Story of My Failed Negotiation on C182

wabower said:
Finding and buying the best one available (of whatever) is often a viable strategy when measuring total ownership-cycle cost. The bottom-dwellers will never understand it, so they will continue to fish there.
Click to expand...


Am I wrong not to value a bunch of avionics that I don't need or some "rich Corinthian leather" that I don't need?

My goal is a safe, VFR plane, one that my employees can ride in with boots on and dirty clothes. One that I can stuff dead animals in during October. And one that can get me to small strips 200 miles away for business. Last week a buddy and I took his 180 out I'm the middle of nowhere, buzzed an old 2-track landing strip to get the cows off the runway and waited for a rancher to come get us.

Isn't the "best one available" going to be equipped for missions much different than mine?
 
denverpilot said:
Back to the OP's deal... If you remove the $8K the Garmin is worth, used... Not including labor, that means that 182 is a $27K airplane deal with a 900 hour engine.

Pretty amazing how low it is. Guy could start parting it out for that. Engine is almost worth more than the airframe at that combined price.
Click to expand...


That is pretty accurate. The engine and the Garmin were the two selling points, and the engine needed a cylinder.

Well, and the fact I would not be compelled to look for a hangar to store it.

That being said, likely could have flown it for years and not suffered much depreciation.
 
douglas393 said:
To me the advantage of the 182 versus the Bonanza is the high wing. I just like that the high wing allows me to see the scenery below me much better. Not a big issue when flying IFR, but when flying VFR, I find it comforting to look down below and see the scenery.
Click to expand...

Other plane I was considering was a Maule. Maybe there is something to the high wing.
 
Buy whatever you want. I was responding to Alex re his post about strategy and total cost, and stand by the statement.

JoseCuervo said:
Am I wrong not to value a bunch of avionics that I don't need or some "rich Corinthian leather" that I don't need?

My goal is a safe, VFR plane, one that my employees can ride in with boots on and dirty clothes. One that I can stuff dead animals in during October. And one that can get me to small strips 200 miles away for business. Last week a buddy and I took his 180 out I'm the middle of nowhere, buzzed an old 2-track landing strip to get the cows off the runway and waited for a rancher to come get us.

Isn't the "best one available" going to be equipped for missions much different than mine?
Click to expand...
 
JoseCuervo said:
I also want to haul dead animals out of back country strips. Can a BO do that?


(By the way, a couple of the ones you linked are sweet.)
Click to expand...

Problem. No carcass hauling in the Bo. :sad:

Then again, if you got a chain saw....:yikes:

That green one is pretty tasty. Looks like it's been loved.
 
JoseCuervo said:
Round number guesses on how much extra the insurance on a Bo is vs. the 182?

How much more expensive is the annual on a Bo vs the 182?
Click to expand...

I had zero complex and zero high performance time. 250tt vfr only and for 75K hull my first year insurance was 1600. Went down a couple hundred after 100hrs in it. Agent said overall rates were up though. Add about 4 hours to the annual for the gear. There's what appears to be a nice N35 for sale in Mississippi priced right. N/P Bos would be my starting point for buying, i dont like the fuel tank setup on the M, but the fuel tank setup on the N onward are where the aft CG issues started. id steer clear of the carbed versions I like my Bonanza better than a comparable 182. I'm sure Wayne likes his 180 better than a comparable Bonanza. Apples, oranges.
 
docmirror said:
Problem. No carcass hauling in the Bo. :sad:

Then again, if you got a chain saw....:yikes:

That green one is pretty tasty. Looks like it's been loved.
Click to expand...

That green one is the one in MS I've been eyeballing. I don't anticipate it being on the market long unless there's something seriously wrong with it.
 
Alexb2000 said:
I would rather spend $50K or $60K or whatever the market demands to get a bird that someone loves, spends whatever money is required to keep it right, and fly it themselves with their loved ones aboard. .
Click to expand...

Agreed! It's going to be a "Pay now or pay later" anyway so why not buy the aircraft that has been maintained, has the equipment you want and is ready to go? Let someone else take the financial hit upfront to equip the plane the way they like it. In most cases it will be a bargain later to someone....
 
I like the C-180 for what I do now, and because of some of the sentimental "full circle" aspects of a 50-some year association with GA that started in one. It has a big engine, L/R tanks and a nice panel and I've literally flown tail-draggers since day one.

