Why so many 310s for sale?

[[email protected][_1_]]

I've noticed quite a few Cessna 310s posted for sale recently on
ebaymotors and controller.com. This got me wondering if there is a
reason why there are so many on the market (beyond the obvious high
fuel and insurance costs for twins). Are 310s impacted by the spar ADs
that the bigger twin Cessnas have to deal with?

The 310 always looked like an interesting plane to me. With prices the
way they are right now, it looks like there are some bargains out
there.

Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html

[Mark Manes]

Eric,

No spar AD's yet and hopefully we won't have. More than likely there is an
increase in
number for sale due to fuel costs. My T310-Q burns 30 gph. My insurance
(abt $4100 for $180k Hull Value)
did increase about $300 last year over the previous year. I have about 150
hrs on my factory remans (last December) yet the value decreased about $20k
last year according to AOPA valuation. I have about
900 hrs in mine in 5 yrs and really like the room inside and speed (abt
185kts TAS @ 65%).
I thought about selling mine but with the depressed market thought I would
hold off a while.
It would probably be the best time to buy one in a long time. Any specific
questions email me.

Mark Manes
N28409
WC5I


> wrote in message
ups.com...
> I've noticed quite a few Cessna 310s posted for sale recently on
> ebaymotors and controller.com. This got me wondering if there is a
> reason why there are so many on the market (beyond the obvious high
> fuel and insurance costs for twins). Are 310s impacted by the spar ADs
> that the bigger twin Cessnas have to deal with?
>
> The 310 always looked like an interesting plane to me. With prices the
> way they are right now, it looks like there are some bargains out
> there.
>
> Eric Bartsch
> 1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
> http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html
>

[john smith]

In article om>,
" > wrote:

> I've noticed quite a few Cessna 310s posted for sale recently on
> ebaymotors and controller.com. This got me wondering if there is a
> reason why there are so many on the market (beyond the obvious high
> fuel and insurance costs for twins). Are 310s impacted by the spar ADs
> that the bigger twin Cessnas have to deal with?
>
> The 310 always looked like an interesting plane to me. With prices the
> way they are right now, it looks like there are some bargains out
> there.

Find out what their histories are.
Many have been used to haul freight so the combination of spar AD and
runout engines may make it cheaper to pickup something else than to
rebuild the engines and comply with the spar AD. Some operations bought
310s because of their speed, but the do not haul as much as a Baron.

[Jay Honeck]

> The 310 always looked like an interesting plane to me. With prices the
> way they are right now, it looks like there are some bargains out
> there.

I agree, it's a cool plane. The coldest I've ever been in my life was
flying a 310 into Rochester, MN....but I digress...

The twin market in general has taken a huge dump. Two friends on the
field who own twins (an Aerostar and a Baron) have completely given up
trying to activiely sell them, because they can't possibly get back
anywhere near what they've got invested in them.

I think part of this is cyclical (people have to get used to higher gas
prices again, every few years), but part of this is a real sea change.
For a long time, being a "real pilot" meant retractable gear and two
engines. Now, with Cirrus and Lancair/Columbia proving that fixed gear
doesn't mean "slow", and Richard Collins (of Flying Magazine) almost
single-handedly proving that two engines doesn't mean "safe", I think
we're seeing a real move away from the traditional twin-engine plane.

Which is great, if you're buying, and really sucks, if you're
selling...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[john smith]

In article om>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> I agree, it's a cool plane. The coldest I've ever been in my life was
> flying a 310 into Rochester, MN....but I digress...

Probably worn out door seals.
I flew right seat with a friend from Ohio to Florida and back one trip.
I could feel the draft when the seal lost pressure. There was a hand
bulb air pump that would squeeze until I felt resistance to indicate the
seal was pumped up. No more cold air draft.

