• Welcome to the new Commander Owners Group Forums. Please bear with us as the kinks are worked out and things are tweaked. If you have any questions or issues with the new platform, please post them here.

New to Aviation Researching Commander 114

A

Aviator101

New member
New to aviation and looking to buy my first plane in the next couple of months. Looking to connect with 114 owners in the TN, MS, and AR area to learn more about the plane.
 
Welcome!
 
Welcome to the group!

I am not in your area - but - I've had 42w (a 114) in your area (KSNH) - Savannah, TN. It's a great plane/platform. It's a great plane, but, I am more than a little biased. LOL

I am sure some folks will pipe up that are around the area you mentioned. If you have specific questions - ask. There are probably people on here with a similar path to yours. 42w was my first (and only) plane purchase.

Good luck

Dean
 
don't forget Judi
 
Welcome. Judi will set you up. Ownership of a Commander starts with her. :)
 
I'm not too far from TN (In Southern Ohio) ....but have a 112-TC not a 114, but if you haven't been up in a 112-TC (or haven't been up in a commander at all yet) and wanted to check out the TC I'd be happy to fly it over some weekend ....

I'm always looking for a reason to fly it and sometimes don't fly it when I can't think of anywhere to go ....or I am just going alone to just airport hop randomly ....you can only do that so much alone before it's not as much fun! HA!

Anyway, I went down the same path, I had fully planned on buying the 114 but I just couldn't find the right one in my timeframe and one that was as ready to go "out of the box" for the condition/overall paint/interior/avionics combo I wanted without having to buy and then paint, or buy and then overhaul, or buy and then immiedately upgrade and have it not be flyable for weeks or months while the work happened.

I kept coming back to 2 or 3 112-TC's and TCA's that just fit all of the requirements I had on paint/interior/engine time/avionics much better than the 114's I was finding available for sale at the time...and almost all the 114's I did find were 114A's ...not the 114B's that have quite a few advantages over the "A"

.....while I was looking/shopping for 3-4 months for a 114 that was available in the market I did still consider all the options out there including a 115 and one or two base 112's .....but I didn't want the base 112 really ...and the 115 was just more money than my wife would let me even consider ....by a long shot and a good bit more than i wanted to spend:)

But I was pretty well committed to a 114 or bust initially .....

.....after I did a little more digging and reading and considering and learning and comparing of the Turbo's vs the 114A's and 114Bs, I started understanding some pros and cons I wasn't aware of with the 112 turbos vs the 114A's, FOR ME (not trying to argue anything is better than the other...but for my desire/mission/etc) it really kinda brought both the TC models and the naturally aspirated model 114A's to a pretty close 1-to-1 for me in the end, so I started shopping for the best fit price/model of either a 112-TC or a 114A ....and then chose the best example/condition airplane of the ones I found and was interested in....which ultimately was a '76 112-TC. If I had found a 114B that checked all my boxes and included not a too huge price difference, I would have gone with the "B" but otherwise I started considering the TC/114A's almost a 1-to-1 in my mind (almost).

The naturally asp 114A in my mind had just a small edge over the 112-TC once I really dug into it more and understood more about the turbo advantages over naturally aspirated engines at altitude.....and in a dead even, 1-to-1 condition/avionics/engine hours/history of airplanes ....where essentially the planes were identical between a 112-TC and a 114A that were within 5-15% price of each other ....I'd probably buy the 114A at <%15 more $$$ (at that point in time anyway, I woulda gone 15%-20% over in truth probably, above the 112-TC for a 114A easily...but today ....I would probably only buy the 114A @ same price or <10% over the 112-TC probably and only then if the 112-TC didn't check anymore of my boxes, than the 114A)


I do believe (AGAIN..FOR ME) it's almost a dead 1-to-1 airplane between TC and 114A ......I'd probably pick the 114 if I bought again today on a 1-to-1. But if the TC was even a little nicer, a little cheaper, had a good bit less TTAF or Engine Hours ...or I even like the paint scheme a little better ......even at a little higher price than the 114 ....I'd probably buy the 112-TC now in that case....and never ever consider it "settling"

If I didn't "NEED" an airplane quickly ...and I could take 8-16 months to find it without any real downside .....I'd probably be patient, and try and wait out finding a 114B/114-TC/115 if I also had the "budget-stretch" needed for that jump .....

After owning the TC and flying it about 200 hours since May or so .....and having a lot of longer trips or days weather just made it nice to be up high and get above it, my "light weight" as a pilot/less usable load concern ...........I actually think the Turbo has given me a better result me better than if I got a 114A with high-alt performance/fuel burn/range/speed etc overall since I really rarely fly it down low....but again, I still don't feel strongly that either one would have been any better than the other for me in the end when you considered all the pros and cons in my case betwen the TC and the 14A


HOWEVER!!!!!
I am literally 6' tall, 140lb's dripping wet and therefore as the pilot, I kinda get a 50-100lb "useful load" advantage as compared to "bigger pilots" ...which helps with the useful load challenges on my TC with the 68 gallon useable / larger tanks ... Likewise ...the "down low" climb performance with my "minimal weight" ...isn't much to me and I usually fly with just me and one other person when it's a cross country ....I rarely fly with 4 people for anything other than a local "tour flight/fun flight" and only with 3 people...maybe 1 outta every 25-30 flights ....

