Those who know and understand the enormous costs involved in general aviation ought to take note of this.


50 MPG; 170 MPH; $70k brand new. If it pans out, that’s a smokin’ deal, let me tell you.

Update. Here’s an inflight view from the cockpit. Yes, please.


Since Covid killed my Cabo San Lucas vacation-rental business in 2021, this is my day job. I can't do it without you. Memberships are $10 monthly, $20 quarterly, or $65 annually. Two premium coffees per month. Every membership helps finance this work I do, and if you like what I do, please chip in. No grandiose pitches.


  1. Kyle Bennett on August 22, 2007 at 10:56

    Does "MPG" really mean anything for airplanes?

  2. Richard Nikoley on August 22, 2007 at 12:06

    Sure. That's not normally how it's expressed in GA (gallons or liters per hour is standard), but it works. Just as in automobiles, it's an average that factors in start/stop, city driving, hills, speeds, headwind and tailwind.

  3. Billy Beck on August 22, 2007 at 13:14

    In actual flight planning, the calculation is gallons per hour. Personally, I've never ever calculated MPG, and I've never heard of anyone who does.

    That's a nice lookin' airplane.

  4. Richard Nikoley on August 22, 2007 at 13:23


    It actually comes standard in tail wheel, t' boot! That's the way I'd take delivery.

  5. Greg Freeman on August 22, 2007 at 13:13

    I checked their website, looks like the VNE for those aircraft is 155mph, not 170mph like the article said, and the 70k version seems to top out at a little short of 116mph. Still much faster than you can legally drive on a highway, and possibly more direct.

    The Taurus looks very cool as well, but I've seen other motorgliders with a better sink rate and glide ratios. They are more economically priced, however.

  6. jomama on August 24, 2007 at 05:02

    That is some fine visibility offered out of
    that cockpit.

    I've never seen a fixed wing offer that much.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.