ready for the "told ya so"

jaybee said:
pfffft

you can buy a "remanufactured" "zero time" engine straight from Continental and it may have 10000 hours on the crankcase for all you know but everyone feels all fuzzy warm about it because its "zero time" and "remanufactured" PT Barnum and all that jazz
Click to expand...
Exactly, "zero time" in many cases doesn't actually mean "zero time." I want a specific breakdown of the OH'ed parts.
 
labbadabba said:
I'm curious, in the ad, did he advertize the engine as 1,500SMOH or 1,500TT?

Because if it is 1,500SMOH and 5,100 TT that seems more legit me. If the engine isn't factory overhauled or new, it won't be zero-timed. If it is the case where it is 1,500SMOH/5,100 TT I wouldn't feel too weirded out especially if you had an A&P do a pre-buy inspection on the thing. Typically in ads you only see the TSOH times and not the total time on the engine unless it's really low.

The O-300 is smooth as silk but a little under-powered I think for a 172. You have those two extra jugs to deal with.
Click to expand...
What does two more cylinders really mean to the owner? really it's just 4 more plugs to buy every 500 hours. the engine is still cheaper to overhaul than the Lycoming 0-360-
 
Ryanb said:
Exactly, "zero time" in many cases doesn't actually mean "zero time." I want a specific breakdown of the OH'ed parts.
Click to expand...
When I overhaul your engine you'll know what was put in it, because you'll buy it on your C/C.
And if it doesn't measure new standard you buying a new one if it can't be machined to approved size.
 
I am thinking more and more that this might be a good airplane for you, Matt. Flying 200 hours over the past 3 years sounds good. If it did not require a lot of maintenance during those 200 hours and at $17,500, I think I would go for it if you like the airplane. A Tri-Pacer is, I think, a fabric airplane. Okay in a hangar, but not so much outside.
 
somorris said:
I am thinking more and more that this might be a good airplane for you, Matt. Flying 200 hours over the past 3 years sounds good. If it did not require a lot of maintenance during those 200 hours and at $17,500, I think I would go for it if you like the airplane. A Tri-Pacer is, I think, a fabric airplane. Okay in a hangar, but not so much outside.
Click to expand...

Pacer is a great aircraft and a really good bang for the buck.

As far as fabric goes, better not tell that to the tons of fabric planes that live outside in AK o_O

Hangar is always better, doesn't matter what the plane is made from, but I wouldn't say fabric, especially the man made stuff you see on 90% of the fleet, is any worse than metal, infact in many ways it's better.
 
Matt, have you run the engine and taken it for a test flight? Does it fly straight? Has your mechanic heard it run and given it a thumbs up? I was thinking 200 hrs over 3 years is pretty good; I bet I have pretty close to those numbers on mine for the same time period and my higher-time O-300 purrs.
 
If everything checked out during the pre buy, why not negotiate a reasonable offer? Yes, the engine may be on borrowed time, but the airframe is solid and you like this specimen. Just don't be too upset when it's time to hang a new power plant on it. Enjoy the ride!
 
Last edited:
Wow! What a roller coaster ride. I bought it this evening for 14K. Needs new interior all the rest is quite serviceable.

Yes to Greg per above my AP IA gave it a solid thumbs up. Bill - yes thanks.

Some of you have been with me here since the first thread I posted about this plane and through this thread as well. Thank you for the insights and guidance. This was a great help in weighing out my decision. I know it's not the plane that many of you would choose, but I realize that I can't have champagne taste on the proverbial beer budget or maybe Gulfstream taste on the Piper budget. I really want to convey my appreciation.

4416l.JPG
My first airplane ownership endeavor.

Also, a million thanks to my wife for not leaving me through the search....
 
Interior is cheap to do. Airtex or TN Wings should get you sorted for new upholstery and carpet for 1k-ish.
 
looking forward to it
 
I used to buy Lycoming factory overhauls. They often had thousands of hours on them. They'd be zero since overhaul, maybe 7000 TT. If I had bought a factory remanufactured engine, it would be zero TT even if it had thousands of hours on it; only the factory can do that, since it means that all parts must meet new specs. Even the overhauled engines only had, in most cases, the original crankcase and sometimes the crank; almost everyting else was new. They ran just fine.

When it comes to old out-of-production models like the O-300, get used to big TTs. Not much choice there.

I have yet to come across a "cheap old airplane."
 
Congratulations Matt. I hope you enjoy your C-172G as much as we did the one we used to have. And, I hope your maintenance experience is similar (annuals, oil changes and new plugs was about it). It sounds like a really good buy to me.
 
Dan Thomas said:
I used to buy Lycoming factory overhauls. They often had thousands of hours on them. They'd be zero since overhaul, maybe 7000 TT. If I had bought a factory remanufactured engine, it would be zero TT even if it had thousands of hours on it; only the factory can do that, since it means that all parts must meet new specs. Even the overhauled engines only had, in most cases, the original crankcase and sometimes the crank; almost everyting else was new. They ran just fine.
Click to expand...

When I last spoke with a Lycoming rep it sounded like even the cases were new on their factory overhauls these days. Basically a brand new engine for the overhaul price.

Dan Thomas said:
When it comes to old out-of-production models like the O-300, get used to big TTs. Not much choice there.
Click to expand...