Everyone knows our commanders are a little "Useful load challenged" but simply because of my size, my family's size, and what, how, where, etc I fly ...the biggest CON of all the commanders .....really isn't something that is a con for me, except on very rare occassions! So it also means the advantages of the 114's that related to useful load or down-low climb...just wasn't a big deal TO ME!

I could go either way on it at this point and if something happened to mine where I couldn't fix it, I would IMMEDIATELY be shopping for another Commander and equally considering the 112-TC/114A Naturally aspirated models as dead even in my mind.....A114B I would buy over the 112-TC even at a 20-30% premium on a 1-to-1 everything else...and maybe a good bit more than a 20% increase...I'd just have to really dig in a little more on the 114B and understand more to decide how much more I'd be willing to go!


So my two cents is .... if you find a TC or TCA you like, in your price range ....and don't find any 114B's that are a good fit ......and the 112-TC's have a much better fit to your condition/avionics/price requirements...than the 114A's you find ....I'd encourage you to consider the TC.

I have just been absolutely thrilled with it since the day I bought it and other than the increased speed down low/ better climb down low advantages of the 114, that I would like to have, if I could have my cake and eat it too .....from the 114 ........I do most of my flying at 11K -16K since it's mostly Cross Country flying, and she just likes it up high better when she is a 112-TC, so I honestly probably get better performance overall, and very good fuel/consumption/range at altitude .......for specifically how/where I fly the 112-TC, than I would in the 114A at but again in the end, it'd be a close dead even match/choice to me .....

Anyway ...just wanted to share, let you now I started out the exact place/mindset you had .....and I have since become convinced FOR ME the 112-TC vs a Naturally Aspirated 114A - is pretty much a 1-to-1 in my case! ...a 114B to a 112-TC is probably is easily worth a 10%-30% bump in price for sure (I am not sure what the normal 114B $$ premium is these days) .....and then the 114-TC's/115 I saw when I was shopping were so few in the market ...and SO MUCH MORE $$ than I was looking to spend .....that I don't have any real way to even quantify to myself what kinda $$$$ difference would be worth it in that case as compared to the other models.

the 14TC's and 15's were just outta my Budget! Although I did like shopping/looking at them online ...even though I couldn't afford either of the 114-TC or the 115's ...I never learned enough about "how much better" they were to determine "how much more they were worth" (TO ME) ....to even share any thoughts on that.


Sorry it's so long ..was just trying to share my experience in case it was of any value to you!

Phil
 
Codeeno said:
Welcome to the group!

I am not in your area - but - I've had 42w (a 114) in your area (KSNH) - Savannah, TN. It's a great plane/platform. It's a great plane, but, I am more than a little biased. LOL

I am sure some folks will pipe up that are around the area you mentioned. If you have specific questions - ask. There are probably people on here with a similar path to yours. 42w was my first (and only) plane purchase.

Good luck

Dean
Click to expand...

I kinda think we all are a little biased when it comes to the 4 Seat Commanders .....All of them .... :)

I mean realistically all you have to do is try and squeeze 3-4 people into an old mooney to realize that they only brag about being faster ....because it is the only thing that helps them survive or rationalize the trip in a mooney ........ since it's so tight in those things, all they want to do is get out of them .....them from the moment 2 or 3 or 4 people climb into them to start the trip.

In the commander's ....we are so comfortable we are more likely to think ...huh, I kinda wish the flight was a little longer .... :)

I'll happily take the "SLOW" commander over all the other "Fast" sardine cans out there!!!!

Phil
 
Codeeno said:
Welcome to the group!

I am not in your area - but - I've had 42w (a 114) in your area (KSNH) - Savannah, TN. It's a great plane/platform. It's a great plane, but, I am more than a little biased. LOL

I am sure some folks will pipe up that are around the area you mentioned. If you have specific questions - ask. There are probably people on here with a similar path to yours. 42w was my first (and only) plane purchase.

Good luck

Dean
Click to expand...

Dean so far it seems to fit what we are looking for. Did have some concerns about part availability as I think for my budget we will be in the early models of the 114. We have a family of 4 looking to start making family trips on long weekends. Wife and two kids. One daughter is 3 months and the other almost 5. Feel like the 114 useful load may be the best fit with size weight and cruise speed. So far community seems really helpful. Thanks for your input.

Michael
 
Quest4Air said:
I'm not too far from TN (In Southern Ohio) ....but have a 112-TC not a 114, but if you haven't been up in a 112-TC (or haven't been up in a commander at all yet) and wanted to check out the TC I'd be happy to fly it over some weekend ....

I'm always looking for a reason to fly it and sometimes don't fly it when I can't think of anywhere to go ....or I am just going alone to just airport hop randomly ....you can only do that so much alone before it's not as much fun! HA!