If I were running the bank or some other business again I'd have kept the King Air or bought another one. If I were commuting weekly from Dallas to KC by myself again I'd get get an air-conditioned FIKI retrac again. 210 or Bo-36, maybe S-35 that was my all-time favorite travel 4-seater other than the doofus wing-crawl-drop-scroochover-pilot-gets-in-first entry.


bartmc said:
I had zero complex and zero high performance time. 250tt vfr only and for 75K hull my first year insurance was 1600. Went down a couple hundred after 100hrs in it. Agent said overall rates were up though. Add about 4 hours to the annual for the gear. There's what appears to be a nice N35 for sale in Mississippi priced right. N/P Bos would be my starting point for buying, i dont like the fuel tank setup on the M, but the fuel tank setup on the N onward are where the aft CG issues started. id steer clear of the carbed versions I like my Bonanza better than a comparable 182. I'm sure Wayne likes his 180 better than a comparable Bonanza. Apples, oranges.
Click to expand...
 
Deal sounded pretty reasonable to me, actually. Seller had a ratty plane that needed gone badly and a sucker ready to give him a check. I bet that plane won't be worth as much to the next sucker having sat out of annual.

Glad it turned out OK anyway. Can't put a price on time spend pleasantly with friends. Good luck getting the deal you want.
 
bartmc said:
That green one is the one in MS I've been eyeballing. I don't anticipate it being on the market long unless there's something seriously wrong with it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I think the OP would let one of his messy boot-wearing carcass-dragging buddies in it and scuff the carpet. We can't have that... :D

I think I have a bias against Cessna having never owned one, or had much time in any of them. I sure like the Cardinal for what it does, but the 172/182/210s do nothing for me. I don't drive a Chevy Lumina car, and that's what I think of when I think 'generic plane'. I don't know how you get a carcass in a C182, but the bag door on the early Bo is pretty small. At some point in the build they got larger but I still think it would be a job to get a carcass and three adults in anything. Of course, the rear seats pop out of the Bo in a few minutes, so if you wanted to haul something big it could be done, but the big baggage door would be better.

Many Cessna owners think the gear mx and trouble that they have extends to the rest of the mfg. I consider the Bo gear to be the best of all single retracts, even over the Mooney Johnson bar. I've had my share of investigation and mx on them and while it's not perfect, I would say it's far better than the Cessna retract deal. If you keep the uplock rollers clean and lubed it'll give great service without a hiccup. I found out that you can fit the Airhawk 7.00x6 6ply tire in the main gear well which helps with off field work. I also tended to keep the nose gear overinflated a bit to get the prop up higher in the Bo and never worried about hitting anything with it.
 
docmirror said:
If you keep the uplock rollers clean and lubed it'll give great service without a hiccup.
Click to expand...

Anybody can play that game. Name three components that if you keep them in good condition you'll virtually never have a Cessna gear problem. Go. ;)

(Give John Frank a call at CPA if you don't know. He covers it in his courses.)

The reality is, they're all pretty good if kept in proper maintenance, and there's plenty of folk who won't keep anything in proper maintenance.
 
CT Arrow said:
Agreed! It's going to be a "Pay now or pay later" anyway so why not buy the aircraft that has been maintained, has the equipment you want and is ready to go? Let someone else take the financial hit upfront to equip the plane the way they like it. In most cases it will be a bargain later to someone....
Click to expand...

What is the "pay me later" requirement ?

A VFR plane that has a mid-time engine?

Even if wanted a new paint job, pull the Garmin out and sell it. Break even. . . . . . Almost.


I have never spent a single dollar on custom wheels and tires on a vehicle. I just don't care what my transportation looks like, only that it is reliable. What is this "equipment you want"?
 
steingar said:
Deal sounded pretty reasonable to me, actually. Seller had a ratty plane that needed gone badly and a sucker ready to give him a check. I bet that plane won't be worth as much to the next sucker having sat out of annual.

Glad it turned out OK anyway. Can't put a price on time spend pleasantly with friends. Good luck getting the deal you want.
Click to expand...


I hate to think of myself as a sucker. I do too many transactions, on a frequent basis for far more than $35k. Hopefully I come out on the "correct" side of the transactions more often than not.

Maybe I should have described my buddy as an "expert" and said I was paying him with something other than a bottle of Bourbon, although it was Black Maple Hill. It is all good, and the main point of the story was that during negotiations, sometimes people push back on one too many small things, and the deal gets sunk.