Indeed. When it comes time to overhaul you could potentially shop around for a lower total time engine but why bother? They're all going to be getting up there.

As a side note, one of the local flight schools had an engine with four or five stamps from Divco on the spine of the case. I can only imagine how many hours total time were on that engine by the time I was around it. It still ran fine.

Dan Thomas said:
I have yet to come across a "cheap old airplane."
Click to expand...

I've come to realize that airplanes are like houses. No matter how new or old they are, they're all a project and all need cash infusions from time to time. :)
 
mondtster said:
I've come to realize that airplanes are like houses. No matter how new or old they are, they're all a project and all need cash infusions from time to time. :)
Click to expand...

More like "classic" cars... similar vintage for most of the fleet, too. It applies pretty well.

Congrats on the airplane purchase.
 
mondtster said:
Indeed. When it comes time to overhaul you could potentially shop around for a lower total time engine but why bother? They're all going to be getting up there.
Click to expand...
There are 170/ early 172 guys buying 0-300-A's just to get the cranks, they might buy 3 just to find a good crank.
 
Matt C said:
Wow! What a roller coaster ride. I bought it this evening for 14K. Needs new interior all the rest is quite serviceable.
Click to expand...
Good on ya,, have fun !
 
mondtster said:
I've come to realize that airplanes are like houses. No matter how new or old they are, they're all a project and all need cash infusions from time to time. :)
Click to expand...
4oPuCX2-1.jpg
 
Reported to be $45,000 per hour to operate. I'm expecting about the same.
 
Owners don't count hourly operating costs (I still do, but it's pointless).
Hourly cost is kinda pointless. You have hourly cost of gas and oil and reserves, and you have fixed costs for insurance etc. The only reason you need to think about total hourly cost is when you compare against renting, but then I urge you to count things like minimum daily hours etc. You'll take missions you could/would not do in a rental. And that's priceless.
 
Sort of like a wife. If you totalled up the hourly cost, you'd go nuts. However, just knowing that you are the only one (ahem) flying her is worth it.

Then again, the old maxim is that if it has tires, +i+$, or +e$+icle$ it is going to cost you and give you trouble.

Jim
 
mtuomi said:
Owners don't count hourly operating costs (I still do, but it's pointless).
Hourly cost is kinda pointless. You have hourly cost of gas and oil and reserves, and you have fixed costs for insurance etc. The only reason you need to think about total hourly cost is when you compare against renting, but then I urge you to count things like minimum daily hours etc. You'll take missions you could/would not do in a rental. And that's priceless.
Click to expand...
looking back over the years to money spent, over the burgers bought, I had the cost of a burger worked down to about $10,000 each.
 
This thread makes me happy. Ignore the interior. Fly it for a year, then figure out what to do with it. You'll know if you want to keep it and fix it up by then, or sell it. For now, just have fun with it.

And post more pictures.
 
tawood said:
So....?
Click to expand...

Skyhawks were the 172 on steroids. The Skyhawk came stock with wheel pants, more insulation, upgrade upholstery, and all that upscale crap ... and a real, honest to God ... 90 channel VHF com radio. I don't know if wheel pants were an option on the 172 or not, but they were definitely an option, not standard equipment. Same same with 182/Skylane and most of the Cessna singles lineup.

My '58 182A was $7k bare-bones coming out of the Wichita spamworks, but by the time it went through the Skylane conversion it was $17k -- in 1958 dollars ($112K in 2016 dollars).

If I ever sell her, I'll simply ask for her original purchase price $17k ... in face value USA silver coins.

Jim
 
Last edited:
FredFenster said:
Wow, no corrosion and it runs for 14 grand, you did well!
Click to expand...
I've been feeling awkward about divulging the price, maybe it's not very gentlemanly. I think he (seller) was being generous. Thanks.
 
UngaWunga said:
This thread makes me happy. Ignore the interior. Fly it for a year, then figure out what to do with it. You'll know if you want to keep it and fix it up by then, or sell it. For now, just have fun with it

And post more pictures.
Click to expand...
4416l i.JPG
Yep - no hurry to pretty it up for me.

I haven't seen it in the daylight since I bought it so no good pics yet. This is probably the clearest one I took in the dark hangar. I will post more when I get some....
 
mtuomi said:
Owners don't count hourly operating costs (I still do, but it's pointless).
Hourly cost is kinda pointless. You have hourly cost of gas and oil and reserves, and you have fixed costs for insurance etc. The only reason you need to think about total hourly cost is when you compare against renting, but then I urge you to count things like minimum daily hours etc. You'll take missions you could/would not do in a rental. And that's priceless.
Click to expand...
I intend to fly for a year, add everything together and then calculate the hourly backwards just for curiosity. You and others have said it here already - there is a value in not dealing with the rental system any more as well as co-owners. (big grin here)
 
You've got 4-5k worth of radios and indicators in that panel. You pretty much bought an engine core and a radio stack. The fact that they are attached to a working and flying airplane is all just a bonus :)
 
mtuomi said:
You've got 4-5k worth of radios and indicators in that panel. You pretty much bought an engine core and a radio stack. The fact that they are attached to a working and flying airplane is all just a bonus :)
Click to expand...
Yep, its part of what kept my attention. We're waiting for about a week of bad weather to clear out now so I can go give it a workout with my CFI buddy. They're predicting two snowstorms in a row over the next 4-6 days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top