Anyway, I went down the same path, I had fully planned on buying the 114 but I just couldn't find the right one in my timeframe and one that was as ready to go "out of the box" for the condition/overall paint/interior/avionics combo I wanted without having to buy and then paint, or buy and then overhaul, or buy and then immiedately upgrade and have it not be flyable for weeks or months while the work happened.

I kept coming back to 2 or 3 112-TC's and TCA's that just fit all of the requirements I had on paint/interior/engine time/avionics much better than the 114's I was finding available for sale at the time...and almost all the 114's I did find were 114A's ...not the 114B's that have quite a few advantages over the "A"

.....while I was looking/shopping for 3-4 months for a 114 that was available in the market I did still consider all the options out there including a 115 and one or two base 112's .....but I didn't want the base 112 really ...and the 115 was just more money than my wife would let me even consider ....by a long shot and a good bit more than i wanted to spend:)

But I was pretty well committed to a 114 or bust initially .....

.....after I did a little more digging and reading and considering and learning and comparing of the Turbo's vs the 114A's and 114Bs, I started understanding some pros and cons I wasn't aware of with the 112 turbos vs the 114A's, FOR ME (not trying to argue anything is better than the other...but for my desire/mission/etc) it really kinda brought both the TC models and the naturally aspirated model 114A's to a pretty close 1-to-1 for me in the end, so I started shopping for the best fit price/model of either a 112-TC or a 114A ....and then chose the best example/condition airplane of the ones I found and was interested in....which ultimately was a '76 112-TC. If I had found a 114B that checked all my boxes and included not a too huge price difference, I would have gone with the "B" but otherwise I started considering the TC/114A's almost a 1-to-1 in my mind (almost).

The naturally asp 114A in my mind had just a small edge over the 112-TC once I really dug into it more and understood more about the turbo advantages over naturally aspirated engines at altitude.....and in a dead even, 1-to-1 condition/avionics/engine hours/history of airplanes ....where essentially the planes were identical between a 112-TC and a 114A that were within 5-15% price of each other ....I'd probably buy the 114A at <%15 more $$$ (at that point in time anyway, I woulda gone 15%-20% over in truth probably, above the 112-TC for a 114A easily...but today ....I would probably only buy the 114A @ same price or <10% over the 112-TC probably and only then if the 112-TC didn't check anymore of my boxes, than the 114A)


I do believe (AGAIN..FOR ME) it's almost a dead 1-to-1 airplane between TC and 114A ......I'd probably pick the 114 if I bought again today on a 1-to-1. But if the TC was even a little nicer, a little cheaper, had a good bit less TTAF or Engine Hours ...or I even like the paint scheme a little better ......even at a little higher price than the 114 ....I'd probably buy the 112-TC now in that case....and never ever consider it "settling"

If I didn't "NEED" an airplane quickly ...and I could take 8-16 months to find it without any real downside .....I'd probably be patient, and try and wait out finding a 114B/114-TC/115 if I also had the "budget-stretch" needed for that jump .....

After owning the TC and flying it about 200 hours since May or so .....and having a lot of longer trips or days weather just made it nice to be up high and get above it, my "light weight" as a pilot/less usable load concern ...........I actually think the Turbo has given me a better result me better than if I got a 114A with high-alt performance/fuel burn/range/speed etc overall since I really rarely fly it down low....but again, I still don't feel strongly that either one would have been any better than the other for me in the end when you considered all the pros and cons in my case betwen the TC and the 14A


HOWEVER!!!!!
I am literally 6' tall, 140lb's dripping wet and therefore as the pilot, I kinda get a 50-100lb "useful load" advantage as compared to "bigger pilots" ...which helps with the useful load challenges on my TC with the 68 gallon useable / larger tanks ... Likewise ...the "down low" climb performance with my "minimal weight" ...isn't much to me and I usually fly with just me and one other person when it's a cross country ....I rarely fly with 4 people for anything other than a local "tour flight/fun flight" and only with 3 people...maybe 1 outta every 25-30 flights ....

Everyone knows our commanders are a little "Useful load challenged" but simply because of my size, my family's size, and what, how, where, etc I fly ...the biggest CON of all the commanders .....really isn't something that is a con for me, except on very rare occassions! So it also means the advantages of the 114's that related to useful load or down-low climb...just wasn't a big deal TO ME!

I could go either way on it at this point and if something happened to mine where I couldn't fix it, I would IMMEDIATELY be shopping for another Commander and equally considering the 112-TC/114A Naturally aspirated models as dead even in my mind.....A114B I would buy over the 112-TC even at a 20-30% premium on a 1-to-1 everything else...and maybe a good bit more than a 20% increase...I'd just have to really dig in a little more on the 114B and understand more to decide how much more I'd be willing to go!


So my two cents is .... if you find a TC or TCA you like, in your price range ....and don't find any 114B's that are a good fit ......and the 112-TC's have a much better fit to your condition/avionics/price requirements...than the 114A's you find ....I'd encourage you to consider the TC.

