Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:55 AM - Re: Re: Cessna 414/421 v 685 (Paul Gendron)
2. 06:29 PM - Re: Re: Cessna 414/421 v 685 (Moe Mills)
3. 06:56 PM - Re: Re: Cessna 414/421 v 685 (Paul Gendron)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cessna 414/421 v 685 |
Hi All.
I'm UNFORTUNATLEY parting out a 685
If anyone need a spare anything?
Give me a call 954-547-3002 Paul
RPMCommander@gmail.com
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:25 AM, n395v <airboss@bearcataviation.com> wrote:
> >
>
> I owned and operated a 685 for several years. My hangar mate had a 421
> >From a cost standpoint there was no significant difference.
> I would however ech Moe's opinion about take off distance. The 685 is not
> a short field airplane. Not sure how takeoff distance compares with the 421
> but the 685 is superior in every other respect.
>
> A lot of 685 operators who complained of poor TO performance were always
> operating well over Gross at takeoff.
>
> If I remember correctly it will hold ove 1800 pounds of fuel. Full tanks
> are seldom necessary for most flights.
>
> Average fuel burn was 48 GPH and cruise was 205KTS TAS consistently.
>
> The GTSO 520Ks will probably need top overhuals at 900 hrs. The bottom end
> of the engines should meet or exceed TBO if treated properly.
>
> Lots of old wives tails about the 685s most of them untrue.
>
> We have at least 2 685 check pilots on the list who can give you further
> guidance.
>
> --------
> Milt
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=382879#382879
>
>
--
Thank You
Paul Gendron for
www.RPMCommander.com LLC
954-547-3002
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cessna 414/421 v 685 |
Hi Paul=2C Is your 685 pressurized? Moe
Date: Sat=2C 15 Sep 2012 05:54:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Re: Cessna 414/421 v 685
From: rpmcommander@GMAIL.COM
Hi All. I'm UNFORTUNATLEY parting out a 685 If anyone need a spare anything
? Give me a call 954-547-3002 Paul RPMCommander@gmail.com
On Tue=2C Sep 11=2C 2012 at 11:25 AM=2C n395v <airboss@bearcataviation.com>
wrote:
I owned and operated a 685 for several years. My hangar mate had a 421
>From a cost standpoint there was no significant difference.
I would however ech Moe's opinion about take off distance. The 685 is not a
short field airplane. Not sure how takeoff distance compares with the 421
but the 685 is superior in every other respect.
A lot of 685 operators who complained of poor TO performance were always op
erating well over Gross at takeoff.
If I remember correctly it will hold ove 1800 pounds of fuel. Full tanks ar
e seldom necessary for most flights.
Average fuel burn was 48 GPH and cruise was 205KTS TAS consistently.
The GTSO 520Ks will probably need top overhuals at 900 hrs. The bottom end
of the engines should meet or exceed TBO if treated properly.
Lots of old wives tails about the 685s most of them untrue.
We have at least 2 685 check pilots on the list who can give you further gu
idance.
--------
Milt
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=382879#382879
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
le=2C List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
--
Thank You
Paul Gendron for
www.RPMCommander.com LLC
954-547-3002
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cessna 414/421 v 685 |
N, it had a camera window
On Sep 15, 2012 9:30 PM, "Moe Mills" <moe-rosspistons@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Is your 685 pressurized?
>
> Moe
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 05:54:21 -0400
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: Re: Cessna 414/421 v 685
> From: rpmcommander@GMAIL.COM
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
>
> Hi All.
> I'm UNFORTUNATLEY parting out a 685
> If anyone need a spare anything?
> Give me a call 954-547-3002 Paul
> RPMCommander@gmail.com
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:25 AM, n395v <airboss@bearcataviation.com>wrote:
>
> >
>
> I owned and operated a 685 for several years. My hangar mate had a 421
> >From a cost standpoint there was no significant difference.
> I would however ech Moe's opinion about take off distance. The 685 is not
> a short field airplane. Not sure how takeoff distance compares with the 421
> but the 685 is superior in every other respect.
>
> A lot of 685 operators who complained of poor TO performance were always
> operating well over Gross at takeoff.
>
> If I remember correctly it will hold ove 1800 pounds of fuel. Full tanks
> are seldom necessary for most flights.
>
> Average fuel burn was 48 GPH and cruise was 205KTS TAS consistently.
>
> The GTSO 520Ks will probably need top overhuals at 900 hrs. The bottom end
> of the engines should meet or exceed TBO if treated properly.
>
> Lots of old wives tails about the 685s most of them untrue.
>
> We have at least 2 685 check pilots on the list who can give you further
> guidance.
>
> --------
> Milt
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=382879#382879
>
>
> ==========
> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
> ==========
> http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> le, List Admin.
> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> --
> Thank You
>
> Paul Gendron for
> www.RPMCommander.com LLC
> 954-547-3002
>
>
> *
>
> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|