rickair7777

I would agree that a 172 would be best if you can afford one, otherwise a 150/152. If you need someone to check out airplanes in SD, let me know.

I have considered getting a 150, but in marine-layer country I know I would need an IFR-certified airplane. You might want to consider that if your local airport is subject to the layer...otherwise there will be many days when severe-clear VFR weather is 300' away, but you can't get to it.

Phil1111

I bought a Cessna 182 with about 5 hr T.T.(total flying time) and completed P.P. instruction on it. Easy to fly with some load capacity when you want to go somewhere. A 172 is probably only $5000-7000 more than a 150 with likely only $5-10 hourly higher costs. Alot more capability subsequent to your P.P. lisc.

I did this back in 1977 and insurance was "only" about $800. Insurance may be an issue to check out. There were lots of instructors around who instructed me for about $15 an hour.

joepilot

Phil,

That $5-10 higher cost sounds a bit low to me. I would think $5-10 more per hour for the airframe and engine maintenance reserve, plus an additional 3 gallons per hour at $6/gallon.

Joe

Cubdriver

C152- about 6.5 gph
older C172- about 8.5 gph
older C182- about 12 gph

To me an older C182 such as a C182K is the biggest bang for the buck. 182's are happy going on cross countries and are optimized for that, but they are overkill for a primary student who has nowhere to go. If speed is not an issue and the airplane will not be used frequently, I would say go for a C172 and why not get a few instruments in the deal like a glideslope and a panel mounted gps, most planes have them anyway and it adds to the margin of safety. C152's really aren't happy going on cross countries although you can force them to and are really only optimized for money saving.

Mason32

Boy, some of you guys haven't been around small planes in a while....

The earlier post about 25k for the 150/152 is about right. They vary from 18k for older 150's to 30k for late model 152's with low time. 25k will buy a very nice 76 or 77 150 with at least basic IFR gear and a less than half time engine. The 150 with the continental has a TBO of 1800 Hrs, and the 152 with the lycomming 235 has a TBO of 2400 hrs. Overhaul costs are about the same, plan on 12-13k from start to finish.
The 172 prices vary considerably more. You can find older (60's) 172's for as low as 25k... all of the 70's models will be at least 30k and that's with a run out engine and high time airframe. To get a nice later model, 76-86, 172 you can expect to pay anywhere from 42k to 68k depending on airframe & engine times and avionics. If you are thinking of buying a VFR plane and adding the IFR stuff later, don't. While you will recover most of the cost of the avionics, you will not recover any of the costs of the installation which can be just about as expensive as the equipment itself. Better to spend more and buy a plane with the stuff in it you want first.
Insurance will run anywhere from 645 to as much as you want to spend. AUA does my 172 and Aztec and 645 was what I renewed the Cessna at just this month.
Annual inspection costs for a 150/152 or a 172 will be very similar, perhaps a few hundred dollars difference, not much. As long as you're buying a well maintained aicraft to begin with, you shouldn't have any huge surprises.
Insist on a pre-purchase inspection with a mechanic of your choice.
Incidentally, if you subscribe to places like trade-a-plane and find yourself looking at airplanes 20 states away, be sure to add another 5-7k onto the purchase price, because you will spend that much going out there and back, hotels, mechanics and incidentals.... often it is better to buy a more expensive aicraft close to home than to buy that "great deal" on the other side of the country.
Having owned airplanes all my life, having parents who owned airplanes, and a gradfather who owned his own 135 and crop dusting business, I would say that without a doubt if the buget will allow for a 172, then that is the way to go. Avoid the 1978 model year and the H2AD engine. All have been fixed with the T-mod but they still dont' seem to get as much time before TBO than the straight D3 or D2 engines. My favorites are the M & N models (expect for the 78 and H2AD).
The 150 is a nice bird, and has much cheaper purchase costs... operationally, if you slow the 172 down to 150 speeds you'll get just about the same fuel flow per hour, so it isn't a big deal... the only real difference is the purchase price, and number of seats.
in the 150 category, I like the 76 & 77. Anything 71 on will have the newer panel layout, but the 76 & 77 have circuit breakers instead of fuses which is nice. They also retain the 40 degree flaps, but use the more common stepped flap handle, another improvement. A 152 will cost more than a comparable 150. The 1978-1986 all used the lycomming O235 which has a higher TBO... and since overhauling these is about the same cost regardless if it is the continental or the lycomming, having lower engine time is better. Keep in mind that engine time along doesn't dictate when TBO is. Most manufacturers also place a date line on them as well. For the C-172 Lycomming engines, Lycomming says 2,000 hours or 10 years is TBO. So, keep that in mind when looking at used planes... many may only have 900 hours on them, but they were done 9-11 years ago. Also keep in minf that TBO is a reccomendation only. It only applies to commercial operations like rental aircraft... so, if your not going to rent it out, if the compressions are good and stable over the last several annual inspections, the oil analysis is consistent, there is no metal in the filter during changes, and the oil consumtion rate is normal and stable over time, then you have a happy engine, and should keep on running it, until ANY of the above inidcators changes, or until your not comfortable with it anymore without an overhaul.
I've seen them with 3,500 hours on 2,000 hour engines, happy and going strong. It is all how they are cared for, and operated.