[Jim Burns[_1_]]

I've followed the Aerostar and the Beech Duke market lately and I agree,
their resale prices continue to decline. I haven't paid attention to Baron
prices. I also follow the Aztec market and it seems to have rebounded.
Last year we could have had our choice of Aztecs that were 10 years newer,
lower engine times, with better avionics and equipment for the same price or
slightly more than we paid for ours. Today these airplanes are up
significantly and I find several examples comparable to ours selling at or
above what we paid. As far as getting back what's been invested? Not a
chance if you include upgrades, especially in the avionics department.

I think that the best return bang for your buck will always be 4 place fixed
gear singles and certain "specialty" planes such as SuperCubs, C180's ect.

Jim


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> > The 310 always looked like an interesting plane to me. With prices the
> > way they are right now, it looks like there are some bargains out
> > there.
>
> I agree, it's a cool plane. The coldest I've ever been in my life was
> flying a 310 into Rochester, MN....but I digress...
>
> The twin market in general has taken a huge dump. Two friends on the
> field who own twins (an Aerostar and a Baron) have completely given up
> trying to activiely sell them, because they can't possibly get back
> anywhere near what they've got invested in them.
>
> I think part of this is cyclical (people have to get used to higher gas
> prices again, every few years), but part of this is a real sea change.
> For a long time, being a "real pilot" meant retractable gear and two
> engines. Now, with Cirrus and Lancair/Columbia proving that fixed gear
> doesn't mean "slow", and Richard Collins (of Flying Magazine) almost
> single-handedly proving that two engines doesn't mean "safe", I think
> we're seeing a real move away from the traditional twin-engine plane.
>
> Which is great, if you're buying, and really sucks, if you're
> selling...
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Nathan Young]

On 1 Dec 2006 19:27:17 -0800, " >
wrote:

>I've noticed quite a few Cessna 310s posted for sale recently on
>ebaymotors and controller.com. This got me wondering if there is a
>reason why there are so many on the market (beyond the obvious high
>fuel and insurance costs for twins). Are 310s impacted by the spar ADs
>that the bigger twin Cessnas have to deal with?
>
>The 310 always looked like an interesting plane to me. With prices the
>way they are right now, it looks like there are some bargains out
>there.

Owning a high performance twin is ridiculously expensive.

Examine the 310:

Factoryengines.com lists the O-470 as ~$27k rebuilt. So $54k of
engine reserve spread across 1500 or 1700 hrs depending on the exact
engine model, and that does not include removal/installation costsl.
$31/hr reserve.

Fuel burn = 14gph * 2 = 28gph.
Gas prices are down recently, but $5 fuel was common only a few months
ago. So 28 * $5.00 = $140/hr.

Oil. $5/quart.
Consumption = 2 quart every 10 hours between the two engines = $1/hr.
Oil Changes = 20 quarts every 50 hrs = $2/hr.
Total = $3/hr.

So $140 + $31 + $3 = $174/hr for the variable costs.

Now the fixed costs:
Hangar. This one varies depending on location. A twin in heated,
shared space at my Chicago area airport is $600. A T-hangar can be
leased for $375, so let's go with that. $375 * 12 = $4,500/yr.

Insurance. I have no idea what today's rates on a 310 are, but I
looked into Seneca II insurance about 2 years ago, and the best rate
this low time ME pilot could find was $5,000/yr. I doubt a 310 is any
cheaper.

Maintenance. This is the big variable. I would think a minimum of
$7,500 should be budgeted for annuals, cylinders, avionics, and the
misc expenses.

Spread the fixed costs across 200hrs of flying. Which is probably
more than a typical owner/pilot would fly in a year.

$4500 + 5000 + 7500 = $17,000
$17,000 / 200hrs yields $85/hr.

So summing the fixed and variable costs for 200hrs per year is
~$260/hr, or $51,800 per year, and this figure neglects the cost of
capital.

The purchase price of many older 310s is not much higher than that!

Worse, there are no guarantees... ...that the engine will make TBO,
....that cracks will not be found on the 40 year old wing spar, ...
that the overwing exhaust hasn't corroded the wingspar.

