The first annual after purchase will be higher as you catch up on deferred maintenance , and also fix things to make it the way you want it. However, it shouldn't take 10 years to catch up, maybe 2 or 3 at most. At which point you would have a very reliable plane and good dispatch rates, as long as you keep up on routine maintenance. At least that has been my experience.
The biggest issue is the upgrades that you might be tempted to do...things you don't need, but you want!

I don’t understand comments like this. I suppose it’s because our experiences are quite diverse.

My December annual cost $4,200 and it was typical. We added some nitrogen to the main gear struts, replaced the TAT TN V band clamp on the exhaust and a couple other minor tweaks.

I had previously bought the clamp from TAT (they run about $450) so that wasn’t included

I can see the A36 if you need the seats or useful load.

The F33A seems like a reach to me. Is there really a speed difference? I know my -10 is 165 knots at 11.X GPH all day long. That's 57% power(ish). I could go faster with more fuel burn. As far as seating goes, there is an option to make the RV-10 a 5 seater, but there had better be a kid in that mix. Kinda like the F33A in that regard. Now, some F33A's have higher useful loads than the RV-10, which could be advantageous. Also, the Beech can hold more fuel, but probably burns more to go the same distance at the same speed, so the impact is somewhat mitigated.

And as has been pointed out, the maintenance on the RV will be less expensive than on the Bo. Why? Fewer systems. No gear swings. Less expensive parts. Cheaper avionics upgrades. Lycoming engine versus Continental.

So, I fully get the A36 if it better fits your mission, but don't see the F33A as an upgrade, or even if it is a minor upgrade, the difference probably isn't worth the hassle of selling one airplane, then buying another and bring it up to your standard.

(I've kind of thought the same thing. I like the plane a lot, but it definitely has a feeling of a plane that's imitating the grownups.)

(I've kind of thought the same thing. I like the plane a lot, but it definitely has a feeling of a plane that's imitating the grownups.)

The base inspection takes 24 hours and his rate is $150/hour so $3,600 is the inspection and the rest was for “squawks”. I do my own oil changes.

In the inspection price he includes swinging and adjusting the gear (if needed), all lubrication items except the oil change, checking the timing on the mags, cleaning and gapping the plugs, etc., etc.

He’s been taking care of my ‘76 A36 Bonanza since ‘91 or ‘92 so it’s an understatement to say he knows the aircraft well. Nearly every thing that’s been done he did himself.

I opt for permanent fixes when appropriate. For example in the late 90’s I had him install the Spacecraft Machine Products rudder brackets which permanently solves the issue where the original design might develop cracks.

We’ve always had a deal - zero deferral of safety related items - if he says it needs it we do it - but I get to choose timing on cosmetic items. One year at annual he told me “this is the last year I will approve these windows” referring primarily to the windshield and the emergency exit windows. He didn’t want to handle the replacement either. So I called Jim Klug at DBM and got on his calendar to replace them all.

I don’t understand when I see people having annuals with costs in the $10k and up range year after year. Makes me wonder what all is being done.

BTW I owner assist on annuals as much as he will allow. It’s a small shop and an extra set of hands can help. When we retired our old IO-520-BA at roughly 1,650 SMOH due to a crankcase crack I ordered a factory reman IO-550-B from Continental.

It’s a big job to replace the engine. He told me to take a week off work and help him perform the R&R. I did and learned a lot in the process.

I suppose my point is we don’t skimp on maintenance. We want our aircraft safe and given proper care. Cosmetics? Yes, I’d like to get it painted and we redid the interior in 2003 but it’s starting to show signs of wear.

But she flies as good as ever and with the TAT TN 550 performs better than ever. What’s not to like?

I'm fascinated why the OP is interested in moving towards an bonanza.

I've thought about moving next from a bonanza to an RV-10 - although I have limited experience in RV's and zero in the -10, like the OP has limited experience in bonanzas.

Is it a 'grass is greener' thing going on? Objectively, I think I see the pros and cons of the choice between the two, An RV-10 and A36 will be pretty equally capable in load, speed and range. I think mx costs will be obviously more for the Bo, but hell, this is aviation, they call it an AMU for a reason. And I also think in terms of flying characteristics and cool factor, the bonanza has no equal, although many prefer the lighter, aerobatic feel of the RV's.
Plenty of good reasons to choose either one, but they're not light years away from each other either.

I just find it fascinating that pilots are seemingly always looking for the 'next' airplane. Like, ALWAYS. Including me, and I couldn't be happier with my P35. It is completely sorted, reliable, fast, comfortable and cool AF to fly.

I've been riding motorcycles for around 40 years. I've owned 14 motorcycles in that time, and except for one bike, not one of them was 'bad'. Yet there always came a day when i just needed to look at a different dashboard.

Boys need new toys - the next machine to master, upgrade, and personalize.

Serious RV-10 question, I've never ridden in one.
I have ridden in RV-6, and 7 I got the impression that the 6 and 7 were very lightly constructed. IE if you just plopped you 220lb self in the seat you might bend something.
IS the RV-10 more soldily built? or doe it have the same feel?
My Travel Air and My Aerostar and My Cessnas all felt more solid than the RV6,7.

After taking a look at the RV 10 website I don’t think it has much in common with an A36 Bonanza.

I can (and have) carried 5 adults, overnight luggage and full fuel in mine. Or 3 adults and 2 children countless times. Plus luggage, full fuel, etc.

It originally had a 1,308 lb useful load but with the TAT TN STC and some avionics changes over the years it’s now up to 1,632 lbs.

While it is well-known an A36 is not a true six-place airplane, it’s important to remember that space equals luxury. Four people in an A36 is much more comfortable than an RV10 and, I believe, a Cirrus.

The RV 10 and Cirrus cabin widths are 6 inches and 7 inches wider, respectively, than the A36 cabin.

Yep. The -10 can be a 4 person aircraft, but it ain't an A36. With 4 people in the 10, you've gotta be economical with the bags. Fuel too. An A36 gives 200+ more pounds of useful load, which really matters.

For the passengers sitting in the back, one looking forward the other aft, elbow room is considerably more with an empty seat next to them. Space=luxury.

Why do wealthy people buy large-cabin jets? Not because they’re going to cram the cabin full of people.

I've paid less than that for the last two annuals on my C-414 at a high quality shop! Last year was the first time they seen the airplane.

If you are paying $10K per year for the annual you are also having a lot of other work being done other than the annual. That brings me to question of what else are you having done? I have things done as well and I'm averaging about $2,500 a year out the door cost over the 20 years I've owned it. I do not owner assist, I drop it off and pick it up when done. You want to spend $10K a year on annuals buy a Cirrus.