Been scanning airplane ads for a while and just recently started looking
some of them up using AOPA's Vref service for members.

According to that, most of the airplanes I see advertised are way
overpriced, some by significant margins.

Are the AOPA Vref prices too low? Or do people have unrealistic
expectations for what they can get? Or do people always put in lots of
wiggle room?

Mostly, people put in a lot of wiggle room. Also, they often think their
plane is better than average (just like them).

If you want to see what happens when this kind of activity gets out of hand,
go buy an oriental rug (just don't pay more than one third of the asking
price).



"xyzzy" > wrote in message
...
> Been scanning airplane ads for a while and just recently started looking
> some of them up using AOPA's Vref service for members.
>
> According to that, most of the airplanes I see advertised are way
> overpriced, some by significant margins.
>
> Are the AOPA Vref prices too low? Or do people have unrealistic
> expectations for what they can get? Or do people always put in lots of
> wiggle room?
>

In article >, xyzzy >
wrote:

> Been scanning airplane ads for a while and just recently started looking
> some of them up using AOPA's Vref service for members.
>
> According to that, most of the airplanes I see advertised are way
> overpriced, some by significant margins.
>
> Are the AOPA Vref prices too low?

I doubt it. According to Vref my cherokee 140 is worth over
$50,000. However, I doubt I could get that much - nor would
it be a fair price.

I always thought Vref was at least 10% too high.

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

xyzzy wrote:
> Been scanning airplane ads for a while and just recently started looking
> some of them up using AOPA's Vref service for members.
>
> According to that, most of the airplanes I see advertised are way
> overpriced, some by significant margins.
>
> Are the AOPA Vref prices too low? Or do people have unrealistic
> expectations for what they can get? Or do people always put in lots of
> wiggle room?
>

It's actually the other way around. Vref is way on the high side.
Check out the value calculator on Trade-A-Plane.

In article >, xyzzy > wrote:
>Been scanning airplane ads for a while and just recently started looking
>some of them up using AOPA's Vref service for members.

Are you sure you're estimating avionics properly? In my experience that
was the hardest thing to do from an ad. If you skim over something like
"KCS55" because you don't know what it is, or because you know it's an
HSI but you don't value an HSI you're going to get a low value.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

Actually Vref seems to be high.

Mike
MU-2


"xyzzy" > wrote in message
...
> Been scanning airplane ads for a while and just recently started looking
> some of them up using AOPA's Vref service for members.
>
> According to that, most of the airplanes I see advertised are way
> overpriced, some by significant margins.
>
> Are the AOPA Vref prices too low? Or do people have unrealistic
> expectations for what they can get? Or do people always put in lots of
> wiggle room?
>

xyzzy wrote:
>
> Are the AOPA Vref prices too low?

The price Vref gives me for my aircraft is much more than I could expect to get for
it.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

Bob Noel > wrote in message >...
> In article >, xyzzy >
> wrote:

> I doubt it. According to Vref my cherokee 140 is worth over
> $50,000. However, I doubt I could get that much - nor would
> it be a fair price.
>
> I always thought Vref was at least 10% too high.

Maybe a Cherokiee thing. If anyone ever seens an Aeronca, Cub, or
Taylorcraft that is airworth and is priced at Vref, I'll write a check
right now. In my experience, the airworthy ones are about 50%-100%
higher than Vref (although Vref is suppose to represent airworthy
planes)
-Robert

> Are the AOPA Vref prices too low? Or do people have unrealistic
> expectations for what they can get? Or do people always put in lots of
> wiggle room?

Wow, what a great question. This topic could be (and has been ) the subject
of many hours of hangar flying.

After watching prices for the last decade (and buying two planes during that
time), my ultimate, conclusive, expert opinion is: It depends.

Some aircraft are so over-priced as to be laughable. When we were looking
for our current plane, in 2002, we test-flew a couple of real pigs that the
owners thought were Cadillacs of the sky. No amount of negotiating would
get them to budge off of their asking price.

In my experience these guys are usually (a) elderly, reluctant sellers, and
(b) wealthier than God. In short, they don't need (or really want) to sell.
Run from these folks as fast as you can, because they will fleece you.

On the other hand, some aircraft are so much better than average, because of
the meticulous care given to them by their doting owners, that they are
worth 10 - 20% more than the market price. This is a hard concept to get
your arms around, because it is so subjective, and because what one owner
does religiously may not matter to another owner.

For example, we keep the exterior of our plane meticulously clean. We
literally clean it after each flight. End result: An aircraft with perfect
paint and glass.

To some folks, this is worth a lot. To many others, it's not worth one,
single nickel -- and if I tried to sell my plane for more because of it,
they would laugh.

In my opinion, these little things tell the tale of an aircraft. An owner
isn't going to put out that kind of effort, and then skate on oil changes,
for example. You can usually judge a book by its cover, IF the airplane has
been in the same hands for a while. (If it's in a broker's hands, all bets
are off.)

On the other hand, I know of owners who fly around in the doggiest looking
pieces of crap you've ever seen, who are fairly meticulous about the
mechanical condition of their aircraft. This is not usually the case
(most aircraft owners take pride in the appearance of their aircraft), but
I've seen it more than once.

Those aircraft are your best bargains, if you can find them. An aircraft
with crappy paint and interior, but in great shape mechanically, will be
your best possible buy -- but they're really hard to find. Usually crappy
is as crappy does.

Our first plane was a '75 Warrior that had been ridden hard and put to bed
wet. Used as a trainer, it had some hangar rash, a mid-time engine, high
total hours, but great paint and a good interior. We got a fair price, but
had to spend a lot of money to get it back to "perfect" condition. By the
time we sold it, that plane was as good as a Warrior gets.

