"The point I was making was that the syllabus IS IDENTICAL as far as wear and tear on the aircraft is concerned"
i agree
moreover, a lighter craft will generate lower wear and tear. my ML, which is a 3 axis with decent performance, weights 304kg excluding fuel.
the fuselage is a steel construction. the legs of the landing gear cost 200 euro and they are very hard to bend, really need a crash rather than a hard landing.
so i think it is a fallacy that a trainer must be heavy in order to last. it must be well designed. in fact a lighter trainer, if properly designed, will be even sturdier than a C152, and will be cheaper. if exotic materials are avoided, less weight equal less costs.
in italy there are many P92 with well over 4000 hours of school on them, and they are still in perfect condition.