As for finding a CFI. There are several places to look for a freelance instructor. Gleim Publications http://www.aopa.org National Association of Flight Instructors are all good places to start.

Nothing beats learning to fly in your own plane. If the extra purchase costs are not a big issue, I would highly advise the C172 as the way to go.

Cubdriver

Thanks for the info, Mason. I think if someone is truly scraping to become a first time buyer then a well used 150 or 152 will work, but a late 70's-early 80's vintage 172 is by far the better option for anyone who is able to pony up $60k. If they can they are set for their primary, instrument, and personal enjoyment flying for years. I have flown all the models, but late 70's-early 80's Skyhawks represent a sweet spot for first time aircraft buyers.

BadMags

I am running a little flight school down in Olympia. We will fly in your airplane or one of the school planes. We also have some aircraft for sale down here, including a nice little 150 I would scoop up if I could afford to. I think they want around 16 for it. PM me if you want more info.

Ewfflyer

I love the handling of the 150/152's because it teaches a very smooth and responsive pilot. The 172 is also a great airplane.

The cherokee 140's are a great little airplane too, and finding one with the 160hp upgrade is even better, or just getting a Cherokee 180. I love the old hershey-bar wing better than the "new" tapered wing style. Something about it, but there are a wide variety out there.

Something that wasn't mentioned is in my opinion, avoid any airplane that's been using Mo-Gas(Autogas). These types of owners were cutting corners in using the auto-gas, in which doesn't take care of these engines like they were supposed to be. It also has it's effects on the fuel-tank seals, caps, etc... Just my opinion.

Good luck!!!

de727ups

I've used auto gas for years and never had a problem. The 152 I had ran better on autofuel cause the plugs wouldn't foul. The STC's are FAA approved and "cutting corners" has more to do with the owners attitude toward maintenance than what kind of gas you burn.

There are problems with auto fuel.

1) How do you safely get it to the plane without upsetting the airport manager. The smaller the airport the more likely you'll not run into trouble. 5 gal cans are okay but try getting one up on a 152 wing. Not easy. The best solution in a 60 gal tank in the back of a pickup with an electric pump but some airport managers will freak...

2) The problems EW mentions with fuel systems have to do with alcohol/ethonol in the gas. Depending on where you live, it can be impossible to find "clean" auto gas that you can burn in an airplane. There is an easy test to do to make sure there is no alcohol in the gas but you have to do it every time, in this day and age, to be sure.

3) Sometimes the hassle isn't worth it. Some places 100LL is within $1/gal of high grade auto gas. Not worth the trouble on a 6 gal/hr airplane.

rickair7777

Yeah, I'd be a lot more interested in autogas for an Aztec than a 152.