I have just been absolutely thrilled with it since the day I bought it and other than the increased speed down low/ better climb down low advantages of the 114, that I would like to have, if I could have my cake and eat it too .....from the 114 ........I do most of my flying at 11K -16K since it's mostly Cross Country flying, and she just likes it up high better when she is a 112-TC, so I honestly probably get better performance overall, and very good fuel/consumption/range at altitude .......for specifically how/where I fly the 112-TC, than I would in the 114A at but again in the end, it'd be a close dead even match/choice to me .....

Anyway ...just wanted to share, let you now I started out the exact place/mindset you had .....and I have since become convinced FOR ME the 112-TC vs a Naturally Aspirated 114A - is pretty much a 1-to-1 in my case! ...a 114B to a 112-TC is probably is easily worth a 10%-30% bump in price for sure (I am not sure what the normal 114B $$ premium is these days) .....and then the 114-TC's/115 I saw when I was shopping were so few in the market ...and SO MUCH MORE $$ than I was looking to spend .....that I don't have any real way to even quantify to myself what kinda $$$$ difference would be worth it in that case as compared to the other models.

the 14TC's and 15's were just outta my Budget! Although I did like shopping/looking at them online ...even though I couldn't afford either of the 114-TC or the 115's ...I never learned enough about "how much better" they were to determine "how much more they were worth" (TO ME) ....to even share any thoughts on that.


Sorry it's so long ..was just trying to share my experience in case it was of any value to you!

Phil
Click to expand...

Big help Phillip! In my short time researching the last couple months the 114 appears to be a better fit, but would not be in the 114tc or 115 market as it is out of my budget. In my research, I found that the 114 would be a better fit for my family based on useful load needs as we plan to carry two kids and two average size adults. One daughter is a 3 month old and one daughter is 4. Two adults weight is somewhere between 320 to 330 plus kids weight of maybe 50 lbs initially. Though they grow quickly.

We originally looked at Cherokee six and Lance, but they were just too far out of what we wanted to spend and are not sure that we would use the extra 2 seats often enough to justify the extra costs and insurance. We narrowed down to commander, cardinal 177, and comanche 250 at this point as they appear to meet our cabin size needs, useful load minimums for traveling with 4, as well as minimum speed needs of 150 MPH- preferably 170 MPH or faster.

Out of the three we like the features of the commander the most. The main concern was parts with production being halted both times with the commander and no longer in business. I have bought great products before that were no longer supported and the decision didn't always work out in my favor... That would be my biggest concern initially. Would hate to buy one and then need a replacement part that may not ever be available. As far as comfort the Commander seems to take the cake! Though on forums many have said that the 114 is slow and would be lucky to get 150 MPH considering I'm not looking at the TC models. Does anyone know that to be an issue?

As for your offer to take me up I'd be happy to schedule that as it seems like a win for you as well as myself. Gives you somewhere to go and helps me to get an idea of the plane in person. I'd rather be on budget at the 112 price point, but believe based on what I have seen and our family's goal that may not make the most sense. (I could be wrong) The 112 may check off the boxes. I guess it really depends on how much fuel being carried.

Based on our family size and intent to go on trips that may average 3 hours or more in distance what would the forum opinions be 112? or 114?

Michael
 
Quest4Air said:
I kinda think we all are a little biased when it comes to the 4 Seat Commanders .....All of them .... :)

I mean realistically all you have to do is try and squeeze 3-4 people into an old mooney to realize that they only brag about being faster ....because it is the only thing that helps them survive or rationalize the trip in a mooney ........ since it's so tight in those things, all they want to do is get out of them .....them from the moment 2 or 3 or 4 people climb into them to start the trip.

In the commander's ....we are so comfortable we are more likely to think ...huh, I kinda wish the flight was a little longer .... :)

I'll happily take the "SLOW" commander over all the other "Fast" sardine cans out there!!!!

Phil
Click to expand...

My thought process as well!

Michael
 
Aviator101 said:
Big help Phillip! In my short time researching the last couple months the 114 appears to be a better fit, but would not be in the 114tc or 115 market as it is out of my budget. In my research, I found that the 114 would be a better fit for my family based on useful load needs as we plan to carry two kids and two average size adults. One daughter is a 3 month old and one daughter is 4. Two adults weight is somewhere between 320 to 330 plus kids weight of maybe 50 lbs initially. Though they grow quickly.

We originally looked at Cherokee six and Lance, but they were just too far out of what we wanted to spend and are not sure that we would use the extra 2 seats often enough to justify the extra costs and insurance. We narrowed down to commander, cardinal 177, and comanche 250 at this point as they appear to meet our cabin size needs, useful load minimums for traveling with 4, as well as minimum speed needs of 150 MPH- preferably 170 MPH or faster.

Out of the three we like the features of the commander the most. The main concern was parts with production being halted both times with the commander and no longer in business. I have bought great products before that were no longer supported and the decision didn't always work out in my favor... That would be my biggest concern initially. Would hate to buy one and then need a replacement part that may not ever be available. As far as comfort the Commander seems to take the cake! Though on forums many have said that the 114 is slow and would be lucky to get 150 MPH considering I'm not looking at the TC models. Does anyone know that to be an issue?

