1966 C-172 For Auction

[Victor Bravo]

I have listed another aircraft on ebay for one of my airport
naighbors, this one is a 1966 Cessna 172G with 795 SMOH, in annual and
ready to fly right now. This is NOT a show quality plane, it DOES have
major damage history, and it AIN'T perfect. It is not embarrassing in
any way, it's just a cheap family cruiser or time builder only. This
one should go fairly cheap (as 172's go), and will provide many
hundreds or even thousands of hours of cheap, reliable flying.

If you're an avionics-porno addict, this one ain't for you. It's a
plain vanilla VFR cruiser with nothing worth writing home about in the
panel.

As I wrote in the auction description, lay a $250 handheld GPS on top
of the glareshield and you will arrive at your destination with the
same precision as a $200K+ new 172, but you will have $170,000 or so
more in your pocket than Mister Full Retail has in his pocket. Perhaps
that chunk of money will relieve some of the agony of not keeping up
with the avionics Joneses.

You can put that $170K into private school for your kids... and the
guy who mortgaged his house for the new 172 will have to ship his kids
off to public school... and then HE will have to endure the heartache
of seeing HIS kids contorting their little hands into incomprehensible
gang signals as they are assisted into the back of the police car.

Better bid on this 172 in a hurry. Don't do it for me, do it for the
sake of your children....

[Anthony W]

What, no link???

Tony

Victor Bravo wrote:
> I have listed another aircraft on ebay for one of my airport
> naighbors, this one is a 1966 Cessna 172G with 795 SMOH, in annual and
> ready to fly right now. This is NOT a show quality plane, it DOES have
> major damage history, and it AIN'T perfect. It is not embarrassing in
> any way, it's just a cheap family cruiser or time builder only. This
> one should go fairly cheap (as 172's go), and will provide many
> hundreds or even thousands of hours of cheap, reliable flying.
>
> If you're an avionics-porno addict, this one ain't for you. It's a
> plain vanilla VFR cruiser with nothing worth writing home about in the
> panel.
>
> As I wrote in the auction description, lay a $250 handheld GPS on top
> of the glareshield and you will arrive at your destination with the
> same precision as a $200K+ new 172, but you will have $170,000 or so
> more in your pocket than Mister Full Retail has in his pocket. Perhaps
> that chunk of money will relieve some of the agony of not keeping up
> with the avionics Joneses.
>
> You can put that $170K into private school for your kids... and the
> guy who mortgaged his house for the new 172 will have to ship his kids
> off to public school... and then HE will have to endure the heartache
> of seeing HIS kids contorting their little hands into incomprehensible
> gang signals as they are assisted into the back of the police car.
>
> Better bid on this 172 in a hurry. Don't do it for me, do it for the
> sake of your children....
>

[Ron Natalie]

Anthony W wrote:
> What, no link???
>
> Tony

There's only 1 172G listed right now.

[Anthony W]

Ron Natalie wrote:

>> What, no link???
>
> There's only 1 172G listed right now.

I found it but for some reason searching on 172 didn't find it. It's
not in my budget but it looks like a pretty good deal.

Tony

[Matt Whiting]

Anthony W wrote:
> Ron Natalie wrote:
>
>>> What, no link???
>>
>> There's only 1 172G listed right now.
>
> I found it but for some reason searching on 172 didn't find it. It's
> not in my budget but it looks like a pretty good deal.
>
> Tony

Since when are 172s homebuilts?

[Victor Bravo]

On Jul 1, 5:45 pm, Matt Whiting > wrote:
> Anthony W wrote:

> Since when are 172s homebuilts?

Since airplane buyers are often looking for an airplane but are
flexible in terms of exactly what they are going to buy. Someone
looking for a Christavia Mk. 4 homebuilt , an O'Neill Magnum
homebuilt, a 4 seat Comp Monster homebuilt, or perhaps someone who WAS
willing to settle for a Kitfox... may find that they can get a 172 for
the same price, regardless of whether it is certified.

