19 Apr 2024, 07:35 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 22:57 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/20/14 Posts: 6473 Post Likes: +4560
Aircraft: V35
|
|
The 210 appears to be 200lbs lighter for basic empty weight. If I am reading the specs right, that's the normally aspirated 210. Most other parameters from HP to wing area are similar.
I guess 200lbs makes a difference!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 23:55 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/01/11 Posts: 6760 Post Likes: +4469 Location: In between the opioid and marijuana epidemics
Aircraft: 182, A36TC
|
|
210’s are great until you have a gear issue.
Had to play fetch a friend due to a 182rg gear issue that presented a a voltage light and slowing of aircraft. Two weeks before that he told me “don’t worry my mechanic knows the retractable Cessnas”. Heard him say to his mechanic after “replace every hose in that gear.” Experiences matter.
_________________ Fly High,
Ryan Holt CFI
"Paranoia and PTSD are requirements not diseases"
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 08 Nov 2017, 02:12 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/25/16 Posts: 287 Post Likes: +170 Location: Tupelo, MS
Aircraft: 182R
|
|
Just ask Matt Guthmiller. Flew an A36 around the world and just flew a 210 over the Atlantic. I promise you he will pick the former.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 08 Nov 2017, 06:51 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/11/10 Posts: 12403 Post Likes: +11412 Location: Indiana
Aircraft: Cessna 185, RV-7
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Bwahahahahahaha. They had to give the 210 more HP so it would go ever so slightly faster. Then they made the Bo fly faster on final(67 vs 77 knots) so the 210 would land shorter. So yeah let's cripple the Bo to make the poor Cessna guys feel better. Exactly. They compared a hot rodded 210 to a tip-tank-bedragged Bonanza, and flew the Bo 10kts too fast on final. Still, it’s a fun break from the usual aviation talk of “Cirrus is amazing, Experimentals are amazing, and we’re all getting screwed.”
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 08 Nov 2017, 08:12 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/13/10 Posts: 20120 Post Likes: +23597 Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Aircraft: Prior C310,BE33,SR22
|
|
Username Protected wrote: In the video, he remarks that the Centurion was "upgraded to an Atlantic engine" (whereas the Bonanza had the usual factory IO-550). I wonder if he really does mean the Atlantic Aero IO-550P engine that was available for 210s and would have about 15 more HP than the usual Continental IO-550 that the Bonanza had...
_________________ Arlen Get your motor runnin' Head out on the highway - Mars Bonfire
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 08 Nov 2017, 10:26 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/16/08 Posts: 63 Post Likes: +21 Location: KPDK
Aircraft: Prior 210L, 182RG
|
|
I fly the L model with the 550P, and my hangar neighbors are devout A36 fans. The 1580# useful load, wide cabin fits my mission with a family of 5. It is warm here, and my Bo friends all have AC which you need. We get by without it with window tint, pilot's window and the high wing. They manage their useful load much more closely than we need to.
The Bo handles better and is easier to land in a crosswind.
We addressed the build quality with a fabulous interior refit including lumbar support. When we outgrew the 182RG, I needed the load carrying so it was really just between the 210 and the PA32 variants (to remain in a single). We fly with 1 seat out, pilots side middle row. The fact that the 3rd row just drops down with a button converts it to more of a suburban pretty quickly. It is hard to find a corrosion free example with the 550P. It took me 2 years. The gear system is reliable IF it is maintained to a no sqwawk, no leak condition. We have doors, and go gear down slower than book speeds to reduce the loading on the doors. Cessna will make you a new one for 7 AMU's.
All planes are compromises, and our 210L fits our mission well. I would need to go to a 55 baron, not a Bo to meet our mission profile. One continental in my life is enough. My old lycoming didn't get a lot of love, and sold it with 1800 hours and great lab results.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 08 Nov 2017, 10:33 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/27/10 Posts: 2162 Post Likes: +531
|
|
I had a lot of time in a Turbo 210 before I bought my Bo, and they really are a good airplane, but I find it a little unnerving to not be able to "pop the cowling" and look everything over before each flight.
I did find it a little surprising that the club claimed "about the same" maintenance expenses.
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|