What single-engine plane is easiest to sell?

IndyTim

IndyTim

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
28
Location
Springfield, MO and Milwaukee, WI
Display Name
Display name:
Indy Tim
I'm progressing quickly through my ppl training, and planning to move as quickly as feasible to an IFR rating.

I'm considering buying something that will see me through about two years of flying, at which point I'll be in a better position to know, and afford, what I really want. What I really want, btw, is a Bonanza A36, and that's out of budget for now.

So,the question is, what IFR-capable plane would be easiest to get out of in two years? Lots of uncertainty in the aviation marketplace, I recognize...

Ideally, it would cost no more than $50k, and be capable of 120+ KTAS to fit my short-term mission requirements (on top of the IFR training). Also, be reasonably cheap to operate which is probably implied by the "easy to sell" criterion anyway.

Update:
- capable of 120+ KTAS cruise @ 75% power
- 450nm range w/ IFR reserves

Any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Cessna 182
 
An older 182, though with older planes, maintenance can be an issue.
 
Take a look at a Beech Sierra. Really a great retractable single which never really got the recognition she deserved. I know it will give you the speed but I'm uncertain of the price.
 
Please define "IFR capable."

At your budget price point, you will be making the choice between adequate panel and adequate paint & interior. The panel will make it more friendly for you as you do IFR training and flying, but paint & interior is a big point for resale purposes.

So if you are willing to do your IFR training/flying in something with an old school panel, as in no moving map IFR GPS, then you would likely improve your resale options.

That said, you need to like what you're flying, it needs to be safe, it needs to be within your operating AND maintenance budget. Since you can't forecast really what the resale will be, to let that drive the decision at this point might be a misplaced priority.

The only adjustment to that comment is the general observation that experimental amateur built aircraft seem to me to have a longer sales cycle than certified.
 
I was thinking Grumman Cheetah. You should be able to get a nice one that meets all of your criteria at that price. Additionally, I have the impression that the decent ones sell reasonably quickly.

That said, an "Intermediate" airplane is a financial pit. You buy it, generally spend way too much money to fix or change the things that bother you, and then it is time to sell. The next buyer isn't gonna pay much for your upgrades, so you take a bath.

Renting or a partnership with an easy "out" may be a better option if your goal is to be in an A36 in the next few years.
 
Last edited:
Ken Ibold said:
Please define "IFR capable."

At your budget price point, you will be making the choice between adequate panel and adequate paint & interior. The panel will make it more friendly for you as you do IFR training and flying, but paint & interior is a big point for resale purposes.

So if you are willing to do your IFR training/flying in something with an old school panel, as in no moving map IFR GPS, then you would likely improve your resale options.
Click to expand...


Fair questions. Since I want to keep capital costs down, I'm fine with old school avionics. A clean, usable panel is what's required.

Every time I crunch through what's out there in the marketplace, I find prices for what I want creeping into the $50-60k range. And for that money, I start thinking, why not a C33 Debonair? Fast, efficient, great looks. The chief concern there is that it will be tough to get out of a 1965 aircraft when it's time to sell.

Cessnas just don't interest me, although I'm trying very hard to let logic rule here, and I'm certainly willing to consider them.

Prices for used 182s seem to quickly get north of $50k for engines better than mid-time though, and at that point I'm again asking, "why not a Deb?"
 
denverpilot said:
If you buy them at the right price, I'll add a +1 here. But they're not as popular as perhaps the DA-40 for some these days. Kids want sexy composites. Just sayin'. (I don't. :) )
Click to expand...

DA-40 costs more and is more likely to depreciate. An old 182 has all the depreciation out of it right now, and you can probably buy one and then sell it for a similar price. Since he wants an A36 later anyway, a 182 would be a good interim plane. :)
 
kyleb said:
I was thinking Grumman Cheetah. You should be able to get a nice one that meets all of your criteria at that price. Additionally, I have the impression that the decent ones sell reasonably quickly.

