For Sale 1965 Piper Aztec for Sale

Jeff K

Jeff K

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jan 18, 2013
Messages
380
Location
KBIV
Display Name
Display name:
Jeff King
SOLD 1965 Piper Aztec for Sale

New price, $32,900 for serious buyers,

Detailed Description

1965 C Model Aztec with current annual and regular flier. Excellent flying aircraft. Fully deiced and in good condition. 6 place Oxygen. Excellent compressions. Autopilot N5797Y


Avionics / Equipment

Avionics/Radios
Dual Narco MK12-D Nav/Com/ILS
Castleberry backup electric AI
King KN62 DME
Narco AT50A Transponder
Bendix ADF T12C
Altimatic 2 autopilot

Airframe

Ex Part 135 air charter. 10212 hours.
Full boots, good working condition
Metco Wingtips.
MicroAero VG’s,
Shoulder Belt STC
Diamondaire flap gap seals,
dual altitude indicator with backup electric,
Fine wire plugs,
Concorde AGM battery,
6 place oxygen
Tanis preheaters
Bruce aircraft cover

Engines / Mods / Prop

Engine(s)
611 SMOH Left Engine 72,75,75,76,72,77
1786 SMOH Right Engine 78.77.78.76.74.75

Prop Specs
405 SPOH Left Engine
413 SPOH Right Engine


Remarks

Always hangered
Original factory zinc chromate Low Priced reliable Twin, Build your multi time or great family transportation. Excellent short field aircraft. Paint 5/10, interior 5/10, Many spares. All logs. Last annual 9/2016NW_Side.JPG NE_Side.JPG SE_Side.JPG SW_Side.JPG FrontPanel.JPG Interior.JPG L_Boot.JPG R_Boot.JPG CastleBerry.JPG

517-425-2900 king.robert.j@gmail.com
 

Attachments

  • 1965 Piper Aztec for Sale.pdf
    4.1 MB · Views: 12
Last edited:
Radar Contact said:
If you're Austin Powers. ;)
Click to expand...

I like that original look. I was looking at some Bellanca Super Vikings last year and loved the planes that had original interior and hated the ones that were redone. I guess kinda like repainting a 70's Cessna. They look great with the original scheme buy not so good with a 2010 scheme. Maybe its just me?
 
pigpenracing said:
I like that original look. I was looking at some Bellanca Super Vikings last year and loved the planes that had original interior and hated the ones that were redone. I guess kinda like repainting a 70's Cessna. They look great with the original scheme buy not so good with a 2010 scheme. Maybe its just me?
Click to expand...

I'm with you.

Some airplane's are like that. I have a friend on the coast with a Super Vike and his original interior with the yellow & dark brown cloth seat inserts is in great condition considering the age of the aircraft...and it just seems to fit the plane better than any of the redone (mostly monochrome leather) interiors I've seen in them.

This Aztec 'C' looks like it's been modified as the nose appears extended with the addition of the forward baggage compartment. That's some sort of aftermarket mod I believe, as the 'C' had the landing light in the center of the nose.
 
Last edited:
"That interior looks a lot better than the 5/10 you give it."
Radar Contact said:
If you're Austin Powers. ;)
Click to expand...

Ha ha.... yeah pretty much.... the interior is original I believe and this was the swinging 60's. I bought the airplane from an FBO owner who was shutting down, and he owned it for 35 years. Just air taxi work, no training from what he told me so he took good care of it. I think there is one small tear. I have some spare material.
 
steingar said:
Seems like a whole lot of airplane for not a lot of money.
Click to expand...

I feel that way also. As a class the Aztec's get a bad rap and it's reflected in the prices. And I feel very much unjustified *if* you understand a few things. It's a grown up Apache airframe with 200HP more power. I fly it at ~50% power and my fuel burn is ~20gph and I flight plan at 160kts. The engines are derated to 250hp and it's quite common to exceed the 2000hr SMOH. The airframe/engine is already certified for 91/96 Avgas from the factory and the Swiftfuel 94UL works in it (with STC). And parts are easy, lots of surplus stock out there and then there is ebay/scrap yards. I only had an issue once with a part, the cowl flap cable and I had that made for me as an owner produced part. The dispatch reliability was quite good.

It's a pickup truck/mom's SUV kind of airplane. The closest I ever got to gross was 200lbs and that was with full fuel and 6 seats full. We called it the "Honey Badger". The only reason I am selling it is two of my kids moved out and the wife liked the big back doors of my old Cherokee 6 so I got a Baron 58. It's not an easy decision but I don't need two twins.
 
GRG55 said:
This Aztec 'C' looks like it's been modified as the nose appears extended with the addition of the forward baggage compartment. That's some sort of aftermarket mod I believe, as the 'C' had the landing light in the center of the nose.
Click to expand...

Radome. I didn't list the radar because it's currently inop I do have many spares for it including a new head, new RF unit and another antenna. So I imagine you could get it working again. Here is a video of the radar when it was working. I actually liked it because I could weave my way around downpours as XM was too delayed for that.

 
MIFlyer said:
Does the c have a zero fuel weight?
Click to expand...

I thought it did, 4400lbs but not seeing it in the POH, I'll dig around but here is the POH
 

Attachments

  • PA23-250-C-POH.pdf
    2.2 MB · Views: 14
Thanks this might be an issue where they didn't post the updates to the old versions of poh. Regardless that's just over 1200 in people and stuff with 800 left for fuel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I generally found with the Aztec it was an "If it fits, it ships" sort of aircraft. They're great airplanes. Not fast or tremendously efficient, but can get in and out of anywhere and have the most generous cabin for any non cabin class twin out there.
 
