Used Twin Price

brien23

brien23

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,489
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Display name:
Brien
Has the bottom of the Twin price hit or will they go lower. With the price of a good twin so low you can put a lot of gas in the savings over a high price single. I had a C-310 years ago and it was a great plane, thinking of buying another do I need my head examined or might this be a good time to buy.
 
Depends entirely on the particular make/model. I don't think "good" piston twins (think high-production modelswith pristine maintenance histories, top notch panels, FIKI, etc.) ever really dropped hard like the "average" fleet. The market does seem pretty soft for average models or for "unique" ones.
 
An awful lot of what’s out there that looks cheap, needs two new engines “soonish”, if you calculate what it’ll cost per hour to pay for both of them at TBO-ish hours.

The airframes are cheap. The engines aren’t.
 
The price of piston twins of every type got hammered by the combo of $150 oil in first half 2008 and then the '08/'09 financial crisis. The prices for twins suitable for commercial training have been rising the fastest, but still a long way from where they were 12 or 15 years ago. Larger, 6-place piston twin prices seem to finally be responding slowly to the better economy the last couple of years, but still look like bargains to me. As always, the better examples go for a premium to the trashed examples.

If you shop carefully, and can tolerate the fuel burn costs of a twin, one can buy a LOT of airplane capability for not that much money these days.
 
There are some twins than burn what I do with a single TIO540! The only thing that scares me is the overhaul!
 
I am thinking of a C310R , I believe it is the only cert. for known ice.
 
brien23 said:
I am thinking of a C310R , I believe it is the only cert. for known ice.
Click to expand...

Only if it’s equipped correctly. Most of the latter R can be brought up to the FIKI for a price. The hot plate is ridiculously price from what I hear. Find a good airframe all the rest is just AMUs...
 
I'm looking for a FIKI equipped Seneca II at the moment. And yes, I'm aware of the deficiencies in what FIKI actually was back in the 70's...not why I'm interested in the bird. If anyone has a line on one, I'd appreciate a heads up!
 
BGF_Yankee said:
I'm looking for a FIKI equipped Seneca II at the moment. And yes, I'm aware of the deficiencies in what FIKI actually was back in the 70's...not why I'm interested in the bird. If anyone has a line on one, I'd appreciate a heads up!
Click to expand...

About a month ago our Flying Club FTU picked up a very nice 3500 hour TT, FIKI equipped (boots, hot plate, hot props) Seneca II with a Garmin 650 and half time engines for $101,000 in a private (no broker) sale. Our first Seneca is not equipped for ice.

One would be hard pressed to find a Bonanza A36 of similar vintage, hours and equipment for that price. I think this just underlines how much capability can be purchased at a reasonable price in a piston twin these days.
 
If you're looking for a "good deal" a piston twin is not the answer. Yeah, the airframe is relatively inexpensive but it is not efficient in either fuel or maintenance. If the twin fits your wants/needs/mission then still get it, just be aware that regardless of purchase price it could be costly. Our C310R has been a fantastic airplane but still expensive to repair/maintain... and that's for an airplane that we bought current/airworthy/regularly flown. You just don't know.

All that said our 182RG and C310R have similar values (nearly identical avionics done within the last 2 years) though the 182 would likely sell more quickly.
 
Been lurking/looking at twins as of late, and here’s my reasoning- the Arrow is close to needing an engine overhaul- still runs strong though. Have one cylinder that might need some attention on the exhaust valve, but that’s it. Avionics are good, but soon will need to update to ADS-B. Sooooo, been asking myself do I keep her or is this the time to take a hard look at twins.

Been eyeing E55’s, and you talk about trying to find a ‘good’ candidate, they’re either run out engines and old panels, or so updated the asking price is near B58 values of similar years. Similar situation as others have commented of what is seen in the market. Finding a unicorn may be easier.
 
Last edited:
Jeff Cutler said:
Been eyeing E55’s, and you talk about trying to find a ‘good’ candidate, they’re either ther run out engines and old panels, or so updated the asking price is near B58 values of similar years. Similar situation as others have commented of what is seen in the market. Finding a unicorn may be easier.
Click to expand...
Any particular reason for an E55 vs a standard B model?

There were a lot more B55s made and PMS ty our there in great shape.
 
A couple of thoughts-

- more were built with de-ice (not fiki) that would give more utility here in the MW
- E’s have the IO-520’s (some have the 550 conversions) that fly a solid 195-200kt flight plan.

For the 550’s some have cabin O2 for flying in the teens. Speed along with altitude options for WX and redundancy. Sounds appealing for this grey wiskerd’ dog (don’t consider a ballistic shute backup, while the composit single will give similar performance / less payload)

I’ve owned the Arrow for just over 20 years, and if I find the right 55, could be the last A/C that I would own for the next 20.
 
