Anyone have experience with a P337. How is the environmental system? Does the A/C work, how about the heater while in the flight levels. Seems like Bonanza speeds, pressurize environment with multiengine safety on not much more fuel burn the BE-36.

Following with interest. P337 was my first twin obsession 15 years ago and was hell bent on gettin one until I discovered Commanders.

Have a sweet spot for the Skymaster. And in my eyes, it's always been beautiful.

Limited spare parts as small production

There‘s one in our maintenance hangar. It is constantly being worked on, I have never seen it fly, and the person who gets to work on it uses words that get turned into %#%$#%!! here on BT :-)

Charles, using the search function, enter P337 and select “topic titles only.” There’s an individual named Ken Reed who has shared a fair amount about his ownership in multiple threads.

I have an interest in these models too. Like many airplanes, BT has proven to be the best, most detailed place on the internet to get information on them.

You will find a lot of people, there is one on this board, who extoll their virtues and claim they are a "value". But to a person, they owned it for a handful of years and dumped it because "our mission changed" or some such nonsense, not because it was a cramped, maintenance hog. OTOH it's easy to fine people who have owned their P-Baron for decades.

There are no "undiscovered deals" in the used airplane market. The market is very efficient at assigning value. And you can't give away a cessna 337.

I have some time in a P337. First twin I flew. Ken Reed does know his stuff about the 337.

Flies a lot like a 182 with almost enough power. One engine opps a lot like an underpowered 182. Cabin was really a 4 person thing. Only odd thing was the immense transitory drag as the gear doors opened and then shut as the gear transitioned in or out. Remains the only plane of any type, incl Boeing and Airbus, that my wife ever slept well in during flight.

IF, big IF, I had someone who knew the type to maintain it for me I would happily own one now. I do not need more range or speed and I like the wing shade thing.

RAS

I've also had a Spot in my Heart for the 337 since I was a Kid I've written this before that, my Dad and Uncle used to Joke about them.....calling them Mix Masters.....Me? WTF is wrong with You Two?
They just Looked at Me Mentally deficient......Well all of BT Knows They were Right about that

Charles......I Hope You find One......I'm gonna start Looking right Now

Jeff, I never had enough sense to listen to the Smart Fellows Like Yourself
I just Follow my Heart........While all my Friends say....Well We Told Him

Very comfortable cross country machine. Quietest piston plane I have flown - no huge need for an intercom / headset. Great visibility. Strong. Docile. Short field performer.

Not at all “cramped”. Very roomy 4 seater. Tons more room than Bonanza / Baron fuselage. More comfortable up front than a Duke for a big guy. Back seat is comfy too - no tapered fuselage.

High maintenance pressurized plane. Hard to find well maintained examples. Difficult to work on. TSIO 360 Continentals drive the price down on every plane they were installed on for a reason. Roughly 300 built. Last 1/2 of production had higher fuel cap - and they needed every bit. LOP would solve that problem.

When these were cheap I liked them a lot more. They are no longer cheap.

AC I believe was all aftermarket. AC is always a high maintenance system. A flight back from Oshkosh in a non AC equipped P337 almost had me thinking I could lose consciousness.

Riley put together quite a few refurbed planes that had all the right stuff installed through the late 1980’s and 1990’s.

I remember the New Mexico State police had a few they flew the heck out of. They had 6000 or more hours on at least one of them by the mid 1990’s. They likely had a talented in-house shop and at least nearly unlimited (other peoples) money to throw at them.

A roachy one will twist you into knots trying to straighten it out. Rear engine temps are something everyone that has ever seen a Skymaster likes to talk about. Well maintained baffling keeps that from being an issue.

Cowl flap motors were unavailable and hard to repair in the 1990’s - likely still an issue.

Probably a plane that will get a tough review on BT - much worse than deserved I would imagine. These planes have lots of systems and equipment to maintain. No pressurized piston twin is low maintenance by its nature. For certain missions it is the only contender in the class.

I have seen quite a few people buy 58P Barons that ran from the scene with their tail between their legs trying to operate them. Double underline and bold blinking font for the “cheap” ones. The Duke adventures are similar and well documented here. If you bring the “small step up from my Debonair” attitude to any pressurized piston twin I think you will be in for a rude awakening. So many go to a simple Baron and find that to be the case.

You have to have qualified maintenance nearby to make sense of one of these. The Rocky mountains and west is where they make the most sense - get you to smooth air with a strong airframe and wonderful visibility!

Adam, you and I have more similar taste in planes than I thought.

Let that sink in. Same cabin size / baggage as a twin comanche. A little slower than a twin comanche. Nearly 2X the fuel burn of a twin comanche. And 3X as hard to turn wrenches on.

Guys in my father's generation extolled the virtues of this airframe as a very stable rocket-launching platform that could take a lot of punishment and make it back home. I'm sure those testaments are true. But that doesn't make it the right choice to haul the family to disney world.

That is exactly the opposite of my thoughts. Having flown the 337, T337 and T337GP/T337HP (P337), the P337 is the only one I would own. There are just too many other better options sans Pressurization. I think you may have gotten lucky with your engines.

Hearty is the last thing i would describe a Continental IO-360 as. A parallel valve Lyc IO540 will make 250 hp for 4500 hours for a $35,000 overhaul cost not too many years ago.

I did see a Hawk XP engine make 3500 hours once up here in Colorado on the rental line. Not sure how much heavy maintenance it took to get it there. That was an anomaly as most don’t seem to make TBO. There was virtually no usable core parts to oh and return to service on that engine.

I spent the 1990’s scouring Trade-a-Plane seeing 1600 TT with 300 to 700 smoh on those engines. Every plane with that family of engine has been on the “bargain” shelf since the 1960’s.

Let that sink in. Same cabin size / baggage as a twin comanche. A little slower than a twin comanche. Nearly 2X the fuel burn of a twin comanche. And 3X as hard to turn wrenches on.

I must say, in a forum like this, the biggest weakness is that people with absolutely no experience in a subject can write in the same size font!

I am amazed at how widespread the tendency is to suggest your pet airplane is the answer to any mission. Need a beginners cross-country plane - 400 mile range. Definitely a Cessna 421 mission!! Not bashing 421’s.

Nearly all of the many types of light planes I have been lucky enough to fly have strong. positive aspects. There have been some I have no use for. Sometimes that relates to your body build and mission.

Some won’t consider a plane purely on the way it looks. Sometimes I find myself doing that. We have a Scottish Bulldog on the field. I am not a fan of French bulldogs either, no matter who has one in Hollywood. Never flown one. Shouldn’t have said that in my out loud voice.

Some guys have a real world business use. Some have one to travel every other weekend for fun.

Others hang at the airport polishing and wrenching and are happy doing three trips a year. To some that is three trips for a $100-$1000 burger. Others that is three trips around the patch.

I barely fit in a BE33/35/55/56 but still must say they work very well for others.

I prefer Lycoming engines - they just last longer generally speaking. I have many favorite planes that have Continentals only. They used to be much cheaper on parts. It is all a mixed bag.

But bashing planes with no real world experience to draw from is like bullying the smartest kid in class on the playground.

[Step down off the soap box now. Don’t read the stage directions.]