FYI, the plane is now in my buddy's shop, undergoing the $3000 annual that we knew it needed, financed entirely by the Seller/Owner. He now has to compete to sell it with the plane referenced earlier of another poster's hangar mate and the 182 I found with the guy losing his medical.
 
docmirror said:
Agreed. I think the OP would let one of his messy boot-wearing carcass-dragging buddies in it and scuff the carpet. We can't have that... :D

I think I have a bias against Cessna having never owned one, or had much time in any of them. I sure like the Cardinal for what it does, but the 172/182/210s do nothing for me. I don't drive a Chevy Lumina car, and that's what I think of when I think 'generic plane'. I don't know how you get a carcass in a C182, but the bag door on the early Bo is pretty small. At some point in the build they got larger but I still think it would be a job to get a carcass and three adults in anything. Of course, the rear seats pop out of the Bo in a few minutes, so if you wanted to haul something big it could be done, but the big baggage door would be better.

Many Cessna owners think the gear mx and trouble that they have extends to the rest of the mfg. I consider the Bo gear to be the best of all single retracts, even over the Mooney Johnson bar. I've had my share of investigation and mx on them and while it's not perfect, I would say it's far better than the Cessna retract deal. If you keep the uplock rollers clean and lubed it'll give great service without a hiccup. I found out that you can fit the Airhawk 7.00x6 6ply tire in the main gear well which helps with off field work. I also tended to keep the nose gear overinflated a bit to get the prop up higher in the Bo and never worried about hitting anything with it.
Click to expand...

Trying to keep up with the pros and cons.

Does the fuel savings on a Bo ever offset the annual and the insurance costs? Or, are those three items immaterial in the big picture of owning a 182 or a Bo?
 
JoseCuervo said:
I hate to think of myself as a sucker. I do too many transactions, on a frequent basis for far more than $35k. Hopefully I come out on the "correct" side of the transactions more often than not.
Click to expand...

Happiest days of an aircraft owners life and all.
 
I think you could pick out a 3-year or possibly 5-year time period that a retrac vs fixed-gear MX budget would be reasonably close. Over time the simple airplane will win. Stuff that's not on the airplane can't break.

Once the pilot is sufficiently experienced and trained, the insurance differences typically aren't show-stoppers, although the carriers clearly understand the frequency of gear-up incidents and include them in the premiums.

Alleged fuel savings in terms of hourly burn are suspect and depend on usage, trip distances and other factors that muddy the analytical waters. If mogas is available at the pump and your plane can use it, the cost/gal spread over LL can be substantial. If schlepping it to the plane in jerry cans is included as part of the "benefit" analysis, you must decide if that's something you want to do. I don't. That said, I haven't bought 20 gallons of fuel at my home base in 10 years, simply because it's $2-3/gal cheaper almost everywhere I go and with 96-gal tanks I can tanker enough to make it work without working too hard.



JoseCuervo said:
Trying to keep up with the pros and cons.

Does the fuel savings on a Bo ever offset the annual and the insurance costs? Or, are those three items immaterial in the big picture of owning a 182 or a Bo?
Click to expand...
 
Ten dollar av gas and six dollar car gas are in your near future.
A fifty to one hundred percent rise in your health insurance premium is also a sure thing.
What will you be able to sell your plane/boat for then?
Plan ahead fellas.
 
Dr. O said:
Ten dollar av gas and six dollar car gas are in your near future.
A fifty to one hundred percent rise in your health insurance premium is also a sure thing.
What will you be able to sell your plane/boat for then?
Plan ahead fellas.
Click to expand...

I plan to sell mine to the newvo rich foreigners. Seriously. Having an aircraft with some international appeal isn't a bad idea IMO.
 
I did the math on the fixed gear versus retract. The results of my analysis based on miles/yr led me to the conclusion that the cost differentials on operation/mx are practically immaterial even for the most aggressive of mission profiles (say, my 25,200NM/yr mission set two years ago). The only thing that makes a lick of difference is acquisition cost. So buy the cheapest airplane that can do what you want it to do to the level of comfort that you want. Pays thou's moneys and go fly. The rest is ballwash.
 
docmirror said:
It hauls as much as the equivalent year 182, so if you're leaving things on the ground with the Bo, you'll leave the same things behind with a 182. If you're out of CG with the Bo, move someone to a different seat, or put a bag on the floor. my experience is that exceeding fwd CG is more common with some heavyweights in the plane.