I love the Bonanza and I love twins, so it stands to reason that I'd love the Baron. And I do - the 55 is indeed a nice flying airplane.

But man, it's hard to look at Barons without peeking over the fence at a 310. I'm not convinced a 310 would cost that much more to operate...
 
kayoh190 said:
But man, it's hard to look at Barons without peeking over the fence at a 310. I'm not convinced a 310 would cost that much more to operate...
Click to expand...
Parts for both are equally expensive (thanks to Textron). From talking to a few shops when I was in the market, it seemed that you were likely to need more replacement parts over time with a Twin Cessna than a Beech, but some of that can be alleviated by finding a good airplane.
 
Jeff Cutler said:
...Finding a unicorn may be easier.
Click to expand...

We can blame the mythology of Beechcraft for that. :D

Jeff Cutler said:
Been lurking/looking at twins as of late, and here’s my reasoning- the Arrow is close to needing an engine overhaul- still runs strong though. Have one cylinder that might need some attention on the exhaust valve, but that’s it. Avionics are good, but soon will need to update to ADS-B. Sooooo, been asking myself do I keep her or is this the time to take a hard look at twins.

Been eyeing E55’s, and you talk about trying to find a ‘good’ candidate, they’re either ther run out engines and old panels, or so updated the asking price is near B58 values of similar years. Similar situation as others have commented of what is seen in the market. Finding a unicorn may be easier.
Click to expand...

Not uncommon to find B55s that have been upgraded to the 520s and with some patience you'll find short body Colemills with the 550s out there. I came across quite a few when I was shopping for a twin.
 
Jeff Cutler said:
Been lurking/looking at twins as of late, and here’s my reasoning- the Arrow is close to needing an engine overhaul- still runs strong though. Have one cylinder that might need some attention on the exhaust valve, but that’s it. Avionics are good, but soon will need to update to ADS-B. Sooooo, been asking myself do I keep her or is this the time to take a hard look at twins.

Been eyeing E55’s, and you talk about trying to find a ‘good’ candidate, they’re either run out engines and old panels, or so updated the asking price is near B58 values of similar years. Similar situation as others have commented of what is seen in the market. Finding a unicorn may be easier.
Click to expand...

Can look at it a different way... would the operating costs of the twin (including maintenance) mean you fly significantly less hours?

(Forgetting about any speed increases, those will just mean your mission range becomes longer.)

Enough to effect proficiency?
 
denverpilot said:
Can look at it a different way... would the operating costs of the twin (including maintenance) mean you fly significantly less hours?

(Forgetting about any speed increases, those will just mean your mission range becomes longer.)

Enough to effect proficiency?
Click to expand...

My twin is so much more capable than any of my past Piper tricycle singles I use it more. A lot more.

I'm going to temper that observation with three qualifiers:

1) Had I owned a IO-520 Bonanza or a Mooney 231 (or faster), I might have used those quite a bit more than my Piper singles too.

2) I live in a mountainous region and I do some flights in my Aztec I would not do in a single. Any single. I am not sure I would be as motivated to own a twin if I lived at a lower elevation and most of my flying was over flatter terrain.

3) One challenge with a twin is their aging systems are more complex than a single and staying on top of maintenance to minimize periods when the plane is unavailable requires diligent attention. There's just more things to attend to.
 
Last edited:
GRG55 said:
My twin is so much more capable than any of my past Piper tricycle singles I use it more. A lot more.
Click to expand...

I’m sure it is.

Not sure why you quoted me.

I was suggesting he ask himself if the higher costs would mean any financial hardship in staying truly proficient.
 
denverpilot said:
I’m sure it is.

Not sure why you quoted me.

I was suggesting he ask himself if the higher costs would mean any financial hardship in staying truly proficient.
Click to expand...

I was merely pointing out in my case personal insolvency due to care and feeding of a twin hasn't stopped me from flying it more. ;)
The key to staying ahead of creditors is keep crossing State lines. Landing strips in foreign country sugar cane fields helps too. :D
 
brien23 said:
Has the bottom of the Twin price hit or will they go lower. With the price of a good twin so low you can put a lot of gas in the savings over a high price single. I had a C-310 years ago and it was a great plane, thinking of buying another do I need my head examined or might this be a good time to buy.
Click to expand...

Been going up since the first of the year.
 
Unit74 said:
There are some twins than burn what I do with a single TIO540! The only thing that scares me is the overhaul!
Click to expand...