Our current plane was a bit higher up the condition scale when we bought it.
The paint was excellent, it had every speed mod ever made for a Cherokee
235 --which is a difficult plane to find -- and fairly low total time.
However, the interior was tired, and we found the engine to be making metal
at the pre-buy inspection. We adjusted our offer downwards accordingly, and
bought the plane for a fair price.

We have since installed a new leather interior, side panels, and carpet,
plus a rebuilt-to-new-spec O-540 -- and it's now in show-plane condition.

Some guys will say that it's best to buy the "perfect" plane, because it
will cost you more in the long run to fix up a dog. Mechanically, I agree
with this -- but not cosmetically. When you buy a plane with a cruddy
interior, you are able to "put your mark" on the plane, and really make it
your own, by selecting materials, color, patterns, etc. (Another
side-benefit of this process, by the way, is that your wife will get deeply
involved with the plane. This is almost always a good thing.)

Avionics is a whole different ball game that I won't go into here. Suffice
it to say that more is usually better, but better quality is ALWAYS better.

To sum up: The prices in T-A-P and VRef are high, since only a foolish
seller starts low. Beyond that, some are higher than they should be, and
some are higher because they deserve to be. It's the buyer who has to
separate the wheat from the chaff -- and THAT is why every new buyer (as
every new pilot) needs a mentor to help him along the buying process.

Buying a plane ain't like buying a car. Find a gray head at the airport,
and befriend him. Take him flying. Pick his brain. You'll always benefit.

Good luck!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 12:50:29 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

> it had every speed mod ever made for a Cherokee
>235 --which is a difficult plane to find --


Could you list these please? I'm interested in trying to afford a few
of these in the near future. Also, any specs on what you get for
speed would be great.

Thanks,
z

> > wrote:
>>it had every speed mod ever made for a Cherokee
>>235 --which is a difficult plane to find --

zatatime wrote:
> Could you list these please? I'm interested in trying to afford a few
> of these in the near future. Also, any specs on what you get for
> speed would be great.

I got a Wag Aero catalog in the mail the other day.
On one page they have a line drawing of a Piper with arrows labeling
each speed mod available.

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 20:30:31 GMT, john smith > wrote:

>
>> > wrote:
>>>it had every speed mod ever made for a Cherokee
>>>235 --which is a difficult plane to find --
>
>zatatime wrote:
>> Could you list these please? I'm interested in trying to afford a few
>> of these in the near future. Also, any specs on what you get for
>> speed would be great.
>
>I got a Wag Aero catalog in the mail the other day.
>On one page they have a line drawing of a Piper with arrows labeling
>each speed mod available.

Speed mods for the 235 are discussed ad nauseam on the 235 BBS:

http://www.cabo-rental.net/cherokee235/home.htm

Everything you could ever want to know about the birds is archived
there. Some, like STCs, even have their own sections. There are 13
pages of STCs. Then search the discussions for what you're
particularly interested in.

My interpretation of the discussions on speed mods, BTW, is that they
do more for roll rate, touchdown control, and rate of climb than they
do for speed. YMMV.

Don

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 17:24:24 GMT, zatatime
> wrote:

> On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 12:50:29 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:
>
>> it had every speed mod ever made for a Cherokee
>>235 --which is a difficult plane to find --
>
>
>Could you list these please? I'm interested in trying to afford a few
>of these in the near future. Also, any specs on what you get for
>speed would be great.

knots2u.com
laminarflowsystems.com
pipermods.com
speedmods.com

> Could you list these please? I'm interested in trying to afford a few
> of these in the near future. Also, any specs on what you get for
> speed would be great.

As others have mentioned, there are many good sources of information
regarding Cherokee speed mods. A short list of ours include:

- Fancy pants
- Flap gap seals
- Aileron gap seals
- Stabilator gap seals
- Fuselage-to-wing fairing
- Position light removed from rudder -- special fairing installed
- Landing light faired over with plexiglas

Regarding their effectiveness, I've been told that the larger-engined
Cherokees seem to benefit more from them. We flight-plan for 142 knots, and
will easily walk away from a stock retractable Arrow.

Of course, I'll be burning 15 gallons per hour to do it (to his 10 gph) --
but there's no free lunch...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:pYD_c.123500$Fg5.16237@attbi_s53...
> Run from these folks as fast as you can, because they will fleece you.

I think you can only fleece yourself. Unless they are holding a gun.

Howard
C-182P


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 9/3/2004

Robert M. Gary wrote:

> Bob Noel > wrote in message >...
>
>>In article >, xyzzy >
>>wrote:
>
>
>>I doubt it. According to Vref my cherokee 140 is worth over
>>$50,000. However, I doubt I could get that much - nor would
>>it be a fair price.
>>
>>I always thought Vref was at least 10% too high.
>
>
> Maybe a Cherokiee thing. If anyone ever seens an Aeronca, Cub, or
> Taylorcraft that is airworth and is priced at Vref, I'll write a check
> right now. In my experience, the airworthy ones are about 50%-100%
> higher than Vref (although Vref is suppose to represent airworthy
> planes)
> -Robert

That's an interesting observation, I was looking at an Aircoupe, Vref
sez $17K and the guy has it priced at $27K. It's in decent shape but not
a total cream puff. That spread is so wide as to be ridiculous and
makes me think it may not even be worth trying to negotiate with someone
who appears to be so far off. I was trying to figure out what could
acccount for such a spread. Maybe Vref doesn't do as good a job on
older cheaper planes, or it's as you said above, or maybe the guy is
just proud of his plane.

I also looked at Cherokee 140's and see that Vref's prices are closer to
what people are asking. Maybe they just do a better job with some
aircraft types than others, particular commonly sold vs. rarely sold.