[[email protected][_1_]]

Jay,

I agree that the Cirrus/Columbia/Diamond Star aircraft are having an
impact on the light twin market. In many cases the SR-22 or the
Columbia's are actually faster than many light twins, and they have
much better avionics. However, at this point, there are a lot of 310s
with low time engines, nice avionics, and relatively new paint &
interiors; that are selling for relatively low prices (about 1/3 of
what a Cirrus goes for new). As I mentioned to you, at some point in
the next couple of years, I'm going to have to trade the Pilatus for
something more practical. It is tempting to look at a late 60s or early
70s 310 that has been nicely taken care of, although the fuel bills
would be significant, and the reserve for engine & prop overhauls would
have to be huge. If the conversations I had with insurance agents at
Oshkosh were accurate, I might be able to get insured on the 310
cheaper than on a Cirrus.

In the end its probably all wishful thinking, but a nice 310 would be a
great plane.

Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html


On Dec 2, 10:43 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > The 310 always looked like an interesting plane to me. With prices the
> > way they are right now, it looks like there are some bargains out
> > there.I agree, it's a cool plane. The coldest I've ever been in my life was
> flying a 310 into Rochester, MN....but I digress...
>
> The twin market in general has taken a huge dump. Two friends on the
> field who own twins (an Aerostar and a Baron) have completely given up
> trying to activiely sell them, because they can't possibly get back
> anywhere near what they've got invested in them.
>
> I think part of this is cyclical (people have to get used to higher gas
> prices again, every few years), but part of this is a real sea change.
> For a long time, being a "real pilot" meant retractable gear and two
> engines. Now, with Cirrus and Lancair/Columbia proving that fixed gear
> doesn't mean "slow", and Richard Collins (of Flying Magazine) almost
> single-handedly proving that two engines doesn't mean "safe", I think
> we're seeing a real move away from the traditional twin-engine plane.
>
> Which is great, if you're buying, and really sucks, if you're
> selling...
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

[karl gruber[_1_]]

"john smith" > wrote in message
...
> In article om>,
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>> I agree, it's a cool plane. The coldest I've ever been in my life was
>> flying a 310 into Rochester, MN....but I digress...
>
> Probably worn out door seals.
> I flew right seat with a friend from Ohio to Florida and back one trip.
> I could feel the draft when the seal lost pressure. There was a hand
> bulb air pump that would squeeze until I felt resistance to indicate the
> seal was pumped up. No more cold air draft.

Mor likely the Janitrol heater was out. They are a HUGE maintenance item.


Karl

[Jay Honeck]

> Mor likely the Janitrol heater was out. They are a HUGE maintenance item.

Bingo. We thought we were going to die.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[[email protected]]

I've been looking at light twins- B55, 310, PA30 as an upgrade from my
comanche 260. There were a lot of 310's built (5400 I read) which is
one reason for the market for these. I would not want to have to sell a
twin at the moment, but good time to buy as stated.

Mark-do you know off hand how wide your cockpit is? I need extra
shoulder space( B55 seemed tighter than my pa24)

thanks.

Andy

[john smith]

In article >,
"Jim Burns" > wrote:

> I also follow the Aztec market and it seems to have rebounded.
> Last year we could have had our choice of Aztecs that were 10 years newer,
> lower engine times, with better avionics and equipment for the same price or
> slightly more than we paid for ours. Today these airplanes are up
> significantly and I find several examples comparable to ours selling at or
> above what we paid.

If you are new to twins, the Aztec is the best buy. It's fat wing is
more forgiving and offers better single engine handling.

