fit my family of 5 in the Mirage. But to be fair 3 of us are 6’5”

Mike

The difference is, the Aerostar is one of, if not the only booted aircraft that be made FIKI after it leaves the factory by buying the kit(s) ala cart. The Baron and Twin Cessna's and I believe Pipers can't.

Every time I think about trading up or down from my Aerostar, I fly a long flight in and ask myself why I would want to sit in the weather and ice down low in a 58, or burn more fuel (MPG wise) than a 58. A 421C would be better for my mission, but I can't own two light twins at the same time...

Gentlemen,

Thank you for your insights. We’ve been so happy with our A36 for so long that I haven’t closely followed the aircraft market for upgrade opportunities.

The problem with any potential step up would be getting into an aircraft that might require checks my bank can’t cash.

The nice thing about the A36 is that we know we can handle the financial part (and it fits in the hangar). Plus with the TAT TN it’s plenty fast and flies high easily.

You’ve given me a lot to consider.

Jim

Jim:

I went from an A36 Bonanza to 58P Baron to F90 King Air. Cost about doubled each step, so did the weather capability.

If the A36 TN is working for you, it will save a lot of cost to keep it.

If you really need to go in the weather, getting above 18,000ft with de ice really helps. It comes at a big cost.

KJ

I've got no real good insight here as my Saratoga is at the upper end of my AMU limitations. However, from what I'm reading it sounds like you've got a wonderful TN A36 that you're comfortable in. Sounds like any improvement over that airframe will at minimum double your operating expenses... If I'm in your shoes I'd probably take that extra cash that I'm saving by NOT upgrading to another airframe and just "buy" more time off to be flexible with my schedule.

Duke fit your request.

Jim head over to Dallas in a couple of weeks and we will go for a flight.

Shop just picked up the Duke for panel upgrade.

Ken

Hi Ken,

I’ve enjoyed following your Duke adventure on the Beech list.

Thank you for the generous offer. If I find myself heading towards Dallas I’ll let you know.

Regards, Jim

My mechanic has one in his care, & he says it’s terrible to work on (a lot of stuff crammed into the engine compartment) , which translates into more time required to do the ordinary maintenance. That’s certainly not unique to this bird, but just an FYI.

Gary