>> Run from these folks as fast as you can, because they will fleece you.
>
> I think you can only fleece yourself. Unless they are holding a gun.

So true!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

It depends on whether you are buying or selling. Actually Vref and the other
valuation services are, at best, extremely rough guesses. They don't really
have any hard data to work with. Sale prices are often reported to the FAA
as "$1 and other consideration." Sale prices reported to states have their
own inaccuracies, for obvious reasons.

The valuation services are also slow. The prices they quote are usually six
months or more out of date. As the economy recovers the price of used
aircraft is likely to firm up. There has also been a glut of used aircraft
on the market due to tax incentives for purchasing new aircraft. These
incentives expire at the end of this year and lose much of their value at
the end of this month.

If the price of an airplane looks too high, it probably is. The seller wants
some negotiating room. If it looks like a good deal, don't expect the seller
to move off his asking price.

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 01:11:55 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>> Could you list these please? I'm interested in trying to afford a few
>> of these in the near future. Also, any specs on what you get for
>> speed would be great.
>
>As others have mentioned, there are many good sources of information
>regarding Cherokee speed mods. A short list of ours include:
>
>- Fancy pants
>- Flap gap seals
>- Aileron gap seals
>- Stabilator gap seals
>- Fuselage-to-wing fairing
>- Position light removed from rudder -- special fairing installed
>- Landing light faired over with plexiglas
>
>Regarding their effectiveness, I've been told that the larger-engined
>Cherokees seem to benefit more from them. We flight-plan for 142 knots, and
>will easily walk away from a stock retractable Arrow.
>
>Of course, I'll be burning 15 gallons per hour to do it (to his 10 gph) --
>but there's no free lunch...


Thanks Jay. These are all the mods I've heard of, although the
landing light fairing is new to me (and you said this was a short
list?). I normally flight plan at 135 Kts and always seem to beat it.
Good to know you're around 142. Your 15 gph sounds high to me. I get
about 12.6 in cruise at about 75% power. Does this include a safety
margin?

Thanks also to the poster who directed me to the 235 site. I hadn't
been there in a while, and learned I should look at my rigging first.
Not exactly how to go about that, but it may give me a couple knots
for free.

I'm not really looking to go alot faster, but more importantly
increase my range by being able to fly at a reduced power setting at
what I currently flight plan for. I've got a couple destinations that
are just out of reach (30 - 45 minutes) that I'd like to bring into
reach w/o a fuel stop.

Thanks again.
z

"Jay Honeck" > wrote
> In my opinion, these little things tell the tale of an aircraft. An owner
> isn't going to put out that kind of effort, and then skate on oil changes,
> for example. You can usually judge a book by its cover, IF the airplane has
> been in the same hands for a while.

Nonsense. These airplanes are old. Unless you're talking about a
hangar queen that flies 20-50 hours a year and gets worked on 200-500
hours, there's no such thing as a perfect airplane out there. They
all need SOMETHING. Everywhere you look, something is wearing,
something is corroding, something is cracking, something is out of
rig, out of tune, out of adjustment. Maybe it's not safety critical
right now, but eventually something will have to be done - and it's
usually cheaper to do something small now than wait for it to break.

So it's not a question of - should I be doing something for the
airplane. The only question is, what should I be doing.

The owner who has the time to keep the paint and interior immaculate
is usually the same owner who just doesn't know enough to fix stuff,
so he does what he can. Then he tells you that NDB approaches are
inaccurate, forgetting that once people shot them to 200-1/2. The
reality is that he doesn't know how to properly adjust the antenna and
shield the receiver, and assumes there's nothing he can do. He'll
tell you that LORAN's all go flaky as soon as it starts to rain -
because he doesn't even realize his airplane doesn't have the full
complement of static wicks. He'll tell you it's normal for the
airplane to drop a wing in the stall - because he doesn't know how to
rig it properly. There are lots of other examples.

> On the other hand, I know of owners who fly around in the doggiest looking
> pieces of crap you've ever seen, who are fairly meticulous about the
> mechanical condition of their aircraft. This is not usually the case
> (most aircraft owners take pride in the appearance of their aircraft), but
> I've seen it more than once.

You've seen it more than you think. It's a matter of priorities -
those who really know the airplane are too busy to clean it because
they have more important things to do.

> Those aircraft are your best bargains, if you can find them. An aircraft
> with crappy paint and interior, but in great shape mechanically, will be
> your best possible buy -- but they're really hard to find.

Yes, they're usually hard to find - because they're usually sold
locally, by word of mouth. If you see one advertised, it's because
the owner doesn't want to let it go at a bargain price. He wants to
see some return on his effort. Usually he won't get it.

So what he will do, once he has decided to sell the aircraft, is let
it go. Stop doing these repairs for the long haul. Then he'll send
it to the shop for a coat of paint and interior, and it's down the
road.

> Our first plane was a '75 Warrior that had been ridden hard and put to bed
> wet. Used as a trainer, it had some hangar rash, a mid-time engine, high
> total hours, but great paint and a good interior.

Yeah, exactly. Typical.

Michael

> You've seen it more than you think. It's a matter of priorities -
> those who really know the airplane are too busy to clean it because
> they have more important things to do.

That's a pretty gross generalization, but I'll admit it's not a black and
white issue.

However, in my experience it's usually safe to say that an aircraft that's
kept immaculate is going to sell for a higher price than one that isn't.

It's the same sort of phenomenon as selling a house with bad rain gutters.
Everyone knows that gutters don't cost much to replace -- but when given the
choice, most people will steer clear of the house with rusted out, dented
rain gutters.

