A California desert drag race helped settle the matter as AOPA looked at which of general aviation's most popular six-seaters is best. Will you be convinced?
In our Outback the Centurion and the Caravan are the planes of choice if you do decent trips. The visibility from the Centurion is amazing with the high wing which goes right through the fuselage...one long strong spar. The third door on the Bananza is handy but the 210 we have has one too. The Centurion is gentler to land and stops shorter. Thats handy here were you might be landing on a road. Cessna is better supported here too.
Well cruising speed, ultimate top speed and fuel economy are important factors. A short one mile race can't determine that. which we would like to know. Also two blade propellers vs 3 blade would be an interesting test.
years ago i did a trip through outback Australis, 3c182, a a36, a 210h and a rg182. the 4 182 where about 9 hours more than the 210 and 6 hours more than the a36 the 210 burnt the least fuel as well.
I fly an A36. It is great. It is certified in the utility category, with maximum of 4.4 G. Stronger airframe than the 210. The 210 in this video also has an extra 10 hp. But, the 210 is a good bird as well. Most 210’s have a higher useful load than the comparable bonanza. Note also the boon this video has tip tanks. Unsure of the performance effects of the tip tanks.
Both great airplanes and as stated, the Centurion in this video has upgrades and the Bonanza has tip tanks not normally seen on an A36. It comes down to personal preference; The factory Centurion performs a little better but the A36 has a certain class and style to it. I only have about 12 hours in an A36 compared to 50 hours in a Centurion but I like how locked-in the slot the A36 feels on final approach in turbulent conditions. Yet I like the feel and visibility of the high wing Centurion. Sadly it looks like private aviation will be nearly extinct in 40 or 50 years...maybe less. Wish I had been around for the HayDay of private airplanes in the 50's and 60's.
No doubt the 210 is a better off field plane (as any high wing over low wing would be). The 210 is simply more versatile- but if you don’t need versatility the bonanza is a very excellent well built plane. Personally I prefer two doors for loading and exiting and high wing for looking down. I’ve flown loaded naturally aspirated 210 in and out of Leadville (10,000’ agl) with no problem. Learn to fly LOP and the range is amazing. I would never drop a bonanza over the trees in a slip to land on 1500’ grass strip - but maybe that’s says more about my skills than the aircraft. 😆
357sps the bonanza parts last longer best built aircraft in the Industry commonly known. My a&p would tell u different as the gear can handle a large beating.
I am a bonanza owner and love both planes. Bonanza is sexier and has better landing gear. Having the high wing provides better visibility and shade for passengers and crew in the centurion. Both are great airplanes, its like, do you prefer blonds or brunettes. Cargo door on a36 is also a big plus in my opinion. Aft CG can be more of a problem in the A36. Pros and cons.
I know the Bonanza has club seating (option) but does the Centurion have that option? I think club seating is better but harder on c-of-g though, I suppose.
+Heath Jarvis Club seating would be way more comfortable but the middle seats are going backwards. Good if you could just change at will, from standard to club easily.
Personally, I've always hated flying backwards. I've only done it a few times, but I couldn't stand it, no matter what plane I was on - single, twin, corporate jet, or airliner. Some people don't mind it, which I suppose is why club seating is considered an upgrade. Unless you feel a great need to play cards while you fly, I don't see the appeal. ;-)
Planes like that could be used as "poor man's biz jet" and if they had a table between the club seating (that could be easily removed and stowed) people could do their business while flying (saving time). Or maybe kids in the back could color-in. About the only practical use in flying backwards and not looking out the window. I would imagine some companies would want club seating with the table. Another thing... apparently business people are buying high performance UL or LS planes (like the Jabiroo, Pipistrel, Glasair etc.) and using! them for "really poor man's biz jets". lol It saves accommodation overnight which pays for fuel and saves time (compared to a car). It's just plane progress.
