Faster/bigger airplanes often take the joy OUT of flying, so there is no need for envy.
Think about it. If you want to go fly a 150, you GO FLY the 150. You might shoot a few landings, or you might head off to a $50 hamburger somewhere, or just go look at the scenery at a blistering Mach 0.14, and you might change your mind about what to do halfway through the flight.
If you have a much faster/bigger plane, you DON'T often go fly for fun. You fly for a REASON, not only because it's more expensive to fly, but because there's more involved in flying at 200 KIAS than at 90 KIAS. You have to give a lot more attention to the 30-degree cone in front of you, simply because you're moving so fast that you need all the reaction time you can get, while at the same time you have to deal with all of the cockpit controls.
With the 150, you can look around more and HAVE FUN, you don't have to be on a mission to justify the cost of the flight.
So, yes, it would be nice to have that 310 that's in the hangar next to yours, but it probably spends a lot more time IN THE HANGAR, while you're out flying around.
You got that right, Keith. Sometimes it is easy to forget, though.
I agree entirely with Keith's observations. If you want a plane for reliable transportation from one point to another, a 150 or 152 definitely isn't the plane you should choose. But if your goal is to enjoy the journey, I find it ideal. It's too small for people who fly with a family and not very practical if you live at a hot, high altitude location and/or have to carry a lot of weight, but otherwise it's really hard to beat. I looked seriously at a 150/150 as a way to solve what I consider to be the two main shortcomings of climb rate and hauling capability, but for me the change would have been a step backward in nearly all other respects important to me so I decided to stay with my standard 150. But just like the engine choice I made, other peoples' requirements, goals, situations, financial restrictions, taste, and a lot of other considerations makes my choice best for only me, and not necessarily for anyone else.
When I've spent three days to fly from Oregon to Clinton or Oshkosh (or gone on a 13 day tour of the wonders of the Southwest), I've thought when I landed how glad I was to have the plane I do. The trips were great fun, like a road trip, with lots of interesting challenges and experiences. I wouldn't have had any of that if I had flown in a fast plane, high and above the weather, and in fact I wouldn't have bothered going at all. When I want to just get somewhere, I fly commercial. When I want to enjoy the trip itself, the 150 is the way to go.
I'm assuming that the new engine has been test run and otherwise fully functional.
I have to believe Continental ran yours on a test stand as Well.
Jim
I am not convinced continental test runs their remanufactured engines before shipping them. Last spring I did a double engine swap on one of the companies 404's. That's 2, GTSIO-520-M's. I won't go into the price of those things. However one engine kicked and bucked on start up.. Went through ignition timing trouble shooting... After much frustration, Discovered that the distributor gear in one mag had the red paint on the wrong mark. There is no way that engine would have run in the test cell with those mags installed.
Previously we have received engines and it was obvious they were test run... The lifters were already spalling from a test cell run.. Luckily we were notified of the bad metallurgy before we even had that engine hung.
Good info, Brian. Our engine is somewhere in the vicinity of 1550 hours since major. It still runs strong, although the oil pressure in the heat of summer is lower than I would like it to be. Catherine sent her engine off to LyCon (I think it was) and as far as I know is happy with the result. I have a lot of things to think about in the next couple of year or so (at least I hope for a couple of years). It sounds like a factory engine can still have problems.
Catherine sent her engine off to LyCon (I think it was) and as far as I know is happy with the result.
Having built a few race bikes.... I want a cheater engine. LOL Legal but a few HP through efficiency. That said... only when Delmar truly needs an engine. Not before.
...Continental Motors Services offers a "kit engine build" where they build an engine with 100% new parts, then transfer the data plate from your old engine to the new one. The only difference between this and a fully new engine (except price) is that your log shows the total engine time of the old engine -- that is, that the old engine was "overhauled". The price for an O-200-A was $22,398 vs. $27,104 for a new engine or $24,161 for a factory remanufactured engine...
That is exactly what I did in 2008. At the time, I bought it through the now-defuct Continental "Mattituck" facility. At the time, mine was $19,450. The price has gone up. Mine also included: New Carb New Mags New Alternator New Harness New Lightweight B&C starter. (I think they have since switched to SkyTec).
It's just like you state. They send you a crate to ship them your old engine as a core, and they ship you back a brand new engine in a crate with old data plate on it, and call it an overhaul. Your logbook still shows the old hours on it. You list the time since it was installed as TSMOH.
I reject the claim that Continental would not thoroughly test the 0200A on a test stand.
As long as you don't plan on selling your plane, who cares if the logbooks say its an OH? If you do sell, just 'splain it to 'em. It's a new engine, with all new everything. Cam. Crank. Cylinders, etc.
PM me if you have any questions. I'll bet you will be working with the same guy I worked with. He's still an employee at Continental.
Glad Delmar found me.
![[Linked Image from eznec.com]](https://eznec.com/images/States_Landed_In.jpg)
