29 Mar 2024, 05:07 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 30 Nov 2017, 18:40 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/04/14 Posts: 1693 Post Likes: +1137 Location: Southern California
Aircraft: C 210
|
|
Username Protected wrote: they missed the only rear advantage of the 210 - you can have a bigger collection of cars and boats in your t-hangar with a high wing Good point, Id have to find a new home for the golf cart.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 30 Nov 2017, 18:54 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/23/09 Posts: 11841 Post Likes: +10441 Location: Cascade, Idaho (U70)
Aircraft: 182
|
|
Username Protected wrote: they missed the only rear advantage of the 210 - you can have a bigger collection of cars and boats in your t-hangar with a high wing Good point, Id have to find a new home for the golf cart.
Yep.
Cessna in hangar.......2 beater airport cars in with it with plenty of room to spare. Bonanza in hangar.......2 beater cars outside getting beatier.
_________________ Life is for living Backcountry videos: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSChxm ... fOnWwngH1w
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 30 Nov 2017, 20:22 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/03/08 Posts: 14529 Post Likes: +22860 Location: Peachtree City GA / Stoke-On-Trent UK
Aircraft: A33
|
|
Yep I would nominate a 182 airframe, Saratoga engine, and beech cowl and throwover yoke, as the perfect plane
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 30 Nov 2017, 20:29 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/23/09 Posts: 11841 Post Likes: +10441 Location: Cascade, Idaho (U70)
Aircraft: 182
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Yep I would nominate a 182 airframe, Saratoga engine, and beech cowl and throwover yoke, as the perfect plane With a magically disappearing trailing edge so as to prevent the multiple diamond imprints on the forehead while wearing a ball cap.
_________________ Life is for living Backcountry videos: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSChxm ... fOnWwngH1w
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 30 Nov 2017, 20:53 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/04/14 Posts: 1693 Post Likes: +1137 Location: Southern California
Aircraft: C 210
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Yep I would nominate a 182 airframe, Saratoga engine, and beech cowl and throwover yoke, as the perfect plane With a magically disappearing trailing edge so as to prevent the multiple diamond imprints on the forehead while wearing a ball cap.
I know someone that rationalized a late model 210 purchase just to get away from corrugated flaps and ailerons for the same reason. Impressive.
10 years of flying Cessna's and still no "Cessna tattoo" on my forehead but Ive come close. Probably shouldn't have said that...
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 30 Nov 2017, 20:55 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/04/14 Posts: 1693 Post Likes: +1137 Location: Southern California
Aircraft: C 210
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The high wing helps with hangar storage and walking around the airplane. Two front doors is, IMHO, kind of a big deal. Beech really should've put two front doors on the Bonanza.
Cessna should've made it so you can check inside the cowling without popping 75 Dzus screws. +1 I have always wondered if there is someone out there that has made their Cessna oil door 4 times bigger...
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 01 Dec 2017, 17:38 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/16/17 Posts: 807 Post Likes: +805 Location: KYIP Willow Run (Detroit MI)
Aircraft: BE58/7AC/C140
|
|
Username Protected wrote: they missed the only rear advantage of the 210 - you can have a bigger collection of cars and boats in your t-hangar with a high wing Yep, I’m already trying to figure out how much of the stuff we have crammed in the hangar with the 172 will have to come out when the Baron arrives. It’s a good problem to have though!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 14 Jan 2018, 23:33 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/12/08 Posts: 7399 Post Likes: +2225 Company: Retired Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Aircraft: '76 A36 TAT TN 550
|
|
I thought the AOPA article was poorly done from a journalistic standpoint for reasons already noted as well as some others. But that's typical for AOPA which is why I seldom read their magazine. As for the 210 vs. A36 debate, I could go on and on about the many reasons my family and I prefer the A36, but why do all that typing? Plus what's not to like about club seating, double doors for the aft cabin, a 1,638 lb. useful load and a TAT TN 550? Of course they're still making the Beech G36. Was the 210 discontinued in 86? So some guy at AOPA who didn't write the check thinks the 210 is better. Really?
_________________ ABS Life Member
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 15 Jan 2018, 09:14 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/01/14 Posts: 2128 Post Likes: +1608 Location: 0TX0 Granbury TX
Aircraft: T-210M Aeronca 7AC
|
|
I visited with Tom Hirshman before the article came out. He said that Tom Haines wanted to read every word before it came out. Both airplanes are great machines! We are fortunate to have a country that allows us opportunity to own and travel at our whims.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 19 May 2018, 11:11 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/12/15 Posts: 47 Post Likes: +24 Location: South Tx
Aircraft: Baron E55, c340,Pc12
|
|
I fly out of 8000 + elevation runways with 1000 lbs of bags and passengers and climb straight to fl190 to smooth air cruising at 188 knots tas burning 18.3 Gph in my T210N. One of my passengers is 6’6 330 lbs and sits in the back seat comfortably with the middle seat removed. Don’t think any bonanza is remotely close to achieving that level performance or comfort. A Barrón might do it but at double the cost.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 210 vs Bo AOPA Style Posted: 19 May 2018, 11:39 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/13/07 Posts: 19825 Post Likes: +9520 Location: Seeley Lake, MT (23S)
Aircraft: 1964 Bonanza S35
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I fly out of 8000 + elevation runways with 1000 lbs of bags and passengers and climb straight to fl190 to smooth air cruising at 188 knots tas burning 18.3 Gph in my T210N. One of my passengers is 6’6 330 lbs and sits in the back seat comfortably with the middle seat removed. Don’t think any bonanza is remotely close to achieving that level performance or comfort. A Barrón might do it but at double the cost. Yes, a turbo Bo can do that, the cruise number at FL190 would be low 200's from what has been reported here.
_________________ Want to go here?: https://tinyurl.com/FlyMT1
tinyurl.com/35som8p
|
|
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
|
|
|
|