Sometimes none, we had O&N aux tanks, no bladders.

I use my Baron for 50 NM trips.

Me too!

Along with 1000+.

My Malibu had a 1340lb useful load, is significantly more comfortable than a p Baron and carries up to 140g of fuel. It also has massive luggage space bc the cabinets are removed, you have a back area bigger than a baron and the nose conpartment is good sized.

Everything Charles has said about the Malibu is true. I have carried 6 folks with gear on a 500 mile trip and I have also carried for on 1350 miles.

This week I flew Denver to the east coast and back non stop both ways.

I spend less than 50k operating close to 200 hours. Mine has been quite reliable - I am not sure why any piston turbocharged plane would be more reliable than any other. They all have similar engines and that seems to be where the issues crop up. And if you have two of them, statistics would imply your failure rate is 2x.

The Malibu is almost as quick to preflight and load as my Dakota was.

Everyone that has flown in the Malibu with me loves it. The back seats are pretty great.

The low fuel burn really opens up the loading options.

Get an 86.5 a(like mine that is for sale!) thru 88 with a 550. They are the best ones.

A good friend has a pBaron. We compare costs constantly. I am half price and have a higher average groundspeed :-)

1) operating temperatures - 421 engines are hard to run hot. Other planes are CHT challenges

2) ease of inspection access - something easy to inspect will probably be caught earlier.

3) ease of maintenance - the same failure might be a 1 day downtime in one airplane but a 3 day downtime in another.

I agree with your overall point. If you scatterplotted NA singles, pressurized pistons and turboprops on some maintenance axes, you'd have three discrete groups. But I could believe relevant differences exist between different models.

Deleted

..and herein lies the underlying reason I'm not in a Mirage right now. It's a Piper, and not a Beech.

I've reviewed the logbooks of late model Mirages for sale with 500-ish hrs TT and the parts that have been replaced already is very disconcerting. Not only cylinders. Lots and lots of cylinders. But heated windshields. Gear bushings. Complete PFD/MFD systems. Fuel pumps. On and on. Again, these are planes with 400-600 total time!!

And what do you have to remove, like 200 screws, to get a look-see at the engine?

I have been absolutely spoiled by Beech quality. After shelling out 5 or $600K for an 8 year old Mirage, I'd be mighty pissed to be putting $20-30K into it each year because something is always breaking. That would take all the fun out of plane ownership for me.

I forget where I got this spreadsheet from . . .

But it seems to indicate quite a difference in UL between a 421B and a 421C.

Is it accurate?

I appreciate all of the advice. I am going to look at a Malibu more carefully. Also does anyone know anything about the Extra 400?

..and herein lies the underlying reason I'm not in a Mirage right now. It's a Piper, and not a Beech.

I've reviewed the logbooks of late model Mirages for sale with 500-ish hrs TT and the parts that have been replaced already is very disconcerting. Not only cylinders. Lots and lots of cylinders. But heated windshields. Gear bushings. Complete PFD/MFD systems. Fuel pumps. On and on. Again, these are planes with 400-600 total time!!

And what do you have to remove, like 200 screws, to get a look-see at the engine?

I have been absolutely spoiled by Beech quality. After shelling out 5 or $600K for an 8 year old Mirage, I'd be mighty pissed to be putting $20-30K into it each year because something is always breaking. That would take all the fun out of plane ownership for me.

The A36 cowl opens up with a simple latch and gives you excellent access to everything top-side for pre-flight and most maintenance actions. I think it would be possible to tie it for ease of access, but basically impossible to beat (unless you literally didn't have a cowl at all).

Anthony, you're not seriously suggesting that Piper airframes are the equal to Beech are you?

Now we certainly agree that late 80s Malibu's like yours with the Cont 550s are very desirable and the better option vs the Lycomings. Personally, if I were looking for a Malibu of that vintage, I would only consider one with the 550.

However, my interest lies in a later model Mirage with a low time engine. Like I said, the mtce I see in the airframe and engine logbooks of 8-10 year old planes with well under 1000 hours is disturbing. But hey, I'm a realist and look at it tis way. It is what it is, and if I'm not willing to deal with it, then I shouldn't buy one.

My search is just beginning to intensify so we'll see where I end up. I may come to realize the wisdom of your advice and try to find a well maintained Malibu with a low time 550 and full glass upgrade.

I don't think that is accurate. I believe the are both in the 2000-2100lbs useful. The trailing link 421C may have a little less.

Not sure I agree with that. My '81 58P has a useful of 1845 and my '80 A36 has a useful of 1170. I am in the process of refurbishing the 58 (A36 just finished) so I haven't used it for family travel yet but I always do a w/b on both when we take a trip just to see how they compare. We are a family of 4 with a 16 yr old boy and a 9 yr old girl. Without question, when the 58P is ready, the utility with it is going to be much better than the A36. By a wide margin. My payload is going up by at least 300 lbs and my luggage will be in the nose. We often fly a 2hr 330m trip to the beach house and soon will be flying around the south following a college baseball team (yet to be determined which one) and the numbers say we can take a set of grandparents to the games in the 58P and have no payload left in the A36 for them Note: oldest kid won't be in plane for game trips, he will be on a bus haha
I just have to get it ready to go in the next 18 months

Not sure I agree with that. My '81 58P has a useful of 1845 and my '80 A36 has a useful of 1170. I am in the process of refurbishing the 58 (A36 just finished) so I haven't used it for family travel yet but I always do a w/b on both when we take a trip just to see how they compare. We are a family of 4 with a 16 yr old boy and a 9 yr old girl. Without question, when the 58P is ready, the utility with it is going to be much better than the A36. By a wide margin. My payload is going up by at least 300 lbs and my luggage will be in the nose. We often fly a 2hr 330m trip to the beach house and soon will be flying around the south following a college baseball team (yet to be determined which one) and the numbers say we can take a set of grandparents to the games in the 58P and have no payload left in the A36 for them Note: oldest kid won't be in plane for game trips, he will be on a bus haha
I just have to get it ready to go in the next 18 months