What's the loading process like on the Aztec? Is it just the single passenger side door?
 
deonb said:
Isn't the Seneca larger?
Click to expand...

No, the interior on a Seneca is significantly smaller, as is the useful load. The Seneca has club seating for the rear and the big doors for the rear passengers, whereas the Aztec only has the standard door by the front passenger and then a large rear baggage door behind all the seats. This difference is what often makes the Seneca more popular.
 
I had a PA32-260 before the Aztec, the PA32 has the same cabin as the Seneca. The Aztec is significantly more comfortable than the PA32/PA34. One big thing is you sit fully upright in the Aztec, the Seneca's seats (non club seating) are low to the floorpan.

Now the Seneca/PA32 big rear doors.... don't have that in a Aztec. But once loaded your passengers will prefer the Aztec over PA32 seating.
 
New price, $32,900 for serious buyers,
 
Shish- at that price, I'm trying to figure out how I could hide it from my wife!
 
Jeff K said:
It fit's in a standard T hangar.
Click to expand...

Someone I know used to own a '66 'C'. Kept it in a t-hanger with enough span and height, but not quite long enough. So he cut semi-circular holes where the doors met at center and about a foot of the schnoz of the airplane stuck out in the breeze with the doors closed. Flew that plane all over North America, the Caribbean including Cuba.

He moved on to flying Navajos but refused to part with the Aztec. Reluctantly sold it after buying his first King Air.
 
GRG55 said:
Someone I know used to own a '66 'C'. Kept it in a t-hanger with enough span and height, but not quite long enough. So he cut semi-circular holes where the doors met at center and about a foot of the schnoz of the airplane stuck out in the breeze with the doors closed.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of this hangar design:
upload_2017-8-30_13-31-2.png

upload_2017-8-30_13-30-50.png

upload_2017-8-30_13-31-20.png
 
While ill advised by some, owning a twin is something on my bucket list. Less than $33k seems like a great deal to me for a twin. :D
 
Matthew K said:
While ill advised by some, owning a twin is something on my bucket list. Less than $33k seems like a great deal to me for a twin. :D
Click to expand...

You could do a lot worse than an Aztec as a first twin. I spent about a year researching and test flying every comparable type before I decided on an Aztec. The engines are robust, the useful load (it'll lift a ton, literally!) means you don't leave anything behind, single engine work is surprisingly unexciting, stall speed clean is 61 kts, 55 kts with the flaps out, and you are safely above the 64 kt Vmc before you leave the ground. Short field, grass or good gravel strips are no issue. It's a solid, stable IFR platform, and better in ice than almost any of its comparables. The 'C' is lighter and a bit faster in cruise than my later model 'F'.

I am 6'4", 235 lbs and easy cabin ingress/egress and comfort is very high on my list of must haves. I find the chair-like seating position in my Aztec far more comfortable than our flying club's Seneca 2. The Aztec doesn't look as sexy as a 310 or as sleek as a Baron and is unloved and underrated in the market, and imo those that have been flown regularly and maintained properly are uncommon value.
 
Last edited:
Please tell me no-one around ATL area is thinking about a 2 or 3-way partnership...?
 
Had to give up getting my multi-engine this year, but in a perfect world this would be an excellent opportunity had I 40K ish in the bank to cover acquisition, taxes, and a pre-buy. Sucks..but hopefully someone will get lucky :).
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I generally found with the Aztec it was an "If it fits, it ships" sort of aircraft. They're great airplanes. Not fast or tremendously efficient, but can get in and out of anywhere and have the most generous cabin for any non cabin class twin out there.
Click to expand...

Ahem, Twin Bonanza?
 
bradg33 said:
Ahem, Twin Bonanza?
Click to expand...

Good point. I suppose I consider the T-Bone to be more or less cabin class, or at least "really frickin' big".
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Good point. I suppose I consider the T-Bone to be more or less cabin class, or at least "really frickin' big".
Click to expand...

Fair point, but to me, cabin class = air stair and an isle. So, some later model or converted Twin Bonanzas are "cabin class," some (like mine) are just "really frickin' big"
 
bradg33 said:
Fair point, but to me, cabin class = air stair and an isle. So, some later model or converted Twin Bonanzas are "cabin class," some (like mine) are just "really frickin' big"
Click to expand...

I consider myself corrected. :)
 
mtuomi said:
Please tell me no-one around ATL area is thinking about a 2 or 3-way partnership...?
Click to expand...

Looking at setting up a partnership in Atlanta, but not in a twin. There are many nice things about a twin, but 25-30 gph isn't one of them. :eek: Then engine/mx reserves for two of everything. :oops: Now, it is nice to have two when one thing decides to fail. Lost ALT1 on a SR22, continued to the destination (only 10+ min), then drove back. :( Lost an alternator (on two different flights) on a Baron and just kept going, no big deal; VMC weather. :)

If I just wanted to build a bunch of multi time and hope nothing big failed in the interim it would be a sweet deal. That's not my mission.
 
bradg33 said:
Ahem, Twin Bonanza?
Click to expand...
Now that is an airplane. Good short field etc, a civilized cabin and will haul almost as much weight wise as a Aztec. I looked at a couple when I was first in the market. What ruled it out is it wouldn't fit in any of our T hangars. I'm not about to own any airplane and just tie it down. The other concern would be part's. They made thousands of Aztec's so parts have never been an issue. But make no mistake, my wife fell in love with the Twin Bonanza when we were first looking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top