As for your offer to take me up I'd be happy to schedule that as it seems like a win for you as well as myself. Gives you somewhere to go and helps me to get an idea of the plane in person. I'd rather be on budget at the 112 price point, but believe based on what I have seen and our family's goal that may not make the most sense. (I could be wrong) The 112 may check off the boxes. I guess it really depends on how much fuel being carried.

Based on our family size and intent to go on trips that may average 3 hours or more in distance what would the forum opinions be 112? or 114?

Michael
Click to expand...

The only commander that can't easily get to 150MPH may be a straight 112. Virtually every other Commander Model will probably get to that at 65% power. I get between 165-170MPH at 11-12k at 75% power. 114 Owners will chime in here with their speeds
 
Aviator101 said:
Big help Phillip! In my short time researching the last couple months the 114 appears to be a better fit, but would not be in the 114tc or 115 market as it is out of my budget. In my research, I found that the 114 would be a better fit for my family based on useful load needs as we plan to carry two kids and two average size adults. One daughter is a 3 month old and one daughter is 4. Two adults weight is somewhere between 320 to 330 plus kids weight of maybe 50 lbs initially. Though they grow quickly.

We originally looked at Cherokee six and Lance, but they were just too far out of what we wanted to spend and are not sure that we would use the extra 2 seats often enough to justify the extra costs and insurance. We narrowed down to commander, cardinal 177, and comanche 250 at this point as they appear to meet our cabin size needs, useful load minimums for traveling with 4, as well as minimum speed needs of 150 MPH- preferably 170 MPH or faster.

Out of the three we like the features of the commander the most. The main concern was parts with production being halted both times with the commander and no longer in business. I have bought great products before that were no longer supported and the decision didn't always work out in my favor... That would be my biggest concern initially. Would hate to buy one and then need a replacement part that may not ever be available. As far as comfort the Commander seems to take the cake! Though on forums many have said that the 114 is slow and would be lucky to get 150 MPH considering I'm not looking at the TC models. Does anyone know that to be an issue?

As for your offer to take me up I'd be happy to schedule that as it seems like a win for you as well as myself. Gives you somewhere to go and helps me to get an idea of the plane in person. I'd rather be on budget at the 112 price point, but believe based on what I have seen and our family's goal that may not make the most sense. (I could be wrong) The 112 may check off the boxes. I guess it really depends on how much fuel being carried.

Based on our family size and intent to go on trips that may average 3 hours or more in distance what would the forum opinions be 112? or 114?

Michael
Click to expand...

Michael,

"They" (mooney guys and such who cruise around 145-150 so 10 knots faster than us...roughly) like to say we are lucky to get150 Knots ...not a 150 MPH ... about 172.5 MPH is what they like to beat on commanders about...we are the "SLOW" fast plane ...by slow we are somewhere between 7-12kts slower than the tiny little 4 seaters just kinda depending on which Commander you are talking about.

So in a nutshell look at a 3 hour trip and the commander vs the Mooney.....(The "Fast" Plane) and what that means....from a speed / time standpoint (My best pilot friend flies one of the Pre G models he is religiously 8-10 knots Faster than me, until we get up high ...than I wave from above him while he struggles to climb at 100-200 FPM and I keep going at 500-650 up above 10K and higher :)



So you have to cover 34.5 miles to catch up. down low my 112-TC runs around 132-135 knots usually at 75% ....= 152-155 MPH so to cover 34.5 miles and at the slow end you are covering 2.53 miles per minute ...so :

Now let's go up to 11,500-14,500 Altitude ...now my 112-TC is gonna run closer to 136-146knots ...even all the way up to "ALMOST" 150kts (go ahead mooney guys start snickering....but it ends the flight with you crying 13 minutes before us) :)

So the above 13 minutes on a 3 hour flight example is the WORST case scenario ...is if you are down low, where my 112-TC is slow (the 114 is gonna be quicker than TC down low ...up high we will either be even, or if significantly high ...then 112-TC will be faster because we are still making sea-level manifold pressure up at 14.5K and such ....and 15.5k...etc...) When we throw on our oxygen masks and run up to 16.5 K the money is 20 minutes behind us getting that high, and now flying slower than us "slow pokes in the 112-TC)


Mooney flies 3 hours = covers 34.5 miles more than you in the commander you flew in 3 hours.
On a 3 Hour trip for Mooney ..where they are sitting on their phone, the ipad is laying on the floor, their flashlight is stuck in a crack between things or tucked behind panel somewhere you can barely find when you need it .....and their wallet or it is sliding around on the panel, and the passenger has to hold her purse on her lap (and the pilots ipad or phone half the time) because the person in the back seat is sitting sidewise taking up rear bench because a grown adult can't sit with knees in front of them if the pilot is even a modest 6 feet tall/has his seat back so he barely fits...and is never comfortable...