Now, if you need to get out of a 900ft strip, maybe the Bo won't be your choice. But, if you're working out of 900ft, I don't want to go in with a 182 either.
Click to expand...

Plenty of places I would gladly take my 182 that would be bad juju for a Bo, but I'd go 180/185 if that was truly my mission.
 
wabower said:
And we'll ignore all of the retrac issues and pilot qual because they don't matter either. Just find a drunk mechanic and good to go.
Click to expand...

Pilot qual issues? If you're gonna wreck a Bo, you're gonna wreck a 182. Both planes are dirt simple to fly, the Bo much lighter in the controls for people with low upper body strength, both have have gotchas in the gear. The Bo has retract gear you have to remember to operate, and the 182 has weak gear under a heavy nose. I've seen and repaired more nose gear collapses on 182s than gear ups on Bos, YMMV.
 
Henning said:
Pilot qual issues? If you're gonna wreck a Bo, you're gonna wreck a 182. Both planes are dirt simple to fly, the Bo much lighter in the controls for people with low upper body strength, both have have gotchas in the gear. The Bo has retract gear you have to remember to operate, and the 182 has weak gear under a heavy nose. I've seen and repaired more nose gear collapses on 182s than gear ups on Bos, YMMV.
Click to expand...

Do firewall replacements, if done correctly (30 years ago) cause you any concern or hesitation on a 182?
 
hindsight2020 said:
I did the math on the fixed gear versus retract. The results of my analysis based on miles/yr led me to the conclusion that the cost differentials on operation/mx are practically immaterial even for the most aggressive of mission profiles (say, my 25,200NM/yr mission set two years ago). The only thing that makes a lick of difference is acquisition cost. So buy the cheapest airplane that can do what you want it to do to the level of comfort that you want. Pays thou's moneys and go fly. The rest is ballwash.
Click to expand...

I am guessing the fuel savings won't amount to much. And the annual and the insurance are rounding errors (insurance, at least). But, saving a couple of hundred a month might motivate me to secure a hangar.


Dr. O said:
Ten dollar av gas and six dollar car gas are in your near future.
A fifty to one hundred percent rise in your health insurance premium is also a sure thing.
What will you be able to sell your plane/boat for then?
Plan ahead fellas.
Click to expand...

I'll let you plan ahead and figure out what to do when the Communists Arabs Black Helicopters Liberals take over the country and enslave us all.

In the meantime, I will enjoy planes, boats, and hot girl friends with fantastic boob jobs.... :yes: ;)
 
JoseCuervo said:
Trying to keep up with the pros and cons.

Does the fuel savings on a Bo ever offset the annual and the insurance costs? Or, are those three items immaterial in the big picture of owning a 182 or a Bo?
Click to expand...

Prolly not. The fact is, that most Bo owners push the knob all the way in and leave it there running ROP. Gas costs are secondary to speed. But, given the same exact speeds the Bo will save some gas money. Maybe a wash, or you may be a bit higher with the ins and mx on the Bo after deducting fuel.

I was paying $1190 for my old Bo for ins for the first two years, then it went down to $960 for $33k hull and 1 mil liability. As for the mx on the Bo, typically you'll go 3-5 years with just a jack, and retract test. About every 4/5 years you'll need to replace a bushing, or a roller, or something. The really expensive stuff is in the gearbox and it's so bulletproof it's the same basic gear box on the Baron 55 and 58 as well as the twin Bo. The motor brushes are from a 52 Pontiac windshield wiper motor, the limit switches are easily avail in any airplane junk yard. The struts can be rebuilt with new seals for about $60 in materials and maybe 3-4 hours each strut(once off the plane), but they last a long time.

Still, I think the running costs of the Bo will be a bit higher than a 182 despite the savings in gas, provided you throttle back.
 
JoseCuervo said:
Do firewall replacements, if done correctly (30 years ago) cause you any concern or hesitation on a 182?
Click to expand...

Nope, not a bit, you're just as likely to collapse a repaired one as a new one.;) The best way to protect your firewall is with a Katmai kit.
 
JoseCuervo said:
What is the "pay me later" requirement?
Click to expand...
It is not a requirement. It simply means that at some point you will need to spend money on something that was deferred or missed or was not important at the time of purchase.

JoseCuervo said:
A VFR plane that has a mid-time engine? "?
Click to expand...
So it has a mid time engine. Has it been taken care of? Have all the SB- AD been taken care of? Compressions? Does it make Metal?