Why? Because they know that what's on the outside often indicates what's on
the inside.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Some general rules that emerge from this discussion and another on a
200 hr engine failure:
1. You can't tell anything about the reliability of an old airplane
by just looking at it.

2. You can't determine within a narrow range whether the asking price
is reasonable or not.

3. Although a lot hinges on the (undeterminable) integrity of the
seller, the seller doesn't always know what problems are hidden in the
aircraft.

4. A detailed pre-purchase inspection is essential by a shop that
knows the breed well - not just a $500 look and see.

5. The most expensive and hardest to find issues appear to revolve
around engines. If the OH is recent, part of the prepurchase should
involve a call to the rebuilder and review of the process by someone
who knows how a rebuild is supposed to be done.

6. Always assume that there is something wrong that you will have to
fix and allow for that in what you pay.

"Jay Honeck" > wrote
> > You've seen it more than you think. It's a matter of priorities -
> > those who really know the airplane are too busy to clean it because
> > they have more important things to do.
>
> That's a pretty gross generalization, but I'll admit it's not a black and
> white issue.

No, it's not black and white. Once in a while you will find an owner
who DOES know the airplane but just can't deal with bugs on the
leading edges - so he spends the time to put Rejex on them and wipe
them down while he lets the trim actuator he knows is too loose go
another year. It happens - but I doubt it's the norm.

> However, in my experience it's usually safe to say that an aircraft that's
> kept immaculate is going to sell for a higher price than one that isn't.

That's absolutely true - just not for the reasons you say.

> It's the same sort of phenomenon as selling a house with bad rain gutters.
> Everyone knows that gutters don't cost much to replace -- but when given the
> choice, most people will steer clear of the house with rusted out, dented
> rain gutters.
>
> Why? Because they know that what's on the outside often indicates what's on
> the inside.

No, that's not why. It's because most people don't know how to
evaluate the quality of wiring or plumbing or foundation structure
(the things that matter, and will cost you big if they go bad) - those
things require knowledge and experience. But EVERYONE can see that
the rain gutter is rusty.

Basically, the airplane (or house) that is pretty but mechanically
unsound will usually sell for a higher price than one that is not
pretty but mechanically sound - because most people don't know any
better.

You simply CAN'T judge a book by its cover. Properly evaluating the
conditions of an aircraft (or a house) takes actual knowledge and
experience. Surface appearance is not a valid indicator.

Michael

> You simply CAN'T judge a book by its cover. Properly evaluating the
> conditions of an aircraft (or a house) takes actual knowledge and
> experience. Surface appearance is not a valid indicator.

I agree with you that it takes knowledge to evaluate aircraft and homes.
(Which is why a pre-buy inspection -- of both -- by a qualified
professional, is essential.)

But I will stand by my statement that appearance matters. If a home-owner
doesn't care enough to keep the gutters functional and proper, God only
knows what they will have done to keep the furnace and water heater going.

Although there are, of course, exceptions to every rule, the same thing goes
with an aircraft. In my opinion, if an owner doesn't care about the
interior and paint to keep things looking nice, God only knows what else
they've skated on. It may indicate that they simply couldn't afford to
keep an aircraft, which means that these will be the same guys who get
el-cheapo, "spray paint" annual inspections, or they may do their own
repairs without proper sign-offs.

These are gross generalizations, to be sure. And, of course, a thorough
pre-buy inspection will separate these dogs from the good buys -- but not
always.

Either way, a great looking plane will sell for significantly more, not
because the buyers are ignorant, but because it costs many thousands of
dollars to paint a plane, and thousands more to re-do an interior.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> However, in my experience it's usually safe to say that an aircraft that's
> kept immaculate is going to sell for a higher price than one that isn't.

It's definitely the case that a plane that's cleaned up for prospective buyers will
probably sell for more than one that isn't, but buyers aren't going to know (and
probably won't care) whether the plane has been "kept immaculate."

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

In article <GHE%c.2313$LT5.143@attbi_s52>, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

> But I will stand by my statement that appearance matters. If a
> home-owner
> doesn't care enough to keep the gutters functional and proper, God only
> knows what they will have done to keep the furnace and water heater
> going.
>
> Although there are, of course, exceptions to every rule, the same thing
> goes
> with an aircraft. In my opinion, if an owner doesn't care about the
> interior and paint to keep things looking nice, God only knows what else
> they've skated on. It may indicate that they simply couldn't afford to
> keep an aircraft, which means that these will be the same guys who get
> el-cheapo, "spray paint" annual inspections, or they may do their own
> repairs without proper sign-offs.

It could mean the current owner doesn't care if the paint is pretty.
What could matter to the current owner is whether or not the
aircraft is mechanically sound. I put a lot of money into
my cherokee to give it great radios and an overhauled engine
(i.e., everything firewall forward overhauled). I don't care if the
paint is sad or the interior isn't pretty - it sure wouldn't fly
any better. Do you really want to try to tell me my aircraft is crap?


>
> These are gross generalizations, to be sure. And, of course, a thorough
> pre-buy inspection will separate these dogs from the good buys -- but not
> always.

true.

>
> Either way, a great looking plane will sell for significantly more, not
> because the buyers are ignorant, but because it costs many thousands of
> dollars to paint a plane, and thousands more to re-do an interior.

No, a great looking plane sells for more precisely because there
are buyers more interested in appearance than making sure the
aircraft is in good shape mechanically.

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

"Jay Honeck" > wrote
> I agree with you that it takes knowledge to evaluate aircraft and homes.
> (Which is why a pre-buy inspection -- of both -- by a qualified
> professional, is essential.)

Absolutely.

> But I will stand by my statement that appearance matters.

You can stand by it, but it's still wrong. You can't judge a book by
the cover.

