Airplane Review: Piper Aztec

[@jeremyrobinson2080]

Many hours flying Aztrucks in Africa…very solid and reliable machine! 👍

[@desertdog185]

Loved flying charters in these in ‘81. Carried tons of ice with total confidence unlike a Barron or 310. Great memories

[@fastbackflying853]

They do have an amazing wing!

[@jonwilliam3597]

A great aircraft. I had a third share in an Aztec F for many years and I loved it. The video is correct, it can be expensive to operate and a good review and research of your intended use is essential. Two problems with my aircraft were, you had to be very careful and slowly open the throttles or you could beat the turbochargers and the result could be dangerous and expensive, the other thing was the emergency gear lowering, you needed to be Mr. Universe because by the time the gear was down your arm would be ready to drop off. My previous aircraft a Grumman GA7 had a gear free fall which was great. Other than those two things, and in hot weather a slow single engine rate of climb after take off it was a stable, reliable aircraft and a pleasure to fly with good load capability. I flew mine all over Europe and into N. Africa and loved it.

[@reinhart482]

Thanks for sharing actual cost figures. Extremely rare for raw expenses to be discussed.

[@fastbackflying853]

Your very welcome. I am aiming to try and give folks a good idea about what they're getting into

[@FredShaw]

Great review! I flew Aztec N6537A for over 2000 Hrs. and loved every minute of it, I used it to fly from FLO Florence SC to PWM Portland ME as well as California and almost every state in the USA. The only major problem I had was a blown turbo at 15000 ft over Worchester Mass. I worked part time at the Florence airport in exchange for most of my maintenance. Being a Turbo I could fly it 25000 ft with ease sucking oxygen. Lots of fun times!!! Thank you for sharing this video.

[@fastbackflying853]

That blown turbo sounds like an interesting and expensive experience! Glad you liked the video.

[@jamesharkness1058]

What a fun airplane! Brings back some fond memories. I earned my multi engine rating in an early model snub nose Aztec

[@fastbackflying853]

Glad you enjoyed it. It's a great plane to fly.

[@marsgal42]

Nice plane. Nice price tag, like most twins these days...I've flown a Seneca. Made me feel like a real pilot the first time I called "positive rate...gear up!" The instructor I was flying with was impressed at how well I synchronized the engines and figured I must have a musical background. Landing it on a 2100 foot runway (Langley CYNJ) took nerves of steel. :-)

[@fastbackflying853]

Props out of sync makes my eye twitch.... I look after a Seneca II and have done a little flying in it. Maybe a future review!

[@ejsoder]

Very nice and accurate rundown. Great video. I saved a 150hp Apache years ago (Baby brother to the Aztec) and know all about 40 cent o-rings and Power Pack issues. Great short field twins. I would consider owning another one if the right deal landed in my lap.

[@fastbackflying853]

I would really enjoy doing some flying in an Apache and the opportunity to restore one for someone. I feel like I keep getting close but I have not bee able to convince anyone yet that they need to let me rebuild an Apache for them!

[@dwaynemcallister7231]

I agree one does need a mission for any aircraft and the Aztec made a good northern charter aircraft, Dad had one of the last B model's before the C came out it was really deluxe, beautiful leather interior, had the 22 gal. tip tanks it was C-FLAW. He chose the B model because in 1965/66 he was flying out of Hay River NWT and they had a B Aztec & C too. The B model out did the C in performance. The cost though is high for a private aircraft.

[@capnhawk51]

I bought my Apache in 1974. Upgraded the engines to turbo 180 hp with no AD props. Since most of my flying is solo, my Apache is perfect for me.

[@fastbackflying853]

That sounds like a fantastic machine. How are the turbos controlled? Manual waste gate or automatic system?

[@capnhawk51]

Manual waste gate. Old model Ray-Jay turbos.@@fastbackflying853

[@tagu2434]

Just got my Apache with 180s, definitely interested in the turbo setup

[@brianb5594]

Great review of the Aztec! Got my multi in one and would like to own one. Aviation Consumer has a good review of them and operating costs as well. I don't think more expensive than a Cirrus with exception of overhauls but the Lycoming engines cost less than Continental engines to overhaul.

[@fastbackflying853]

I am very glad you enjoyed the review. The Continental engines are not only more expensive to overhaul but have a shorter TBO. Component repairs are also very expensive on them and if you maintain them properly there is significantly more work to do on them.

[@stlflyguy]

Great stuff! Well done!

[@fastbackflying853]

Thanks

[@edwardkelly5625]

VERY COOL VIDEO , GREAT INFORMATION.....HOW WOULD YOU COMPARE A LATE 60s AZTEC to A LATE 60s ROCKWELL COMMANDER

[@fastbackflying853]

Thank you very much. I have not had the opportunity to fly the commander despite my best efforts. I was seriously considering purchasing one a number of years ago.

