Paul,

First of all, welcome to the forum. This is a great place to get answers to the questions that you seek. There is a huge amount of collective knowledge available on the LML. Many times two different answers to the same question will be diametrically opposed. This is usually a good thing...gives you a chance to hear different points of view. As long as it's kept civil (almost always the case) and doesn't degenerate into name calling (rare and unfortunate) it will help you broaden your prospective on many Lancair related subjects.

Here's my attempt at an answer to your 235/320/360 question.

The 235 was the first production kit from Lancair. The 320 included several improvements over the 235. These include bottom hinged flaps, oleo nose strut as well as a longer and wider fuselage. By the way, there is no airframe difference between a 320 and a 360. It just depends on which engine you hang on it.  With a 320 you don't have to choose between the capability to go "160KTAS at 6gph" and "190KTAS at 9gph". The 320/360 can do both. As a matter of fact, my 320 will burn considerably less than 6 gph if I slow down to 160 KTAS.  Both are quite tiny airplanes. You need to learn to pack very carefully in either but the 320/360 gives you at least a little more room. My wife and I flew our 320 to Europe several years ago and were able to pack for a 6 week trip and include a raft and survival gear as well. I can't say that it would be impossible to do that in a 235, but it would certainly be more challenging. I know of at least 1 other 360 that has flown to Europe and back.

I believe that finding a well built airframe is the most important factor whether you choose a 235 or a 320/360. There are good and bad examples of both out there. You can re-design the panel and replace the engine but if you've got a badly built airframe it's more difficult to rectify from a practical standpoint.  The 320/360 airframe does give you a little more room and that, in some instances, makes it easier to work on (there are some VERY tight spots that you'll need to squeeze into for maintenance in either). There are more examples of the 320/360 airframe in existence. This might give you a bit more choice in the market. There are further modifications that have been included in some 320/360s that are not available on the 235. Examples would include forward hinged canopy, extended engine mount, MKII tail, outback gear, etc). You can find opinions here on the LML concerning the relative merits of any of these mods.

Finally, both are fast, efficient, amazing airplanes. As you have seen from our recent stall discussion, both can kill you quite easily if you don't respect them and learn their characteristics. Lancairs are not difficult to fly...but they are different. Different from any other plane you might have flown. Which ever Lancair you choose, GET TRAINING from a qualified, Lancair experienced instructor. Join LOBO. The training decision is, by far, the most important decision you will make regardless of which airframe you choose.

Good luck. Let us know if we can help.

Bill Harrelson
N5ZQ 320 2,150 hrs
N6ZQ  IV  75 hrs




-----Original Message----- From: Paul Besing
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 6:56 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Purchase Advice LNC2

Hey guys….I'm a little torn during my education process.

Here is where I started.
Purchase a 235 for $35k, and put another $15k in it for the panel I want, ending at $50k (assuming no other desires).
Enjoy 160KTAS at 6gph.

Now, considering $70k on a good 320/360 that is 90% how I want, and enjoy 190KTAS at 9gph, and a bit more room and better climb.

My question is, to most of you is $20k (net increase from my $50k 235) worth the room, performance, yet higher fuel flow? Anyone done both?

Thanks for the education.

Paul Besing
--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html