Not technically fair because the Atlantic aero conversion for the 210 is a 310 hp engine (io550p) and the bonanza has a normal io550B 300hp. The Atlantic aero also maintains higher mp ant alltitude ( different intake manifold). An Atlantic arrow bonanza is faster than a 210 and would win in the acceleration competition and cruise speed. A little bit bias to the 210 because it has a higher hp newer designed engine
@@tinoesterhuizen4433 negative. an early model bonanza with an Atlantic Aero io550P would not be "outgunned" by the 210. the later model bonanzas were a lot more heavy. According to Atlantic Aero, the bonanza with the same conversion and engine will post higher cruise speeds. The 210 is a cool aircraft but I don't see a benefit to having one over an A36. It has the most unreliable gear on almost any GA plane and accounts for over 20%( just 210 alone) of all gears ups alone. Now compare that to ALL the bonanza models that account to around 4%. There are close to 18,000 Bonanzas built while only 9240 210s were built and still accounts for over 20% of gear ups. If you exclude the v tail Bonanzas the straight tail Bonanza is much more structural statically. The 210 Has a much higher number of inflight breakups over the A36. I will say that many were from penetrating thunderstorms and flying outside of the airframe's limit but that also goes for the BO's statistics and shows its superior design. Not to mention everything was just built better on the bonanza. its fit and finish were the best in the industry. I like the 210 don't get me wrong. I Just couldn't justify buying one over an A36 with a 1300-1700 pound useful load. There are plenty of A36 Bonanzas out there with great useful loads. Especially if you have an io550 or a TN kit and tip tanks.
I think the 210 is ugly but I have to admit this 210 actually looks pretty nice for a 210 but I still am just not a fan as I'm sure there people who don't like the look of the A36. Also, this video doesn't do justice on TO and landing distance. The takeoff distance on the 70s-early 80s A36 Bonanzas is pretty much identical to the 210 and same goes for landing, however the 210 does have larger flaps and wing so it still has a slight edge however I wouldn't ever take a 210 to a strip a bonanza could get off and I know any sane owner wouldn't
Bonanza Driver I mean a stock 210 would have 300hp io-520e that make the prop go at 2800RPM than a bonanza that goes for 2700 RPM at 300hp. By when it comes to costs. A 210 is nice
I suppose the Centurian is cheaper too. I guessed that the Cessna would win just before I watched the video. That's cos I studied plane specs way back in the 70's and the Cessnas always seemed to have the same edge on the others. And this explains why there are so many Cessnas around. But even the Cessnas are getting antiquated these days. The 4 seater (120hp) Australian UL called the Jabiru does the same job as the 172 and the Jabiru is like HALF the empty weight as the 172! Now that''s saying something about modern materials.
You can put 6 people, 90 gallons of gas and luggage and easily go 1,000 miles at 170 knots and burning about 13.5 to 14 gallons an hour. Can't do that in the Bonanza.
Realistically for going on a vacation of more than a couple days 2 seats are for the baggage and 4 seats for people. You’ll never get 6 people plus bags for a week in these airplanes unless they are incredibly disciplined in packing light. One book bag per person.
Mr Hats there both io 550s BUT this 210 has an io550p which is rated for 10 more hp and more manifold pressure at altitude over the bonanzas io550B. It isn't a fair competition. Look up and Atlantic aero bonanza and you will see the front cowling Is different because its packing the more powerful engine and the cruise speed and performance specs are much better. If they both had io550b engines then the results would be different
You are correct the io 550 B is only rated for 300hp and the Atlantic aero engine on the 210 is rated for 310hp. There is are Atlantic aero bonanzas that have the io550p. The 550p makes more power and maintains more manifold pressure at altitude as well so it loses less hp the higher you go. THIS IS NOT A FAIR COMPARISON.