[@rqstaffan]

I remember growing up with an Aztec-D as the family travel vehicle going between the UK and Europe. "Upon command grab the handle and pump as though your life depends upon it" is stuck in my mind (manual gear activation).

[@muldrowe]

If someone were to buy this as a time builder, what kind of fuel burn would they be looking at if they really dialed the engines down and flew slow. I’ve seen some people say the Twin Comanche burns around 9gph if you aren’t trying to go anywhere fast. Could an Aztec see like a sub-15gph fuel burn?

[@fastbackflying853]

I think you are not likely to see any less than 17 or 16 gallons an hour flying the aircraft around assuming it's normally aspirated. The price different in terms of purchase when compared to a Twin Comanche may mean that you can do a lot of flying before you see any savings with the Twin Comanche.

[@lyndonjohnson483]

I'm planning on getting into sightseeing tours in The Bahamas traveling a 75mi circuit route. With that in mind I should estimate fuel burn to be average 25gal for a single run loaded with 6 sould onboard ?

[@secretsquirrel6718]

We used one back in the early 80s moving guns and other goodies around Africa! Probably ly wouldn't have e passed inspections back in the states but. We were young.

[@fastbackflying853]

Well that sounds like it could be a book of a movie. I would like to hear more of those stories!

[@ziggurat-builder8755]

Thank you!

[@niinjoosum]

Learn so much from his videos.

[@fastbackflying853]

I am really glad to hear you found it useful.

[@michaele1278]

Given the operating and upgrading costs. What else in the same ball park (performance) would you suggest? I'm shopping for something with excellent range, efficiency, reliability/maintenance (parts avail) and safety. Speed is important so long as it would justify fuel burn.

[@fastbackflying853]

The Cessna 310 is another excellent aircraft to look at. It is a little faster than the Aztec and burns a bit less fuel doing it. Space and useful load is normally a bit less but the last 310 models like the R were very large with lots of space, speed and range. A twin comanche is a quick and fuel efficient twin but normally with a high purchase price and greatly reduce load carry capacity.

[@istvanmeissler2238]

Sounds like a wonderful plane. I am glad you saved it. Do you have to have an A&P in Canada to work on your own planes as in the US? Also, are you familiar with how this model compares to the Commander? Similar plane or no? Thanks.

[@fastbackflying853]

Yes you do require a maintenance license. I hold an AME M1 license and that is the Canadian equivalent to the A&P IA in the U.S.A. I have unfortunately not had the opportunity to fly the Commander although I did look into them in some detail a number of years ago. There are a number of different versions of the Commander and my basic view would be that they are a very capable aircraft but compared to an Aztec they are larger and potentially more expensive to operate, especially if you have a version with a geared engine. I was certainly impressed with my research into the airplane and excited to get one.

[@istvanmeissler2238]

@@fastbackflying853 Thanks for the response. In researching twins, it seems the ability of the plane to fly well and handle easily with one engine is prerequisite for a safe outcome in emergency situations. Pilot training and practice in these situations is also quite necessary. I really am enjoying your videos. Best wishes from Michigan.

[@dwaynemcallister7231]

My Dad had a 1964 B model with the 22 gal tip tanks, aside from the range increase they improved low speed performance. The operator's back in the day who had both B & C models said the B would out perform the C. Not sure why maybe the augmenter exhaust?

[@fastbackflying853]

If nothing else the exhaust tubes sound super fantastic!

[@dwaynemcallister7231]

@@fastbackflying853 yes I agree they sounded awesome.

[@ericbullock3188]

o the memories my dad had one back in the sixties i was in my teens he would take off and land and i'd fly it in between.

[@fastbackflying853]

Fantastic. Glad it brought back some good memories for you.

[@ericbullock3188]

@@fastbackflying853 he over time had a split tail bonanza , apache, 185 on floats and a grumman widgeon flew all of them.

[@adseabs]

Well done! Was that Bancroft airport?

[@fastbackflying853]

Thank you. Yes it was Bancroft. Always a great place to visit.

[@bclaverenz1]

Is there a Extended range fuel option.. Ability..??

[@fastbackflying853]

Yes there is extended fuel tanks for the aircraft. Right now no one seems to have the stc or ability to sell them however. I have a video talking a bit about the mods and history of the aircraft and some links in it for modifications. The link for the video is kzbin.info/www/bejne/iIXRoGd3i8mgrNU

[@carlosasher-leon4879]

This is a beautiful plane only in my mind, in reality it's a nightmare for a 60 year old retired guy living in the Caribbean. I want to island hop, the days of lugging around empty seats to fill my ego are over, I am going experimental two seats and carbon fiber with 3X up front.. I enjoy flying and the beach, the days of standing around looking at my A&P work are over.....

