X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 18:50:25 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from blu0-omc3-s9.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.116.84] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.5) with ESMTP id 3052599 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 02 Aug 2008 09:24:15 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.55.116.84; envelope-from=gary21sn@hotmail.com Received: from BLU130-DS4 ([65.55.116.72]) by blu0-omc3-s9.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 2 Aug 2008 06:23:36 -0700 X-Originating-IP: [68.186.114.52] X-Originating-Email: [gary21sn@hotmail.com] X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: gary21sn@hotmail.com From: "Gary Edwards" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: Hole in the Lancair Lineup X-Original-Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 06:23:31 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_007C_01C8F468.494C9170" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: MSN 9 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By MSN MimeOLE V9.60.0053.2200 In-Reply-To: Seal-Send-Time: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 06:23:31 -0700 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Aug 2008 13:23:36.0094 (UTC) FILETIME=[F7E553E0:01C8F4A2] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_007C_01C8F468.494C9170 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I also concur. The RV is filling the low to mid-range portion, while = Lancair caters to the mid to upper end of the market. Although I was = planning to build a Legacy, for the low amount of time that I fly my = plane, I cannot realistically justify stepping up from what I have now. = I am having second thoughts. Gary Edwards LNC2=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: rwolf99@aol.com=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:07 AM Subject: [LML] Hole in the Lancair Lineup The piston Evolution may be a nice airplane, but it is not filling the = hole in the Lancair lineup. That humongous chasm is at the low end of = the spectrum -- right smack where the 235 and 320 used to be. The 360 = kits were $20-30K and the finished costs probably average $100K. Today the lowest price Lancair is the Legacy FG, right? Kit cost = alone is $42K and the finished cost is projected by the factory at = $130-250K. =20 How is a normal guy with an income of $50-100K (a typical = professional, a senior blue-collar guy, but not a CEO/COO/CFO or a = doctor/lawyer) supposed to build one of these? Well, they are not. = That's why there are so many more Van's airplanes than Lancairs. I made this argument to Bob Fair many years ago, and it fell on deaf = ears. Seems like the new management is making the same call. I'm glad I got in when I did. Ther's no way I could afford it today. - Rob Wolf ------=_NextPart_000_007C_01C8F468.494C9170 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I also concur.  The RV is filling the low to mid-range = portion, while=20 Lancair caters to the mid to upper end of the market.  Although = I was=20 planning to build a Legacy, for the low amount of time that I fly my = plane, I=20 cannot realistically justify stepping up from what I have now.  I = am having=20 second thoughts.
 
Gary Edwards
LNC2 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 = 10:07=20 AM
Subject: [LML] Hole in the = Lancair=20 Lineup

The piston Evolution may be a nice airplane, but it is = not=20 filling the hole in the Lancair lineup.  That humongous chasm is = at the=20 low end of the spectrum -- right smack where the 235 and 320 used to = be. =20 The 360 kits were $20-30K and the finished costs probably average=20 $100K.

Today the lowest price Lancair is the Legacy FG, = right? =20 Kit cost alone is $42K and the finished cost is projected by the = factory at=20 $130-250K. 

How is a normal guy with an income of = $50-100K (a=20 typical professional, a senior blue-collar guy, but not a CEO/COO/CFO = or a=20 doctor/lawyer) supposed to build one of these?  Well, they are = not. =20 That's why there are so many more Van's airplanes than = Lancairs.

I made=20 this argument to Bob Fair many years ago, and it fell on deaf = ears. =20 Seems like the new management is making the same call.

I'm glad = I got=20 in when I did.  Ther's no way I could afford it today.

- = Rob Wolf=20
------=_NextPart_000_007C_01C8F468.494C9170--