That said, an "Intermediate" airplane is a financial pit. You buy it, generally spend way too much money to fix or change the things that bother you, and then it is time to sell. The next buyer isn't gonna pay much for your upgrades, so you take a bath.

Renting or a partnership with an easy "out" may be a better option if your goal is to be in an A36 in the next few years.
Click to expand...

I was pondering the Tigers, actually. They're kind of interesting.

I agree about the dangers of a stepping stone which is why I started this thread. I want to find somethign that's (relatively) easy to get out of, and find something that's pretty much setup the way I need (not want, but need). And then do my darndest to resist updating it anyway.

Is there any published data on actual airplane transactions? I'd really like to try get hard data, if it's available.
 
If you're looking at 2 years of flying before you expect to be able to afford your coveted A36, I'd just rent until then. It'll cost you more to own.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
If you're looking at 2 years of flying before you expect to be able to afford your coveted A36, I'd just rent until then. It'll cost you more to own.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same.

Also look into an existing flying club.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
If you're looking at 2 years of flying before you expect to be able to afford your coveted A36, I'd just rent until then. It'll cost you more to own.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

But if you are absolutely adamant about owning a plane, (the insurance premium will be pretty high) but look into the Bellanca Viking, it may replace your want/need for an A36.
 
AggieMike88 said:
I was thinking the same.

Also look into an existing flying club.
Click to expand...

There are pretty limited options in my neck of the woods (Springfield, MO). It is possible to to rent, but the choices aren't very good.

Finding a partner is probably more likely, but I'm not holding my breath.

If I'm going to get any real flying in, I either need to wait and save the pennies, or get something as a stepping stone.

The intermediate plane delays the A36 acquistition even further, since I'll divert some savings into the intermediate plane, whatever it is. But I'm thinking that's ok since my personal priorities are to get plenty of time under my belt before tackling the A36 missions (3 valued pax with gear).

Just thinking out loud, good to have a place to sort this through...
 
IndyTim said:
I'm progressing quickly through my ppl training, and planning to move as quickly as feasible to an IFR rating.

I'm considering buying something that will see me through about two years of flying, at which point I'll be in a better position to know, and afford, what I really want. What I really want, btw, is a Bonanza A36, and that's out of budget for now.

So,the question is, what IFR-capable plane would be easiest to get out of in two years? Lots of uncertainty in the aviation marketplace, I recognize...

Ideally, it would cost no more than $50k, and be capable of 120+ KTAS to fit my short-term mission requirements (on top of the IFR training). Also, be reasonably cheap to operate which is probably implied by the "easy to sell" criterion anyway.

Update:
- capable of 120+ KTAS cruise @ 75% power
- 450nm range w/ IFR reserves

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

If ya want a Bo in two years... Just buy one now..:yes:


http://www.barnstormers.com/listing_images.php?id=728097
 
Last edited:
Mtns2Skies said:
But if you are absolutely adamant about owning a plane, (the insurance premium will be pretty high) but look into the Bellanca Viking, it may replace your want/need for an A36.
Click to expand...

The Viking and A36 are somewhat different planes in my opinion, though. A Viking is a proper 4-seater, an A36 is a wanna-be 6-seater.

But I agree that the Viking is a neat plane. One of my friends at work is thinking about buying one at my suggestion.
 
N801BH said:
If ya want a Bo in two years... Just buy one now..:yes:


http://www.barnstormers.com/listing_images.php?id=728097
Click to expand...
There's merit to this. My first airplane, I wanted a Mooney 201 bad, but my budget could not do that. I was looking at Tigers and Archers and not really happy with what I was finding. My wife convinced me to take a look at Mooneys. I found one with decent times and acceptable avionics, but the paint and interior was pretty ratty. I bought it and did the paint and interior on my schedule. A couple of years after I bought it, I had it upgraded to my tastes and within my budget, and it was just the plane I wanted.

Having said that, don't go in over your head to the point where you can't afford to fly it or maintain it properly.
 