[@fastbackflying853]

If you are traveling on your own the Aztec is a terrible aircraft in terms of economy. If you have five passengers and all their gear now it's really working for you. Like most old aircraft, if they have been abused and neglected for years then they are going to have lots of expenses headacks and reliability issues. Get on top of that and they can be a very reliable aircraft. This one has done many major trips without incident in some rather remote locations. The experimental world is fantastic with many great aircraft and fantastic equipment at more reasonable prices. Again one must be careful that things are done correctly and that the experimental category is not used as an excuse for poor or no maintenance! This is something I see regularly.

[@МихаилВишняковский]

Hi I am flying the Aztec in Flight sim x, I have a question, where is the carb heat? cool video =)

[@fastbackflying853]

It depends on your model of course as many are fuel injected by the carb heat controls are below the throttle quadrant

[@МихаилВишняковский]

@@fastbackflying853 Thank you very much for your help, I thought my model might have been fuel injected, i got the payware version, so its very advanced, and there are no carb air temp gauges, im assuming its fuel injected =)

[@fastbackflying853]

Your very welcome. If I remember correctly fuel injected was optional on early Aztec B model, which is my model and then became standard on the C model and later. I hope your enjoy flying it? Have you been exploring any interesting airports?

[@МихаилВишняковский]

@@fastbackflying853 Yeah I love flying it. its so much fun, I live in Arizona usa, so I have been flying the Aztec to Sedona, Cottonwood, Tombstone, Payson, The Grand Canyon, several small airports on the Navajo reservation, into Phoenix, even northern Mexico. I mastered the DC3 and did some sim flying in Canada, I flew from Montreal to Mont Tremblant, and between Calgary and Banff, also Vancouver and Banff, and Montreal to Quebec city, as well as small airports throughout Quebec. Right now i'm flying the Aztec to Lutz Florida from Flagstaff, cross country with a few fuel stops along the way; I am currently crossing the southern Rockies over northern New Mexico, how high can the Aztec cruise? it is a nice plane, if i ever get my license I would like to own one someday. Flying is expensive, I have about 23 hours in a 172, but stopped because of the expense. Where have you flown your Aztec?

[@fastbackflying853]

@@МихаилВишняковский that's really cool and a great way to do some exploring. I have had mine out to the Bahamas and to Oshkosh a couple of times as well as New York City. The east coast of Canada and lots of trips into Quebec. This year's big trip was to Colorado but Covid put a stop to that. I have had mine to 17,000 ft and the POH says it will do 21,000ft. Single engine service ceiling is 8400ft at Gross so that's something to consider when flying over the mountains. Check out some of my short field runway videos! KPSG Albert Whitted is a cool airport in St Petersburg Florida. Farmers Cay in the Bahamas could also be fun for you to check out!

[@pziemann]

I have a '76 turbo and yes high Maintainance - my fuelflow is MUCH higher iow hourly cost - at 10.000 2200/24" about 28gph. Hourly cost easy more than $450 all in all

[@fastbackflying853]

What do you get for a TAS at 10,000 and those power settings?

[@pziemann]

@@fastbackflying853 IAS 126knts - when I increase to 28" I get IAS 136knts (OAT 15.2). Also I cannot lean to peak - the CHTs get to hot. Typically I lean to a TIT 1500-1600 and watch CHTs to remain less than 400. on 2200/24" the fuel burn is 27.8gph and goes to 33.9 with 28" - same story: an 8% increase in IAS at a price of 22% more fuel. At 3.5h cruise you gain 15 minutes or 35nm so about $80 for the 15 minutes savings

[@ozelot250]

Ouch! 😮$$$$$ 💰

[@rogerwilcoshirley2270]

Its just a lot of fun flying twins but ME lessons are essential. Twins are more difficult and there are many small issues that initially can get you and the plane into big trouble until you have enough training and hours to make the automatically required adjustments. Count on 200 hrs in your new twin to become sufficiently & consistently safe and experienced to carry nonpilot friends/family. And no, never skimp on maintenance, you dont want undetected fuel and/or exhaust leaks or improperly torqued landing gear bolts just as 2 examples.

[@fastbackflying853]

Insurance companies are also stopping inexperienced pilots from being able to fly twins so even if you have the license and rating you may not get insurance if you have insufficient experience overall.

[@ozelot250]

I couldn’t afford to own and operate this airplane even if the plane itself was given to me for free. I couldn’t afford the hourly costs of fuel not to mention upkeep. 😞