3 Hrs they land ...saying how fast they are and start climbing out through the one hole/door on right side, practically feeling twice their age with their knees popping and cracking as they crawl over seats or each other to climb out that door and all the while the person in back seats swears they are never sitting/squeezing in the back again and starts asking how in the H#$# are they going to pickup Bobby and get him to fit in the back seat TO ..on the way home.....


Rockwell Commander 112-TC/114A
13.6 Minutes later you land ...smiling and happy and sure it's been 13 minutes that the mooney folks have been crying about how uncomfortable it was ....and THEY WERE FASTER .....13 minutes ....faster on a 3 hour trip .....and we smile and laugh as (3) 6' + tall people climb outta our airplanes, each simply climbing out the door on our side of the airplane and not crawling on hands and knees over the seats to get in and out ......we get out feeling like we literally just sat in a cadillac for the last 3 hours and 13 minutes with everything organized and center consoles between each of you, and armrests between the back seats ... and oh yeah, 4 HIGH BACK, Reclining seats ...not a 24 inch tall bench seat for folks in back like the mooney folks ....

We fly 3 Hr's 13 Minutes - With our legs stretched out, a center console for our phone and wallet, a glove box on pass side for wifes make-up, sunglass, and the passengers in the back leaned back napping in the big high back comfortable seats :)

For 13 minutes the 3 people bent up like pretzels in the Mooney have been trying to figure out how to ask us ....IF WE MIND .. Taking their fourth passenger back with us, because they don't really have room .....and when we say sure ...congrats on that speed and useful load you have, we will have to run a little less than our 68 gallons useable fuel to stay within weight and balance ....but we still have 3 hours range no problem..with more than an hour reserve running 15-18 gallons less than full fuel.

And then all 3 mooney passengers start fighting over WHO GETS TO RIDE BACK IN THE COMMANDER .....for an extra 13 minutes longer than in the miserable little "FAST" mooney....

All of a sudden 13 minutes longer "FEELS LIKE 45 Minutes Shorter" because of the comfort during that 3hrs and 13 minutes.

So I say ... KEEP Your 10 Knots faster....feel free to laugh at our slow planes .....but when you get out of your mooney and feel like you were in there for 5-6 hours on a 3 hour flight ...we will get out of the commander 13 minutes later ...and feel like we exactly 13 minutes longer than you, in 4 seat crossover suv built for comfort.

That's right .. We are THE SLOW...FAST ....Four Seater. And we are proud of it!

My little story sounds like a joke kinda ...but this is TRULY What it is like in the commanders ....and truly why we don't care about taking 13 minutes longer or being the "Slow" plane ....10 knots slower.

10 Knots has such a little impact on trips in the sub 6+ hour range ....you won't even notice it!

Phil
 
Last edited:
Quest4Air said:
Michael,

"They" (mooney guys and such who cruise around 145-150 so 10 knots faster than us...roughly) like to say we are lucky to get150 Knots ...not a 150 MPH ... about 172.5 MPH is what they like to beat on commanders about...we are the "SLOW" fast plane ...by slow we are somewhere between 7-12kts slower than the tiny little 4 seaters just kinda depending on which Commander you are talking about.

So in a nutshell look at a 3 hour trip and the commander vs the Mooney.....(The "Fast" Plane) and what that means....from a speed / time standpoint (My best pilot friend flies one of the Pre G models he is religiously 8-10 knots Faster than me, until we get up high ...than I wave from above him while he struggles to climb at 100-200 FPM and I keep going at 500-650 up above 10K and higher :)



So you have to cover 34.5 miles to catch up. down low my 112-TC runs around 132-135 knots usually at 75% ....= 152-155 MPH so to cover 34.5 miles and at the slow end you are covering 2.53 miles per minute ...so :

Now let's go up to 11,500-14,500 Altitude ...now my 112-TC is gonna run closer to 136-146knots ...even all the way up to "ALMOST" 150kts (go ahead mooney guys start snickering....but it ends the flight with you crying 13 minutes before us) :)

So the above 13 minutes on a 3 hour flight example is the WORST case scenario ...is if you are down low, where my 112-TC is slow (the 114 is gonna be quicker than TC down low ...up high we will either be even, or if significantly high ...then 112-TC will be faster because we are still making sea-level manifold pressure up at 14.5K and such ....and 15.5k...etc...) When we throw on our oxygen masks and run up to 16.5 K the money is 20 minutes behind us getting that high, and now flying slower than us "slow pokes in the 112-TC)


Mooney flies 3 hours = covers 34.5 miles more than you in the commander you flew in 3 hours.
On a 3 Hour trip for Mooney ..where they are sitting on their phone, the ipad is laying on the floor, their flashlight is stuck in a crack between things or tucked behind panel somewhere you can barely find when you need it .....and their wallet or it is sliding around on the panel, and the passenger has to hold her purse on her lap (and the pilots ipad or phone half the time) because the person in the back seat is sitting sidewise taking up rear bench because a grown adult can't sit with knees in front of them if the pilot is even a modest 6 feet tall/has his seat back so he barely fits...and is never comfortable...