> If a home-owner
> doesn't care enough to keep the gutters functional and proper, God only
> knows what they will have done to keep the furnace and water heater going.

Just as likely, he noticed that the water heater was showing early
warning signs of a problem (for example, increased fuel use without
increased load) and decided that it was more important to fix this now
(before it got expensive) than to deal with the gutters, and put the
gutters off. That probably doesn't carry much weight if you live out
in the middle of nowhere and consider a house built twenty years ago
old, since there's not much to go wrong in a new house if it's built
well, but check out some houses on the East Coast (where an 1800 sq ft
A-frame built in the 1950's will bring well over $300K - a situation
that has much in common with the used airplane market) and you will
see that this is a major issue.

> Although there are, of course, exceptions to every rule, the same thing goes
> with an aircraft. In my opinion, if an owner doesn't care about the
> interior and paint to keep things looking nice, God only knows what else
> they've skated on.

You've said it before - and all you're doing is showing your
ignorance. It's the owner that has the time to mess with paint and
interior that is probably skating - and doesn't even know it. Then,
when he has a big bill down the road, it will be just one of those
things that happens in airplane ownership.

> It may indicate that they simply couldn't afford to
> keep an aircraft, which means that these will be the same guys who get
> el-cheapo, "spray paint" annual inspections, or they may do their own
> repairs without proper sign-offs.

The former happens, but those are the guys who will get a paint and
interior to sell the plane.

The latter happens too - but remember, it's not the paperwork that
keeps the airplane safe. Usually, the issue isn't getting a signoff -
the people doing the maintenance competently can find someone to sign
it off. The issue is doing the work competently - and incompetent
repairs stand out like a sore thumb on a prepurchase.

> These are gross generalizations, to be sure. And, of course, a thorough
> pre-buy inspection will separate these dogs from the good buys -- but not
> always.

Actually, a good pre-purchase inspection will ALWAYS separate out the
ones that are worth buying from the ones that are not. It might miss
one or thwo things, but a plane that only has one or two things wrong
is rare - and if the owner has been skating on maintenance,
nonexistent. The key is getting a good prepurchase inspection. First
clue - if the mechanic so much as mentions paint and interior, odds
are that you're NOT getting a good one.

In reality, a good pre-purchase is tough to find - and the moment you
start talking about any sort of guarantee or an annual as a
prepurchase, it becomes impossible as every sensible mechanic quickly
figures out what kind of customer he is dealing with and becomes too
busy.

> Either way, a great looking plane will sell for significantly more, not
> because the buyers are ignorant, but because it costs many thousands of
> dollars to paint a plane, and thousands more to re-do an interior.

In reality, a crappy airplane with good paint and interior will
generally sell for more than it would cost to buy a crappy airplane
and have paint and interior done. That's because you can usually
convince some ignorant buyer that the airplane is in good condition
even though it's what experienced owners call a polished turd.

Michael

> Actually, a good pre-purchase inspection will ALWAYS separate out the
> ones that are worth buying from the ones that are not.

Close, but not quite true.

The pre-buy on our first plane (the Warrior) gave it a clean bill of health.
At the annual, just a few months later, we discovered a bad cylinder and
piston, because (believe it or not) the previous owner had simply omitted
the little cap at the end of the pushrod -- the part that actuates the
valve.

We were flying around in a plane that was actually missing a critical engine
part -- and there was simply no way a pre-buy could detect that, short of
tearing down the engine. That first annual ended up costing us $5K -- and
this was after we had a very thorough pre-buy inspection done by the same
shop.

Now that shop turned out to be overly picky and border-line shady, and quite
frankly they took advantage of me as a new owner. (Had I knew then what I
know now, I would have had them button up the plane, and flown it to another
shop.) But the point is still valid -- a pre-buy may not catch everything,
and what slips by can be very, very expensive.

This is why a Spam Can buyer would be just plain foolish to risk buying a
plane with a doggy interior and paint -- which MAY indicate poor
treatment -- when the market is chock-full of aircraft that have been
well-maintained and cared for. The financial risks of buying a bad airplane
are simply too high, so it's the wise buyer who limits his search to
aircraft that have obviously been treated well.

> > Either way, a great looking plane will sell for significantly more, not
> > because the buyers are ignorant, but because it costs many thousands of
> > dollars to paint a plane, and thousands more to re-do an interior.
>
> In reality, a crappy airplane with good paint and interior will
> generally sell for more than it would cost to buy a crappy airplane
> and have paint and interior done. That's because you can usually
> convince some ignorant buyer that the airplane is in good condition
> even though it's what experienced owners call a polished turd.

Around here it's known as putting lipstick on a pig. ;-)

I think BOTH examples occur with regularity. There are goofy buyers who
ignore the pig beneath the lipstick, and there are goofy sellers who let
their planes go to hell.

'Twas ever thus, methinks!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" > wrote
> > Actually, a good pre-purchase inspection will ALWAYS separate out the
> > ones that are worth buying from the ones that are not.
>
> Close, but not quite true.
>
> The pre-buy on our first plane (the Warrior) gave it a clean bill of health.
> At the annual, just a few months later, we discovered a bad cylinder and
> piston, because (believe it or not) the previous owner had simply omitted
> the little cap at the end of the pushrod -- the part that actuates the
> valve.

A bad jug is ONE problem - and not a terribly major one, either. That
doesn't move the airplane from the "worth buying" to "not worth
buying" category. In fact, Lycoming/Continental QC being what it is
(it meets FAA standards - 'nuff said?) occasional bad jugs are a fact
of life.

A well-maintained airplane will usually still have the odd problem.
It's when you see A LOT of them that the plane isn't worth buying -
and a good prepurchase will turn that up every time.

Now the next question is - did you have a good prepurchase?