[[email protected][_1_]]

Mark,

Thanks for the T310 information. At the moment I'm just window
shopping, but in about 2 years I'll probably be seriously looking at
something (either partnership or sole ownership). Right now I'm flying
a warbird and enjoying that a lot, but for transportation it is kind of
useless. At some point I'm going to need to get back to something the
family can fit into to go places. Of course an ex-Air Force 310 would
still get into the warbird parking at Oshkosh :-)

The prices do look like a real bargain right now. I saw some very nice
non-turbo models for $110K to $125K with low time engines and nice
avionics. For that price, you can afford to spend a little more on
fuel. A good older 210 or Saratoga goes for more than that.
(unfortunately Bonanzas and Barons are not in my future as they are too
cramped inside, or I'm too tall).

Thanks again for the info,
Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html

On Dec 2, 7:42 am, "Mark Manes" > wrote:
> Eric,
>
> No spar AD's yet and hopefully we won't have. More than likely there is an
> increase in
> number for sale due to fuel costs. My T310-Q burns 30 gph. My insurance
> (abt $4100 for $180k Hull Value)
> did increase about $300 last year over the previous year. I have about 150
> hrs on my factory remans (last December) yet the value decreased about $20k
> last year according to AOPA valuation. I have about
> 900 hrs in mine in 5 yrs and really like the room inside and speed (abt
> 185kts TAS @ 65%).
> I thought about selling mine but with the depressed market thought I would
> hold off a while.
> It would probably be the best time to buy one in a long time. Any specific
> questions email me.
>
> Mark Manes
> N28409
> WC5I
>
> > wrote in oglegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > I've noticed quite a few Cessna 310s posted for sale recently on
> > ebaymotors and controller.com. This got me wondering if there is a
> > reason why there are so many on the market (beyond the obvious high
> > fuel and insurance costs for twins). Are 310s impacted by the spar ADs
> > that the bigger twin Cessnas have to deal with?
>
> > The 310 always looked like an interesting plane to me. With prices the
> > way they are right now, it looks like there are some bargains out
> > there.
>
> > Eric Bartsch
> > 1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
> >http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

[[email protected]]

Jay Honeck > wrote:
: > Mor likely the Janitrol heater was out. They are a HUGE maintenance item.

: Bingo. We thought we were going to die.
: --
Having spent a lot of time in Southern MN as a kid, I can say it gets friggin' *COLD* there... and I've lived in
Fairbanks, Alaska! I'd rather have -40 in Fairbanks than 0 in Minneapolis. Flying in that would be something else.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Mark Manes]

Andy,
I don't know the dimensions off hand but I will be going by the hanger today
and I'll measure it.
I have a friend who sold his B55 about a year ago. He said there was a lot
more room in my
310 than his Baron. I sat in his once with no no one else in the cockpit
and I thought it was smaller.
I saw a comment on the group about 310 being cold. My heater works, we were
comfortable @
-10 deg F OAT ( we had to go to 16000' to stay out of the ice) on a trip to
Alaska this July.

Mark
N28409


> wrote in message
ups.com...
> I've been looking at light twins- B55, 310, PA30 as an upgrade from my
> comanche 260. There were a lot of 310's built (5400 I read) which is
> one reason for the market for these. I would not want to have to sell a
> twin at the moment, but good time to buy as stated.
>
> Mark-do you know off hand how wide your cockpit is? I need extra
> shoulder space( B55 seemed tighter than my pa24)
>
> thanks.
>
> Andy
>

[M[_1_]]

Plus the fuel cost.

I don't know of any twins that can burn autogas Jay :-)


Jay Honeck wrote:

>
> The twin market in general has taken a huge dump. Two friends on the
> field who own twins (an Aerostar and a Baron) have completely given up
> trying to activiely sell them, because they can't possibly get back
> anywhere near what they've got invested in them.
>
> I think part of this is cyclical (people have to get used to higher gas
> prices again, every few years), but part of this is a real sea change.
> For a long time, being a "real pilot" meant retractable gear and two
> engines. Now, with Cirrus and Lancair/Columbia proving that fixed gear
> doesn't mean "slow", and Richard Collins (of Flying Magazine) almost
> single-handedly proving that two engines doesn't mean "safe", I think
> we're seeing a real move away from the traditional twin-engine plane.
>
> Which is great, if you're buying, and really sucks, if you're
> selling...
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article om>,
"M" > wrote:

> Plus the fuel cost.
>
> I don't know of any twins that can burn autogas Jay :-)

Beech Model 18 series
Cessna T-50 Bobcat (Bamboo Bomber)
Piper PA-23-150 Apache 150 HP




> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> >
> > The twin market in general has taken a huge dump. Two friends on the
> > field who own twins (an Aerostar and a Baron) have completely given up
> > trying to activiely sell them, because they can't possibly get back
> > anywhere near what they've got invested in them.
> >
> > I think part of this is cyclical (people have to get used to higher gas
> > prices again, every few years), but part of this is a real sea change.
> > For a long time, being a "real pilot" meant retractable gear and two
> > engines. Now, with Cirrus and Lancair/Columbia proving that fixed gear
> > doesn't mean "slow", and Richard Collins (of Flying Magazine) almost
> > single-handedly proving that two engines doesn't mean "safe", I think
> > we're seeing a real move away from the traditional twin-engine plane.
> >
> > Which is great, if you're buying, and really sucks, if you're
> > selling...
> > --
> > Jay Honeck
> > Iowa City, IA
> > Pathfinder N56993
> > www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > "Your Aviation Destination"

[Mark Manes]

Andy,

Didn't make it to the airport Sunday but got there today.
My cabin is 43" wide at the floor right in front of the seats.
At the bottom of the window (right at my elbow) it's 47" and
the cabin is 49" tall between the front seats.

Hope that gives you what you wanted to know.

CU
Mark


> wrote in message
ups.com...
> I've been looking at light twins- B55, 310, PA30 as an upgrade from my
> comanche 260. There were a lot of 310's built (5400 I read) which is
> one reason for the market for these. I would not want to have to sell a
> twin at the moment, but good time to buy as stated.
>
> Mark-do you know off hand how wide your cockpit is? I need extra
> shoulder space( B55 seemed tighter than my pa24)
>
> thanks.
>
> Andy
>

[[email protected]]

Thanks Mark- that's what I wanted to know. Roomy that. My comanche is
42" or so at the elbow-B55 felt a little tighter. I need to go fly a
310.

What are your thoughts Turbo vs not for the 310?

Thanks again.

Andy

[Mark Manes]

Andy,

It depends on how you will be flying it.I had reservations about turbo'ed
aircraft
at first. Mainly a lot of people tell me that turbochargers cause problems.
That's
not what I found to be. I replaced the engines last year (you do have to
prepare
for that: around $80k). Both engines made TBO with no turbo problems. The
left
engine was 50 hrs over and the right one was 100 hrs over (replaced 50 hrs
later).
The right engine was still in good shape but I felt that beating the $2500
price increase
was to my advantage. I put 5 jugs on in the time the previous engines were
on the
plane. I owned the plane for about the last 800 hrs on those engines. So I
guess the
main issue is mission. The non turnbo'ed should burn abt 24 gph and mine
about
30gph (book says should get 28 in cruise but I can't). I don't run lean of
peak and try
to cruise at 65% all of the time. I expect the non turbo'ed to be 15 to 20
kts slower at
12,000' (where I reall like to fly). I have crosssed the Rockies 4 to 5
times at 16,000
& 17,000 feet. I flew the coastal route to Alaska in July this year and had
to go to
16000 to stay out of the ice (mines's not de-iced by the way). I wouldn't
have gone
up the coast without being able to go high.

I LIKE THE TURBO AND WOULD DO THE SAME THING AGAIN!

Hope this helps.

Mark


> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Thanks Mark- that's what I wanted to know. Roomy that. My comanche is
> 42" or so at the elbow-B55 felt a little tighter. I need to go fly a
> 310.
>
> What are your thoughts Turbo vs not for the 310?
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Andy
>

[[email protected]]

Great info Mark. Much appreciated.


Andy