3 Hrs they land ...saying how fast they are and start climbing out through the one hole/door on right side, practically feeling twice their age with their knees popping and cracking as they crawl over seats or each other to climb out that door and all the while the person in back seats swears they are never sitting/squeezing in the back again and starts asking how in the H#$# are they going to pickup Bobby and get him to fit in the back seat TO ..on the way home.....


Rockwell Commander 112-TC/114A
13.6 Minutes later you land ...smiling and happy and sure it's been 13 minutes that the mooney folks have been crying about how uncomfortable it was ....and THEY WERE FASTER .....13 minutes ....faster on a 3 hour trip .....and we smile and laugh as (3) 6' + tall people climb outta our airplanes, each simply climbing out the door on our side of the airplane and not crawling on hands and knees over the seats to get in and out ......we get out feeling like we literally just sat in a cadillac for the last 3 hours and 13 minutes with everything organized and center consoles between each of you, and armrests between the back seats ... and oh yeah, 4 HIGH BACK, Reclining seats ...not a 24 inch tall bench seat for folks in back like the mooney folks ....

We fly 3 Hr's 13 Minutes - With our legs stretched out, a center console for our phone and wallet, a glove box on pass side for wifes make-up, sunglass, and the passengers in the back leaned back napping in the big high back comfortable seats :)

For 13 minutes the 3 people bent up like pretzels in the Mooney have been trying to figure out how to ask us ....IF WE MIND .. Taking their fourth passenger back with us, because they don't really have room .....and when we say sure ...congrats on that speed and useful load you have, we will have to run a little less than our 68 gallons useable fuel to stay within weight and balance ....but we still have 3 hours range no problem..with more than an hour reserve running 15-18 gallons less than full fuel.

And then all 3 mooney passengers start fighting over WHO GETS TO RIDE BACK IN THE COMMANDER .....for an extra 13 minutes longer than in the miserable little "FAST" mooney....

All of a sudden 13 minutes longer "FEELS LIKE 45 Minutes Shorter" because of the comfort during that 3hrs and 13 minutes.

So I say ... KEEP Your 10 Knots faster....feel free to laugh at our slow planes .....but when you get out of your mooney and feel like you were in there for 5-6 hours on a 3 hour flight ...we will get out of the commander 13 minutes later ...and feel like we exactly 13 minutes longer than you, in 4 seat crossover suv built for comfort.

That's right .. We are THE SLOW...FAST ....Four Seater. And we are proud of it!

My little story sounds like a joke kinda ...but this is TRULY What it is like in the commanders ....and truly why we don't care about taking 13 minutes longer or being the "Slow" plane ....10 knots slower.

10 Knots has such a little impact on trips in the sub 6+ hour range ....you won't even notice it!

Phil
Click to expand...

LOL. I couldn't agree with you more. This is why the commander is the A/C we really want. Not concerned with the 13 minutes and really never even considered a mooney or speed to be the big deciding factor. Comfort for three girls is my main goal but don't want to go slightly faster than what you can go in a car on the interstate. What do you need to research and consider for ceiling height and speeds up high relative to lower flight trips? Difference in fuel burn rate. Altitude comparison between TC or Non TC?

Michael
 
Michael,

Have you seen the commander FAQ document the group or someone in the group put together? It's awesome and answers so many questions for "new people" to the commander. Just search for FAQ in the forum.

But here is the speeds by model from actual owners, I just cut and paste from that post:

Owner Reported Performance, Cruise


o112/A

4500ft, 24MP, 2500rpm. TAS 140 knots at 11.8gph, 11C. 2550lbs.

4500ft, 24MP, 2400rpm, TAS 140 knots at 11.5gph, 5C, 2340lbs

5000ft, 24MP, 2430rpm, TAS 136 knots at 10.3gph, -4C, 2550lbs

5500ft, 23MP, 2500rpm, TAS 143 knots at 12gph, +5C, 2400lbs

o112TC/TCA

8000ft, 31MP, 2400 rpm. TAS 145 knots at 12.5 gph, 4 deg., 2500lbs

7000ft, 31MP, 2450 rpm. TAS 147 knots at 13 gph, 51F, 2700lbs

8000ft, 31MP, 2350rpm. TAS 141 knots at 11.5 gph, -4 deg C., 2750 lbs.

12,500ft, 31MP, 2350rpm. TAS 146 knots at 11.5 gph, -4 deg C., 2750 lbs.

8,000ft, 30MP, 2400. TAS 138kts at 12.6gph, -4 deg C, 2500lbs

o112 Hot Shot

12,000ft, 25.5MP, 2400rpm. TAS 149kts at 12 gph, -15C, 2500lbs.

16,000ft, 25MP, 2400rpm. TAS 162kts at 12.5 gph, ISA, 2500lbs.

o112B

5500ft, 24MP, 2500rpm, TAS 139 knots at 12.4gph, +4C, 2450lbs

o114

6500ft, 23MP, 2510rpm. TAS 146.4 at 13.9gph, 7C, 2550lbs.

