C172 crashed - Looking for Replacement

T

talkingbob

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
117
Display Name
Display name:
JonC
One of the aircraft in a club that I am in crashed. It was the club's only C172 and it was a 197 "N" model.
Based on the estimated value of such an aircraft, I am guessing that the insurance check will be around $69,000 or maybe a little less.
It wasn't fancy - no ADSB, AP or IFR GPS. Mostly stock equipment that was never really upgraded from 1979.

So...

What would you replace it with? Also, for anyone who has gone through this situation before, how long should I expect it to take to get the new airplane acquired and back on the flight line?

Thanks in advance everyone!
 
C150, and a Cherokee 180.
The 180 was a leaseback and is kinda pricey, and thus, was less popular than the C172 that crashed. The C150 is now being flown more, but that's due to the C172 being offline.
 
That much for an N model? Wow!

Why not just look around for another 172 in good shape with low time engine?

My club recently purchased a 172SP/G1000. I don't know how long it took to close the deal. And, it took 4 days for someone to go get it and fly it back (thanks to weather). Then, CFI's all got first crack at it. After about 1 week from arrival, it was available for check outs.
 
Personal choice but being you have a Cherokee I'd go with a 172, maybe even a 182 for the better load.
 
The engine in the plane had been essentially overhauled less than a year ago and it was a 1979, but still waiting to know the actual amount from insurance. Think it will be closer to 60K?
The president of the club was thinking of just getting another 172. I just didn't know if there was something better out there, like a C177 or maybe a Mooney. Heck, even maybe an experimental?
I don't shop for planes - just fly other's, so not sure what the market is, etc.

My assumption is about 1.5 months until we get the replacement to be ready-to-fly by the club members.
 
Wow. Did not know 4 adults and full fuel could be hauled in a 182. Thanks!
 
talkingbob said:
Wow. Did not know 4 adults and full fuel could be hauled in a 182. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Depends what demographic you’re analyzing. 18 is considered an “adult” and many are lightweight. :D
 
Does a 172-180 fit in the budget? An early one would get you close to the load capacity of a 182 (but not the speed or range).
 
asicer said:
Does a 172-180 fit in the budget? An early one would get you close to the load capacity of a 182 (but not the speed or range).
Click to expand...

Good idea! Forgot those existed. Talked to a guy this summer who had one and and very happy with it and didn't see the need to upgrade to a 182.
 
Wow.
Trade-a-plane did not have many cheap 1980/1979 C172s! Cheapest I found was wanting $52,000.
 
Call me crazy, but I don’t see the point in getting another C172 if you have the Cherokee 180 available. I’d want something with more load capacity (C182, Dakota) or that fills a different niche (tailwheel, aerobatic, amphibian, etc.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Well, that's not enough money for a similar vintage Bonanza, therefore the answer is Grumman Tiger.
 
talkingbob said:
I considered a Tiger, but have no experience with them. Is it easy tr transition to one from a C172/C150?
Click to expand...
They fly somewhat like an Archer except faster. That may or may not be good considering you already have an Archer.
 
When buying our plane we started off looking at 172 with 180hp and Cardinal B models (also 180hp and constant speed prop). No matter how you worked it, with 4 adults and a decent amount of fuel you bust W&B. So we started looking at 182s. Wow...those same 4 adults, plenty of gas, decent baggage and still safe. And you have room! I would think a 182 with a 430 in the panel would be gone every weekend. Expect at least another $20/hr for fuel..but you get there faster. You'll also need/get your HP endorsement. It climbs and short fields like a mofo :) If you can find a decent 182 within $20k of the 172/180 or Cardinal I think you'd be happy. I'm sure there's a low wing equivalent to the 182 as well.
 
Skyrys62 said:
Is it crazy that these are selling for this?

https://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=&make=CESSNA&model=172/180+CONVERSION&listing_id=2288023&s-type=aircraft&s-seq=1&s-lvl=4
Click to expand...

Dang, you can buy real airplane for that kind of money.

OP, how about calling a special club meeting, and get input from the members as to what they'd like to fly. A Cherokee 180 and a 172 are essentially the same class of plane. The local club I used to be a part of now has a 172 and a 182RG, which is a nice combination. The 182 is "in the family" and an easy step up for those used to flying the 172. Had they had the 182RG back then, I might have stayed with the club.
 
FlySince9 said:
THANK-YOU...I thought the pricing of those birds was a bit out of line too... But they're all like that so I guess there's a history of getting at least close to that price... I wonder what's so special... seems for that price a 182 might be a better choice...
Click to expand...

Well, it's under contract so apparently someone thinks it's worth it.

Certainly it has a lot going for it - STEC-55, 430w, 180hp upgrade, great interior, great exterior, clean panel, everything looks updated. But pushing it, I agree it's a 70k airplane at best. With a 200 hour engine, it might be up to 85k.
 
I dunno, the guy in the hangar across from one just got himself a Cessna 172 XP. It cost more than my Mooney, is in worse shape cosmetically, burns more gas and flies more slowly.
 
talkingbob said:
I considered a Tiger, but have no experience with them. Is it easy tr transition to one from a C172/C150?
Click to expand...

I went from a Grumman which was a rental, to my father's Skyhawk. The Grumman is faster in cruise and has more responsive handling. The Cessna's flaps are more effective and has slower approach speeds. Also, there's no nosewheel steering on the Grumman, you use the toe brakes. The Skyhawk is better at short fields, the Tiger is more fun to fly and is faster.

I'd think your club members would be very comfortable in the Grumman after an hour or two of dual.
 
Maybe a Symphony 160? They're faster and more fun to fly and cost about the same to maintain.They're more modern with newer avionics and may be more desirable for a typical club rental.

The only downside is that they're two-seaters but most missions don't have people in the back seat anyway.
 
bflynn said:
Well, it's under contract so apparently someone thinks it's worth it.
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing... I guess that doesn't mean the contract price is exactly the asking price though, so it's speculation at this point.
Several that I have been watching are sold, but don't know how the asking vs. actual price panned out.
 
What are most of your club members doing in the 172? Training for PP? IR? Flying to the beach for the weekend?

That answer will drive the airplane choice.
 
labbadabba said:
Maybe a Symphony 160? They're faster and more fun to fly and cost about the same to maintain.They're more modern with newer avionics and may be more desirable for a typical club rental.

The only downside is that they're two-seaters but most missions don't have people in the back seat anyway.
Click to expand...

It's funny that you mention a Symphony - one of the CFIs in the club has one and was looking for partners! Not sure if he would be open to putting it in the club or not. Personally, I did take two people in the 172 on occasion, so the back seat is nice and the club already has a 150 for local, two-person flights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top