Not that bad, really.

http://www.jewellaviation.com/pdf/PriceSheet2018Engines.pdf

TIO-540 = $19,800
IO-470 = $16,250 x 2

If you get 1,700 hours out of the engines, that's only a difference of $7.50/hr.

Most of the time I choose to burn 8-10 GPH per engine in my Baron. You can put 30 GPH through it if you really want, of course.
 
I'm doing 100kts at 8 gallons....... The T Lance is not good at speed at all. But it's didn't buy it for speed. Bought it to haul load.

24 GPH I can do 160 ROP. I cruise it at 14 LOP 2400/29 about 135kts. But if the doors close, it will fly!
 
Unit74 said:
I cruise it at 14 LOP 2400/29 about 135kts. But if the doors close, it will fly!
Click to expand...

That's not bad at all - just slightly more burn than a 182 at similar speed with a ton more interior volume. Interesting!
 
My travel air could be very economical at low speeds. Could get the fuel burn down to 14 gah,when flying long cross country,22 gah.,maintenance can get costly. Prices on the travel air seem to be on the rise.
 
kayoh190 said:
That's not bad at all - just slightly more burn than a 182 at similar speed with a ton more interior volume. Interesting!
Click to expand...

Seats flat, you can sleep in the back!!!
 
Unit74 said:
I'm doing 100kts at 8 gallons....... The T Lance is not good at speed at all. But it's didn't buy it for speed. Bought it to haul load.

24 GPH I can do 160 ROP. I cruise it at 14 LOP 2400/29 about 135kts. But if the doors close, it will fly!
Click to expand...

You're doing something wrong, or something is wrong with your plane, if you're only getting 135kts TRUE airspeed out of a Turbo Lance.
 
bradg33 said:
You're doing something wrong, or something is wrong with your plane, if you're only getting 135kts TRUE airspeed out of a Turbo Lance.
Click to expand...

That's after pulling back to 29"/2400rpm and LOP at 14gph - his point is that you don't have to run it balls out (160 knots) if you're not in a hurry.
 
bradg33 said:
You're doing something wrong, or something is wrong with your plane, if you're only getting 135kts TRUE airspeed out of a Turbo Lance.
Click to expand...


Oh it will do it for sure. I just can't afford the fuel bill upon arrival. I care about load, not speed. Full rental power it will hang with most BOs. But they will be burning half as much fuel, so the joke is on me.
 
Unit74 said:
I'm doing 100kts at 8 gallons....... The T Lance is not good at speed at all. But it's didn't buy it for speed. Bought it to haul load. 24 GPH I can do 160 ROP. I cruise it at 14 LOP 2400/29 about 135kts. But if the doors close, it will fly!
Click to expand...

Just as a comparison, at 8 GPH per side (16 GPH total), I get about 160 KTAS, at 10 GPH per side (20 GPH total), I get about 175 KTAS and at 12 GPH per side (24 GPH total), I get about 190 KTAS. And I have over 1,700 lb useful load . . . and real air conditioning.

Sounds like the Baron has greater useful load than a turbo Lance and flies faster on less fuel :D
 
Everytime I see Ryan F’s twin it makes me want one! No doubt, having a twin gives a lot of peace of mind out here in the mountains.
 
CC268 said:
Everytime I see Ryan F’s twin it makes me want one! No doubt, having a twin gives a lot of peace of mind out here in the mountains.
Click to expand...

Twin Comanches are great airplanes, I use to have one. But finding one in excellent condition today is mighty difficult.
 
KLRDMD said:
Twin Comanches are great airplanes, I use to have one. But finding one in excellent condition today is mighty difficult.
Click to expand...

I’ve noticed that...I look around at twins from time to time...not that I could afford one, but it is fun to look.

There are a lot of really nice 310s out there
 
kayoh190 said:
That's not bad at all - just slightly more burn than a 182 at similar speed with a ton more interior volume. Interesting!
Click to expand...

Unit74 said:
I'm doing 100kts at 8 gallons....... The T Lance is not good at speed at all. But it's didn't buy it for speed. Bought it to haul load.

24 GPH I can do 160 ROP. I cruise it at 14 LOP 2400/29 about 135kts. But if the doors close, it will fly!
Click to expand...

What’s the actual useful load on your T-Lance?

Just curious. Never flown one. But I like trucks. Ha.
 
KLRDMD said:
Twin Comanches are great airplanes, I use to have one. But finding one in excellent condition today is mighty difficult.
Click to expand...

I’ve noticed that also. Man are a lot of them beat down. Must be a lot of people who do the “I’ll buy a beater for time building and sell it afterward” in the Twin Comanche market. Reading many of the ads in public (for stuff that isn’t selling privately without ads, as I’m sure some nice ones get snapped up before they ever get advertised), is just painful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top