JoseCuervo said:
Even if wanted a new paint job, pull the Garmin out and sell it. Break even. . . . . . Almost. "?
Click to expand...
It depends.... Garmins's are a dime a dozen and are cheap especially if there non-waas. Don't assume the "garmin" will help you break even.
Paint is important because it offers protection from corroision.

JoseCuervo said:
I have never spent a single dollar on custom wheels and tires on a vehicle. I just don't care what my transportation looks like, only that it is reliable. What is this "equipment you want"?
Click to expand...

Again, as you mentioned earlier it is about the mission and what do you need to perform the mission? Nobody says you need a new 182 with shiny paint. Clearly that's not what you say you need. But if your buying a cheap piece of ****, then expect to have problems. You do get what you pay for!
 
Last edited:
CT Arrow said:
Again, as you mentioned earlier it is about the mission and what do you need to perform the mission? Nobody says you need a new 182 with shiny paint. Clearly that's not what you say you need. But if your buying a cheap piece of ****, then expect to have problems. You do get what you pay for!
Click to expand...


Did I say 182?? Oops, I meant a 1967 King Air 90.

The guy wants $350k for it, I offered to split the annual, and 50/50 on the first $40k in repairs.

He countered back he wanted me to pay for the annual for $10k so that I would have "skin in the game". I said what the hell, not going to lose the plane over $5k.

But, if he did walk from the deal and didn't want to do the $40k in repairs, then I wanted my $10k back, as I am not going to do an annual for somebody else's King Air.


EEAC1C8C-5779-408D-AB64-CA8BB20D25D2-500x379.jpg



So, I walked, and he now has another $3k per month in interest, $1500 a month in insurance, etc....


Does the story change much when you use a 10x multiplier? Should I still "get what I pay for"?
 
Last edited:
That's an A model and probably not what you want to own. You can get a much better deal on a C model with -21 engines, so if I were you I'd keep looking.;)
JoseCuervo said:
Did I say 182?? Oops, I meant a 1967 King Air 90.

The guy wants $350k for it, I offered to split the annual, and 50/50 on the first $40k in repairs.

He countered back he wanted me to pay for the annual for $10k so that I would have "skin in the game". I said what the hell, not going to lose the plane over $5k.

But, if he did walk from the deal and didn't want to do the $40k in repairs, then I wanted my $10k back, as I am not going to do an annual for somebody else's King Air.


EEAC1C8C-5779-408D-AB64-CA8BB20D25D2-500x379.jpg



So, I walked, and he now has another $3k per month in interest, $1500 a month in insurance, etc....


Does the story change much when you use a 10x multiplier? Should I still "get what I pay for"?
Click to expand...
 
AggieMike88 said:
Jose; what is your budget?

A nice C182RG was posted on the red board: http://forums.aopa.org/showthread.php?t=88769
Click to expand...

He has posted it here on POA as well

To the OP do I understand that you were concerned that if the oner walked away you would have paid for his Annual? If that was the concern, you controlled the inspection, you could have done the annual and just treated as a pre buy by not having the IA make log entres. I think bat may have protected you. Best of luck in your search.
 
AdamZ said:
He has posted it here on POA as well

To the OP do I understand that you were concerned that if the oner walked away you would have paid for his Annual? If that was the concern, you controlled the inspection, you could have done the annual and just treated as a pre buy by not having the IA make log entres. I think bat may have protected you. Best of luck in your search.
Click to expand...

But he would have still paid for it.
 
JoseCuervo said:
60k for a 182, do I get what I pay for?

What price would you pay for a 62-69 182?

Every aircraft purchase is a study in its own, you are the only person who knows what you want, and what it worth to you.

Would you get what you paid for?
Click to expand...

I usually do with aircraft, I look for projects that I can flip. I paid 5k for the 170 I have now, but by the time I put away in my hangar I had 11K in it.

It sounds to me like a C-170 would fit your mission very well
 
Henning said:
But he would have still paid for it.
Click to expand...

True but he was paying for a pre buy any way, and a lot of people like employing Annual standards to thier pre buys. That's what I understood th OP to want to do.
 
Henning said:
But he would have still paid for it.
Click to expand...

inspections are maintenance, all maintenance is required to be recorded.

see FAR 1,1 "Maintenance"

and FAR 43 for return to service requirements. and 91. for owners responsibility for records.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top