> Now that shop turned out to be overly picky and border-line shady, and quite
> frankly they took advantage of me as a new owner.

So the answer is no, they did NOT do a good pre-purchase.

> But the point is still valid -- a pre-buy may not catch everything,
> and what slips by can be very, very expensive.

No, the point is really not valid. You dealt with a lousy shop, so
you had a lousy prebuy. They ONLY thing a good prebuy would have
missed was items like that one jug. And that's a maybe - it may
already have been showing marginal compression and required "jiggling"
to get the numbers to come up.

> This is why a Spam Can buyer would be just plain foolish to risk buying a
> plane with a doggy interior and paint -- which MAY indicate poor
> treatment -- when the market is chock-full of aircraft that have been
> well-maintained and cared for.

The market is not full of aircraft that have been well-maintained and
cared for. They are the exception. The market IS full of planes like
the one you bought - good paint and interior, needs an expensive
annual.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again - you need to pick your
mechanic before you start shopping for an airplane. You need to pick
one ONLY on the basis of personal recommendation, from people you
trust, who have the same philosophy on maintenance you do. You can't
judge a book by its cover here either - neither a clean shop floor nor
a big fuzzy cat on a ragged out couch is definitive.

You also need a mentor - an experienced owner who will go with you to
look at the planes - not to do a complete prepurchase, but just give
it a quick look-see and eliminate the dogs. You CAN NOT eliminate the
dogs on the basis of paint and interior - because MOST of the planes
with fresh paint and interior are polished turds. You need someone
who knows something of the type and something about maintenance.

Once you eliminate the turds (and 90% of what is out there will be a
turd) then you have your mechanic do a prepurchase.

Michael

If it is your assumption that most airplanes are turds, and you then decide
that the ones with interior and paint maintained are still most likely
turds, then I may go with you on that one. Depending on how old a plane is,
ones idea of "turd" may change. 90% is too high a number though, especially
if you find a bad jug as acceptable.

If you think buyers typically pay too much attention to the paint and
interior quality then you are completely correct. So if you want to sell
aplane, no matter how good the mechanicals are, painting it is a good idea.

If it is your belief that nothing can be told from fresh paint and interior
vs. not so nice same, then you are wrong. Based on those facts as well as
an intuitive look at the owner, his mechanic, and the log books you can get
some good ideas on how suspicious you should be.

For instance. The owner is crisply dressed, makes or has a lot of money, is
moving up to more plane, drives an expensive late model car (no dents,
waxed), and his hangar is neat and tidy (or he uses a hangar service that
pulls the plane for him). The mechanic has a neat, clean shop. The plane
and log books are compulsively neat and clean. This plane is likely to be a
winner, no matter what the paint and interior condition, but you and I know
this guy has a nice interior and paint. No one would think this plane is
likely to need interior or paint unless its new owner wants it done to his
taste. All the facts fit a nice neat picture. We still do a prebuy, but we
expect we will find it all.

On the other hand. Take a slob owner, who is trading down, or out. Combine
that with a mechanic working out of the back of an '89 buick. This plane is
desiring a serious amount of skepticism. If the paint is new - walk away.
If its old, this doesn't tell you much, but you want to look for things they
may not be telling you because there is a good chance they cannot afford the
repair. Can you afford the prebuy on this plane?

Now, you have a retired guy, who seems the responsible type who wants to
sell his plane. His mechanic is rough around the edges and curses a lot,
but he seems to know his stuff. The paint and interior are old or original,
but clean. The logs look to be in order, and everything seems to work on the
plane except the Loran (which is placarded). Now, I find nothing suspicious
here either. This is likely worth a prebuy.

Can you see where I am going Michael? The plane's condition has to fit the
rest of the story. Saying you should walk away from nice paint and interior
seems a bit foolish. I can tell you that a seller who wants top dollar will
put paint or interior on anything that needs it. Personally, I would rather
do that myself as a new buyer, but most buyers do not respond this way.

In the end, nothing really works but a good prebuy. No rule fits all the
cases. My advice is to listen to the little voice in your head. The same
one that tells you today is not the day to go flying.




"Michael" > wrote in message
om...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote
> > > Actually, a good pre-purchase inspection will ALWAYS separate out the
> > > ones that are worth buying from the ones that are not.
> >
> > Close, but not quite true.
> >
> > The pre-buy on our first plane (the Warrior) gave it a clean bill of
health.
> > At the annual, just a few months later, we discovered a bad cylinder and
> > piston, because (believe it or not) the previous owner had simply
omitted
> > the little cap at the end of the pushrod -- the part that actuates the
> > valve.
>
> A bad jug is ONE problem - and not a terribly major one, either. That
> doesn't move the airplane from the "worth buying" to "not worth
> buying" category. In fact, Lycoming/Continental QC being what it is
> (it meets FAA standards - 'nuff said?) occasional bad jugs are a fact
> of life.
>
> A well-maintained airplane will usually still have the odd problem.
> It's when you see A LOT of them that the plane isn't worth buying -
> and a good prepurchase will turn that up every time.
>
> Now the next question is - did you have a good prepurchase?
>
> > Now that shop turned out to be overly picky and border-line shady, and
quite
> > frankly they took advantage of me as a new owner.
>
> So the answer is no, they did NOT do a good pre-purchase.
>
> > But the point is still valid -- a pre-buy may not catch everything,
> > and what slips by can be very, very expensive.
>
> No, the point is really not valid. You dealt with a lousy shop, so
> you had a lousy prebuy. They ONLY thing a good prebuy would have
> missed was items like that one jug. And that's a maybe - it may
> already have been showing marginal compression and required "jiggling"
> to get the numbers to come up.
>
> > This is why a Spam Can buyer would be just plain foolish to risk buying
a
> > plane with a doggy interior and paint -- which MAY indicate poor
> > treatment -- when the market is chock-full of aircraft that have been
> > well-maintained and cared for.
>
> The market is not full of aircraft that have been well-maintained and
> cared for. They are the exception. The market IS full of planes like
> the one you bought - good paint and interior, needs an expensive
> annual.
>
> I've said this before, and I'll say it again - you need to pick your
> mechanic before you start shopping for an airplane. You need to pick
> one ONLY on the basis of personal recommendation, from people you
> trust, who have the same philosophy on maintenance you do. You can't
> judge a book by its cover here either - neither a clean shop floor nor
> a big fuzzy cat on a ragged out couch is definitive.
>
> You also need a mentor - an experienced owner who will go with you to
> look at the planes - not to do a complete prepurchase, but just give
> it a quick look-see and eliminate the dogs. You CAN NOT eliminate the
> dogs on the basis of paint and interior - because MOST of the planes
> with fresh paint and interior are polished turds. You need someone
> who knows something of the type and something about maintenance.
>
> Once you eliminate the turds (and 90% of what is out there will be a
> turd) then you have your mechanic do a prepurchase.
>
> Michael