Can't speak to resale, but for the price range, some short body Mooneys come to mind.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
:yeahthat:

But if you are absolutely adamant about owning a plane, (the insurance premium will be pretty high) but look into the Bellanca Viking, it may replace your want/need for an A36.
Click to expand...

Now, there's a plane that will be easy to unload. :lol:

They're beautiful planes though, with great numbers. Too bad the market won't touch them.
 
IndyTim said:
Now, there's a plane that will be easy to unload. :lol:

They're beautiful planes though, with great numbers. Too bad the market won't touch them.
Click to expand...

Yeah true, I meant it would be a great plane instead of the A36. Because the market wont touch them it falls into the OP's price range.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
The Viking and A36 are somewhat different planes in my opinion, though. A Viking is a proper 4-seater, an A36 is a wanna-be 6-seater.

But I agree that the Viking is a neat plane. One of my friends at work is thinking about buying one at my suggestion.
Click to expand...


If I were going to buy a Viking, I'd go look at this one. Someone has put an awful lot of TLC into it: http://warrenaircraft.com/index.php?id=n28111
 
Scientifically...the airplane with the largest market will sell the easiest. That's probably a 172.

That said, being priced well is more important than the kind of airplane. Everything in the world that is sold is sold because the value to the purchaser is greater than the purchase price and the value to the seller is less than the purchase price. If you go about that by pricing the airplane high and attempting to find that one person for whom the price is just barely right, you're going to be waiting for a long time. If you price it so you have many potential buyers, you'll sell easily.

Yes...selling easily costs you money. That's true no matter what the airplane (or car or house or...) is. Ideally you want to sell the airplane for the most that exactly one person will barely pay and to have that one person see the airplane within the time frame that you want to sell it. But you can't, so choose whether money or ease is more important to you.
 
Last edited:
Agreed! The easiest airplane to sell is any one that is priced significantly lower than the price you paid, assuming that you paid close to fair market value.
 
skidoo said:
Agreed! The easiest airplane to sell is any one that is priced significantly lower than the price you paid, assuming that you paid close to fair market value.
Click to expand...

That's true, to a point. But surely the market is more liquid for some planes rather than others, given the same theoretical value-to-price ratio.
 
IndyTim said:
That's true, to a point. But surely the market is more liquid for some planes rather than others, given the same theoretical value-to-price ratio.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that there would be two ends to this spectrum. A highly desired plane with few copies in existence might sell quickly, but will probably also be fairly expensive. The other side would be a plane that was highly produced and there are a high number of potential buyers. Something like a 172 comes to mind. There are a lot of 172 and a lot of people that want them. The trick here, is getting one that stands out. Since they are trainers, many have been abused. I would find a 172 in the best condition you can and also include a 430 (avionics do sell a plane and there are many threads on this board to back that). As long as the plane is not priced too out there, it should sell quickly.
 
You'll notice that nobody will ever recommend a twin other than twin owners who are trying to dump them. Which validates your point in spades.

IndyTim said:
Well, because twins are even harder to get out of??
Click to expand...
 
Get an older bonanza, some decent examples can be had (not flown) for Cessna 172 price, if you buy right, you can sell right.
 
I think you're in the position of "drafting the best athlete available with your pick" and many different planes will do what you want. If a good local prospect is available, take a hard look even if it isn't your mostest favorite plane.

A simple and inexpensive purchase process can significantly reduce the cost and hassles of an extended search, and planes with a local ownership history are good prospects for other buyers when it's time for you to move on.
IndyTim said:
That's true, to a point. But surely the market is more liquid for some planes rather than others, given the same theoretical value-to-price ratio.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
You'll notice that nobody will ever recommend a twin other than twin owners who are trying to dump them. Which validates your point in spades.
Click to expand...

I've also seen them recommended by maintenance shops who will be maintaining them and people with a large amount of their portfolio invested in oil companies.

Or there's me, who just recommends them for certain people who have a fitting mission.
 
- 450nm range w/ IFR reserves, does it really make a difference if it is 110ktas verses 120ktas?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top