5500ft, 23.5MP, 2450rpm. TAS 143 at 12.7, 15C, 2700lbs.

6000ft, 24MP, 2300rpm. TAS 146 at 11.4, 51F, 2700lbs

11,000, 20MP, 2400rpm, TAS 150kts at 12.5 gph, -12C, 2700lbs

o114 Hot Shot

8,500ft, 21.7MP, 2320rpm. TAS 139 at 12.2gph, 16C, 2,700lbs

12,000ft, 24.1MP, 2500rom. TAS 157 at 16.1gph, 20C, 2700lbs

12,000ft, 24.1MP, 2500rpm. TAS 148 at 11.9 (LOP), 20C, 2700lbs

o114B

7,500ft, 21MP, 2500rpm. TAS was 150 knots at 14.8 GPH, 4 deg. C, 2950lbs

7500 MSL, 21", 2300 RPM, 150 KTAS, 14 GPH, 12 C, 2950 lbs.

o114TC/115TC

11,000, 29MP, 2200rpm, TAS 160kts @ 15.4gph, -12C, 2975

o115 (see 114B)

oSuper Commander

7500 MSL, 22.5", 2500 RPM, 170 KTAS, 18 GPH, 12C, 2950 lbs.

*** Don't quote me on my exact pressures and stuff below, this is just rough approximates and #'s that are pretty close, but I didn't take time to lookup up Manifold pressures that equate to power % ...just trying to explain the concept.

The reason turbos are faster up high is because they allow the engine to essentially to still have sea level manifold pressure at 10K, 12K 15K and at least 15.5 K ...but that's all the higher I've been and know for sure.

.....a non turbo ...any airplane type, cannot make full manifold pressure because the air is so much thinner so it simply cannot get enough air/oxygen/pressure to burn enough fuel to actually produce the same horsepower the engine can produce at sea-level.....

I'M NOT AN ENGINE GUY SO I AM SURE I KINDA SAID THAT WRONG and someone will chime in and correct me :)

So where as non-turbos performance gets worse and worse and worse as you go higher .....a turbo's stay's the exactly the same (essentially except for maybe the last few thousand feet near it's max it will eventually not max out, but will stay be WAY CLOSER to max than a non turbo)

So the 112-TC with the turbo maintains manifold pressure and gives you the ability to still cruise at your 33, 34 or 35hg (55%-75% power/cruise settings) .....a non turbo (just a ballpark # I read, don't quote me on it) motor at about 7,000 ft has to have full throttle to still generate 75% power ....as you keep going up, you have no more thottle to push, and therefore your power continues to decrease....the higher you go.

The turbo has the same power available at 7000, 10,000, 13,000 ft, and at least up to 15,500 ft (because I've been there in mine and still could run 75% power and still wasn't at full throttle) ...so as they slow down, we speed up, with turbos.

Again that's a "PHIL" explanation/paraphrasing of the reading I did 8-12 months ago ....and won't be exactly the right mechanical explanation probably ...but just google it and read up on it ....

I assumed a turbo was like a car turbo. You got more horsepower all the time ....than without a turbo ...but that's not really what the advantage is in our commanders ...it's the ability to still have full cruise power, when naturally aspirated airplanes are going to be running full throttle, but only 45 or 50 or 55% power while we still have 75% and usually more in reserves if we want to go higher.

If fly Basic Med, so I"m not allowed above 18,000 feet ...otherwise I'd go out and try it and report back on where my girls point of 75% power finally isn't attainable....

I'm sure one of these truly brialliant mechanical guys will chime in and correct my explanation, or point you to a post that does ...I was just trying to give you the basic idea, that I came to understand when i we deciding between a 112, 112-TC, 114 ..that made me realize ....all planes are not created equal when you fly HIGH :) and the general advantage that a turbo brings ....it's not more horsepower in total ...it's more power availability way up high :)

Phil
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it’s a tough market buying now, from what I hear. On a medium or longer flight a few minutes looking at winds helps with efficient flying. I try not to quibble over 15-20 minutes.

Good luck with the search.
 
Well said Phil ...
 
Well said Phil, and all true, but only 1/2 the equation :D. In the thinner air, at altitude, there's less drag on the airframe - a huge issue with our big, comfortable, wide bodied Commanders. The turbo allows us to get to an altitude where we can take advantage of the positive benefits of the thinner air on our airframes, but not be penalized by the negative effects on our powerplants.

That combination is what makes the Hot Shot the best kept secret in General Aviation:cool:.
 
Last edited:
These posts are a wealth of information for those of us just starting the buying process. Thanks for all the guidance for those of us researching what Commander will best fit our needs. I will go for space and comfort every time over a few knots of speed. I used to fly frequently with a friend that owned a Mooney TLS and it was fast but uncomfortable as you almost feel like you are sitting flat on the floor. I did learn flying with him that is is nice up flying in the high teens or low twenties as there is almost no traffic around you. Although I'm a flatlander Key Largo I would like to take advantage of the turbo for longer trips and weather avoidance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top