I wouldn't say "looking for", but yes, the IV-P is piston powered, pressurized. It is an experimental category. Just still in the learning phase.
I'd like to be able to fly about 6-700 miles, (at least), and occasionally carry three other people. Skiing, water skiing, pleasure trips. I've also considered later model mooneys, and perhaps turbo charged bonanzas. I've been looking for a while, but have no defined time frame. I've got about 1500 hours of light airplane time within my overall 16,000 hours of flight time. I'm an airline pilot. I started as a civilian flight instructor and have become interested in getting back into light aircraft.
Well, a 4P or Mooney ain't gonna carry 4 people on 6-700 mile trips. I have a Turbonormalized Bonanza and regularly carry myself and 3-4 other with bags over 800 miles non stop. I can add tip tanks and carry the same load over 1000 miles. TAS is 185 at 10,000' and increases 1.7 knots for every 1000' I climb.
Here's an article for your education: http://www.n252q.com/2008/01/mooneyis-it-really-best.html you may also learn some from here: http://www.lancair.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=71&Itemid=130 enjoy
1. Have you looked at the back seat of a 4P or a Mooney? 2. Have you calculated how much fuel you need for a 700NM flight versus how much the useful load is of those airplanes?
Those articles are comparing to a F33 Bonanza which is not manufactured anymore. Mine is a G36 Bonanza. It has 6 seats and a 1400lb useful load. But, even comparing the F33 that article still has the Mooney coming up short on payload. There are several different types of Bonanza. The only one still manufactured is the 36 series.
I would expect the opposite, but it seems that commercial/airline pilots like yourself are comfortable and do well in the experimentals like RV or Lancair. They know their own capabilities and trust a plane even if it doesn't have a certified stamp on it. On the certified side for your mission a Mooney NA yes, turbo no. Bonanza or if wanting a little more speed and modern the Cirrus or Corvalis. What is your budget? I just went through this analysis last 4 years and my mission is almost exactly like yours. 3-4 people 600-800 miles IFR or solo 1000+. I picked the 2006 Columbia 400 because it had the G1000 and lower prices than the later model versions which weren't any more plane for the money.
I wish I had the balls to get into an experimental like the Evolution. I just don't know how you'd ever get rid of it. The FAA has been clamping down on experimental sales also. I just don't want to deal with it.
just 20 minutes ago on our club forum a 2008 400 owner just posted (Don Sak, former Trans Am driver) that he put a deposit on Evolution at Sun n' Fun. Fast yes, decent looking yes, pressurized yes. Everyone is happy for Don, but a little reality too with G900, what kinda of autopilot legal?, etc.
If I were older and I knew it was the last airplane I'd ever own I'd do it. I like to buy things I can sell easily.
The B36 or Saratoga are a lot more like what you are looking for. Skis are a problem in a lot of light aircraft, the cabin doesn't have the length to keep them without a ski tube to extend the cargo area into the tailcone some. I had a modified back panel on my 182RG so I could take skis and 4 aboard, but that's about as small an airplane that you can get away with. Haven't seen a ski tube for a Mooney but maybe they could be fitted. I didn't have a weight and balance problem with my 182, but lighter and smaller airplanes don't have as much weight and balance lattitude. The newer airplanes like the Cessna Corvalis and the big motor Cirrus have 300 hp motors. These are faster than the previous generation singles like the 182RG and the Mooney, but they burn close to 20 gph where the smaller planes burn 11 or 12 (a 182 burns 14.5 down low and about 11 gph at 12k ft). The B36 is a great airplane and it will do what you want to do. A Saratoga will too. My 182RG had a useful load of 1320, which will also do what you want to do, but the Mooney useful load (for the newer big engine Mooneys is only about 1,000 lbs), you aren't very far with four people aboard in a Mooney. You need to put together a spreadsheet and look at useful load, cabin room and all of the other basic parameters. That will narrow down the available choices pretty quickly. Cross that with how old an airplane you want to play with and a group of airplanes will drop out that are candidates. The kit planes like the Evolution are very impressive airplanes, but as Jason noted they are not a good investment unless you bought it for a song. Also unless you know the work of the person that built it, I'd stay far away from a homebuilt. You just don't know what you are going to get, and as you go to real high performance airplanes the margins for error just aren't there.
Incorrect, both the Corvalis and Cirrus run LOP 16-17 GPH full power cruise. You can turn the power back from there and get lower GPH and usually faster speeds for same burn. The T182T I put over 100 hours in was good for about 13 something ROP up high, but also was only going 135 KTAS with screws popping. Now if you could run the 182 LOP that would be another story, but still slow as heck!
I used to cruise at 161 kts TAS at 11k ft burning 11 gph with my NA 182RG, but it wasn't stock. It had a number of speed mods. A stock RG isn't that fast either, but if you can close the doors, it will fly. I never thought that much of the turbo RG because you had to run it rich and it burned a lot of gas for not a lot more speed, and only if you went higher and sucked on the bottle was it any better than the NA plane. The straight leg 182's are slooooo, and unless you live in Aspen, turbo straight legs are pretty much a waste. Still, until the newer generation of Columbia's and Cirrus came along the RG was the best combination of price, speed, fuel economy and payload going. It carried a lot more than a 201 and an Arrow, was as almost as fast as a Saratoga, and carried as much as the smaller body Bonanzas while they cost a lot less. A B36 is a lot more airplane, but in those days it cost almost twice as much. All depends on your mission. I was interested in doing 1,000 miles with four aboard and I could do that in the RG. Unless I went to a Saratoga or a Bonanza (both of which were a lot more bucks) there wasn't anything that could do what I needed, so the RG was the logical choice.
Ok, I'm finally back to this thread. I suppose my purchase budget is going to be around 200k or so. I'm also expecting a minimum of $1000 monthly before I fly it. Still haven't sat in a Lancair, but I am beginning to hear they are SMALL. BTW- I've got some Bonanza time and I recall loving it. I'm exploring all options, and in absolutely no hurry.
T182(T) Bo Mooney Ovation (Acclaim can't carry anything) used Cirrus Columbia 300 Diamond D40 many options at $200k, I would decide what are your must haves 6-pack/glass, AC/not, high wing/low wing, weight carrying/speed, etc.
I owned a Mooney M20K (231) for many years. It was a great plane and it could carry a family of four for 500-600 nautical miles. The cabin width is actually greater than a Bonanza (43.5" vs 42.0"), but the cabin height is restrictive (44.5" vs 50.0"). The advantage to Mooneys is that the fuel burn rate is low for the performance and the stretch models have large tanks. This lets you tradeoff useful load for range, at a better than typical ratio, within reason. However, when you get to 4 FAA adult weight people (rather than children) with baggage, the tradeoff results in less useful range than desirable, particularly with IFR reserves.