"Dude" > wrote
> If it is your assumption that most airplanes are turds, and you then decide
> that the ones with interior and paint maintained are still most likely
> turds, then I may go with you on that one. Depending on how old a plane is,
> ones idea of "turd" may change. 90% is too high a number though, especially
> if you find a bad jug as acceptable.

No, in my experience 90% is about right. And here's the problem with
a bad jug - the best maintained planes get them. You can't tell
without doing a compression check - the power loss is not noticeable.
So if you're buying a plane, and you do the first compression check
the plane has had since annual, 4 months and 4 hours ago...

> If you think buyers typically pay too much attention to the paint and
> interior quality then you are completely correct. So if you want to sell
> aplane, no matter how good the mechanicals are, painting it is a good idea.

No argument.

> If it is your belief that nothing can be told from fresh paint and interior
> vs. not so nice same, then you are wrong. Based on those facts as well as
> an intuitive look at the owner, his mechanic, and the log books you can get
> some good ideas on how suspicious you should be.

No. The look at the owner, mechanic, and logbooks tells you a lot.
The fresh paint and interior never tell you anything positive. They
MAY tell you something negative.

> For instance. The owner is crisply dressed, makes or has a lot of money, is
> moving up to more plane, drives an expensive late model car (no dents,
> waxed), and his hangar is neat and tidy (or he uses a hangar service that
> pulls the plane for him). The mechanic has a neat, clean shop. The plane
> and log books are compulsively neat and clean. This plane is likely to be a
> winner, no matter what the paint and interior condition

Bingo. Paint and interior tell you nothing at that point.

> but you and I know
> this guy has a nice interior and paint.

Almost certainly. Only way he won't is if he bought the plane ratty,
started to upgrade it, paid attention to the important stuff first -
and then decided he needed more plane than he has so is trading up.
Not likely, which is why most of those planes will have nice interior
and paint. Also they will bring top dollar.

> On the other hand. Take a slob owner, who is trading down, or out. Combine
> that with a mechanic working out of the back of an '89 buick. This plane is
> desiring a serious amount of skepticism. If the paint is new - walk away.

Again - agree. So the new paint has told you something about the
plane - but it's negative.

> If its old, this doesn't tell you much

Right again. Maybe the owner and mechanic are just slobs, maybe
they're mechanically sloppy too. You don't know. Old paint told you
nothing. But new paint told you to walk away. This is exactly what I
was talking about.

> but you want to look for things they
> may not be telling you because there is a good chance they cannot afford the
> repair. Can you afford the prebuy on this plane?

Good question. If you're going in cold as a novice and making the
decision to call in the mechanic on your evaluation - the answer is
probably not. If you have the benefit of an experienced owner with
you who knows the type, don't walk away so fast. In an hour or two of
looking at plane and logs, he will either tell you it's a turd (90%
probability) or tell you that it looks good to him. If the latter,
get the mechanic for the prebuy. But not any mechanic - you need one
who really knows the type and knows where the bodies are buried. Of
course that's the case anyway.

> Now, you have a retired guy, who seems the responsible type who wants to
> sell his plane. His mechanic is rough around the edges and curses a lot,
> but he seems to know his stuff. The paint and interior are old or original,
> but clean. The logs look to be in order, and everything seems to work on the
> plane except the Loran (which is placarded). Now, I find nothing suspicious
> here either. This is likely worth a prebuy.

Once again I agree. What's more, this plane is probably the best deal
going.

> Can you see where I am going Michael? The plane's condition has to fit the
> rest of the story. Saying you should walk away from nice paint and interior
> seems a bit foolish.

It is, and that's not what I said. What I did say is that nice paint
and interior never tell you anything positive. Sometimes they're a
certain sign that you should walk away, other times they're just an
expected part of the picture.

> I can tell you that a seller who wants top dollar will
> put paint or interior on anything that needs it. Personally, I would rather
> do that myself as a new buyer, but most buyers do not respond this way.

Once again, I completely agree.

> In the end, nothing really works but a good prebuy.

Once again - I agree 100%.

Michael

> No, in my experience 90% is about right. And here's the problem with
> a bad jug - the best maintained planes get them. You can't tell
> without doing a compression check - the power loss is not noticeable.

In my case, the Warrior had a thorough pre-buy, by a reputable shop, the
compressions were great -- but the jug nevertheless failed a few months
later, because the engine was actually missing a critical internal part. No
pre-buy on earth would have detected that missing rotator cap -- unless they
were tearing the engine down.