Whatever, I wouldn't even waste money on a stock Bonanza since their so expensive and not built the way they should have been done. If your going the Bonanza route get one thats rebuilt the way it should have been done from the beginning through "Blackwell" the Ultimate Bonanza, anything else is just a whatever version with overheat problems.
not only that but the Cessna is lighter and has larger flaps. If you kept the power to weight ratio the same, then the Bonanza would run away from the Cessna. Cessna is 100 lbs lighter with 10% more wing area. Changing the Bonanza to meet the 210's power to weight ratio would make it about 12 kts faster. Too many assumptions here though, Too many variables and not enough equations to figure this one out apples to apples.
what if the Bonanza had standard wingtips instead of the tanks out there and the larger scimitar prop like your 210 has here? And since you allowed and engine STC upgrade in the 210, the upgrade to the Bonanza would the the Tornado Alley TN kit. Those have seen 200+ kts at 17,000 ft. on 16.5 gph. So the STCs here hurt the Bonanza and helped the 210. But that fat old wing has its limits unless you strap on a PT6 or an Allison. Maybe it comes down to the 2" of extra shoulder width in the 210,....
My Aussie take is that having plenty of experience on both types from the mid 60's for ten years or so, the C210 wins, especially in Australia's less populated Outback.
Beechcraft Bonanza. The longest continually produced aircraft in history. 1947-Present day. Can that many Bonanza owners be wrong? (Rhetorical question, BTW)
Not to mention if you compared the same year's the bonanza would be equal on empty weigh. This is a heavy bonanza and they also flew the thing 10 knots to fast on final approach......
I think the 210 was jiggling because the Bo was flying lead, with the 210 on his wing, requiring the 210 to make constant corrections to stay in position.
Valletta Meme Master Lol the 210 has a hp that makes more power than the bonanza and also makes more power the higher it goes. It is not fair you are right.
10hp is hardly enough to make a difference over aerodynamics at those speeds. The Bonanza looks more aerodynamic and the Cessna has better lift but they are comparable and despite its looks the Cessna doesn't seem to be worse aerodynamically. Perhaps if the Bonanza's front end was more tapered?
Cessna wins ... until you get behind the control yoke and actually fly the planes Bo: Holy cow this thing has butter smooth and perfectly balanced controls. I could fly this with 3 fingers Cessna: Holy cow this thing flies like a 1964 F100 pickup with no power steering. We wont bring up interior build quality of the Cessna interior...
The 210 can do EVERYTHING just that little bit better. A better all round GA aircraft still has not being built yet. Yes these 2 specific aircraft don't have the same engines, but even with the same engines same load same altitude same exact manifold pressure on both it will still outrun the Bonanza every single time. It does EVERYTHING just that little bit better.
Tino Esterhuizen no it won't. The 210 is not faster that the bonanza. It will takeoff and land shorter and can carry maybe 150-250 more pounds and stall slower. but this comparison is not fair. The Atlantic aero conversion 210 has an io550p and it makes more than 10 hp more than the 550b in the bonanza. It also maintains more manifold pressure at higher altitudes so more hp the higher you are. Compare an Atlantic aero bonanza to this 210 and it would be much different.
With both using IO520's a C210 IS still faster than a Bonanza, it also loses less speed with load than the Bonanza does. That is the unique thing about the 210 it does EVERYTHING better than the Bonanza, I have personally been in a couple of Bon vs 210 dashes, same load, same engine, the 210s always comes out on top. Every single time.
The retractable landing gear of the 210 is so spindly it scares me. Retractable gear is never going to be sturdy on high-wing planes. The 210 is not pretty either and it's not much fun to fly. I'm bored just thinking about that flying mini-van. The first Bonanzas were designed to be fast using only a 205 hp E-185 engine. The design values speed over flight stability, which is why Bonanza was and is called the doctor killer. Chronic yaw in cruise, tail flutter, spiral divergence, high stall speeds, CG problems and a general inability to stay in one piece during flight have always plagued this airframe. Frankly, I don't know why anyone would invest big money in either of these lemons.
You can't be serious. Who was flying the Bonanza? Did you find a 100-hour goober against a seasoned pilot in the Cessna? Short field approaches were all wrong in both planes. The Bo was ALWAYS land shorter than a 210 that is unmodified. What a hack job. Don't quit your day job, hackmaster.