Buying an old plane is always a roll of the dice, but -- had I known then
what I know now -- I would have more thoroughly researched the *seller*, not
so much the aircraft.

The seller was an FBO manager, from Marshfield, WI. I found out later that
he was apparently selling off his aircraft to pay his way out of bankruptcy.
Had I known that at the time, I would have walked away from the table, since
a guy going bankrupt is NOT going to be able to maintain an aircraft
properly. That missing rotator cap -- left out because he probably had the
wrong length push-rod in stock -- could have killed me.

Ah, well. It's now the finest Warrior, anywhere -- so all's well that ends
well.

(Besides, I'd have just spent all that money in the bars probably anyway...)

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" > wrote
> In my case, the Warrior had a thorough pre-buy, by a reputable shop

No, we've already established that the shop was disreputable.

> the compressions were great

Were they? Or was the prop wiggled until they looked good? Have you
ever done a compression check yourself? Did you watch them do the
compression check? Unless the answer to both questions is yes, how do
you know it was done properly?

> but the jug nevertheless failed a few months
> later, because the engine was actually missing a critical internal part.

Yes, we know. But what we don't know is if there was already a worked
spot on the jug that a proper compression check would have detected.
Maybe yes, maybe no. We're never going to know, either. Sometimes
jugs fail because an error was made in the assembly. Sometimes they
fail because of a manufacturing defect. Sometimes they fail because
of the way they are operated. Replacing jugs is a fact of life.

> Buying an old plane is always a roll of the dice, but -- had I known then
> what I know now -- I would have more thoroughly researched the *seller*, not
> so much the aircraft.

Yes, if you don't know much about aircraft but know a lot about
people, that might be your best bet. But aircraft are a lot easier to
inspect - if you know how.

> The seller was an FBO manager, from Marshfield, WI. I found out later that
> he was apparently selling off his aircraft to pay his way out of bankruptcy.
> Had I known that at the time, I would have walked away from the table, since
> a guy going bankrupt is NOT going to be able to maintain an aircraft
> properly.

He could afford nice paint and interior though...

> That missing rotator cap -- left out because he probably had the
> wrong length push-rod in stock -- could have killed me.

If a failed jug can kill you, maybe you need to rethink the way you
fly. Jugs fail, for all sorts of reasons, and with depressing
regularity. And BTW, pushrods are cheap and you can get them quickly.
More than likely, he left out the part by mistake.

Michael

I don't know for sure but I'd bet that Vref prices are high becasue the
dealers who report sales tend to either report them too high or they ONLY
report the ones that sell high.

Vref and Aircraft Blue Book get their data from dealers who report sales to
them. It serves the dealers interests to keep prices high, so they serve
themselves by mis-reporting aircraft sale values in such a way as to inflate
the Blue Book and Vref prices.

Just a theory.

I appreciate the sentiment, but I doubt it is true. You are right about
where the data comes from, but I wouldn't suspect the dealers to that
degree. My guess is that planes sold through dealers simply get sold
for more money than the average.

Anyone know the ratio of dealer- or broker-sold aircraft to those sold
through private parties?

Howard wrote:

> I don't know for sure but I'd bet that Vref prices are high becasue the
> dealers who report sales tend to either report them too high or they ONLY
> report the ones that sell high.
>
> Vref and Aircraft Blue Book get their data from dealers who report sales to
> them. It serves the dealers interests to keep prices high, so they serve
> themselves by mis-reporting aircraft sale values in such a way as to inflate
> the Blue Book and Vref prices.
>
> Just a theory.
>
>

Only a few dealer/brokers keep very much inventory. Many of their planes
are brokered, so its not really theirs. Consequently, they mostly do not
care about the prices. They make money on the margin, so propping up prices
with lies would be a stretch.

Small firms, and FBO's who sideline in planes often have a very low cost of
sale because they have a facility already, or the owner is also the sales
person. They do not have to mark planes up as much, but they have little
room to help you out if you get a lemon.

Large firms, and new plane dealers have to make a lot of money on each sale
due to overhead. Also, a dealer who deals in a certain make generally gets
a higher price on that make because he is expected to stand behind it to
protect his reputation. These guys are not necessarily going to be there for
you if there is a problem, but they generally have a little more ability to
help. Some are still just jerks, so watch out.

One important thing that will prop up averages is the tax code. Plane deals
with trades involved sometimes get inflated because one side perceives a tax
advantage to the higher costs, and the other doesn't care. Another is
owners pride. Just like a car trade, they can inflate your trade in instead
of giving a discount on your new car.

For a tax advantage example, say the 206 is going to be a company plane, and
it will be depreciated, so the dealer charges you over list price on the new
plane and gives you a high trade in on your trade. He only cares about the
difference, but you can now depreciate more on the new plane. Of course,
this only works if there is no tax penalty on the trade side, where there
often is.




"Elwood Dowd" > wrote in message
...
> I appreciate the sentiment, but I doubt it is true. You are right about
> where the data comes from, but I wouldn't suspect the dealers to that
> degree. My guess is that planes sold through dealers simply get sold
> for more money than the average.
>
> Anyone know the ratio of dealer- or broker-sold aircraft to those sold
> through private parties?
>
> Howard wrote:
>
> > I don't know for sure but I'd bet that Vref prices are high becasue the
> > dealers who report sales tend to either report them too high or they
ONLY
> > report the ones that sell high.
> >
> > Vref and Aircraft Blue Book get their data from dealers who report sales
to
> > them. It serves the dealers interests to keep prices high, so they
serve
> > themselves by mis-reporting aircraft sale values in such a way as to
inflate
> > the Blue Book and Vref prices.
> >
> > Just a theory.
> >
> >