In other words, a seller of a Turbine Legend, or a 2/3 scale P-51, or
a brand new Yak-18 / CJ-6 would ROUTINELY put their ad in a Warbirds
newsgroup even though a Legend and a Chinese trainer are definitely
not warbirds, but because those airplanes have the same kind of
performance as many warbirds... it's fair game. And a guy who wants a
P-51 but is thinking twice about the price tag might be interested to
know of an airplane of similar performance for less money. BTW, the
reserve price of $24,000 HAS been met on this auction, so at this
stage high bid flies away with a good solid airplane.

[Al Giazirra]

On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:02:11 -0700, Victor Bravo >
wrote:

>On Jul 1, 5:45 pm, Matt Whiting > wrote:
>> Anthony W wrote:
>
>> Since when are 172s homebuilts?
>
>Since airplane buyers are often looking for an airplane but are
>flexible in terms of exactly what they are going to buy. Someone
>looking for a Christavia Mk. 4 homebuilt , an O'Neill Magnum
>homebuilt, a 4 seat Comp Monster homebuilt, or perhaps someone who WAS
>willing to settle for a Kitfox... may find that they can get a 172 for
>the same price, regardless of whether it is certified.
>
>In other words, a seller of a Turbine Legend, or a 2/3 scale P-51, or
>a brand new Yak-18 / CJ-6 would ROUTINELY put their ad in a Warbirds
>newsgroup even though a Legend and a Chinese trainer are definitely
>not warbirds, but because those airplanes have the same kind of
>performance as many warbirds... it's fair game. And a guy who wants a
>P-51 but is thinking twice about the price tag might be interested to
>know of an airplane of similar performance for less money. BTW, the
>reserve price of $24,000 HAS been met on this auction, so at this
>stage high bid flies away with a good solid airplane.

Geez, Marketing 101. Whodathunkit?

[Barnyard BOb]

Al Giazirra wrote:


>>> Since when are 172s homebuilts?
>>
>>Since airplane buyers are often looking for an airplane but are
>>flexible in terms of exactly what they are going to buy. Someone
>>looking for a Christavia Mk. 4 homebuilt , an O'Neill Magnum
>>homebuilt, a 4 seat Comp Monster homebuilt, or perhaps someone who WAS
>>willing to settle for a Kitfox... may find that they can get a 172 for
>>the same price, regardless of whether it is certified.
>>
>>In other words, a seller of a Turbine Legend, or a 2/3 scale P-51, or
>>a brand new Yak-18 / CJ-6 would ROUTINELY put their ad in a Warbirds
>>newsgroup even though a Legend and a Chinese trainer are definitely
>>not warbirds, but because those airplanes have the same kind of
>>performance as many warbirds... it's fair game. And a guy who wants a
>>P-51 but is thinking twice about the price tag might be interested to
>>know of an airplane of similar performance for less money. BTW, the
>>reserve price of $24,000 HAS been met on this auction, so at this
>>stage high bid flies away with a good solid airplane.
>
>Geez, Marketing 101. Whodathunkit?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Endearing name for this audience, Al.

Moving on....
Marketing 101 is irrelevant.

Given that so few posts here are consistently on topic,
something else is afoot besides plain ol ignorance,
prejudice, etcetera.

Some folks just don't like Bill.
Some folks just don't like anybody or anything....
and would bitch if hung with a new rope. :-)

P.S.
Proud to call Bill a friend.

Barnyard BOb - rah resident chit stirrer

The more people I meet,
there more I love my dog
and George Carlin humor.

[Victor Bravo]

On Jul 2, 4:12 pm, "El Maximo" > wrote:

> Ya think maybe of someone's looking to BUY a plane they might check RAM ?
>
> Posting this on RAH is spam.
>
> I'll give ya $10 for it.

But Your Honor, does that mean that all the hundreds of 'experimental
for sale' notices I saw on RAH for YEARS were also spam... but you and
the Content Police DIDN'T bitch them out? That would constitute a
"prescriptive easement", to use a common real estate term, meaning
that if similar postings not 100% on-topic were tolerated on RAH in
the past then at a certain point the Content Police lose their right
to arbitrarily yip-yap about it at a later date.

Postings not 100% on-topic in RAH... Perish the thought!

Send me the ten dollars, I'll see whether the owner will take it.

[El Maximo]

"Victor Bravo" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Jul 2, 4:12 pm, "El Maximo" > wrote:
>
>> Ya think maybe of someone's looking to BUY a plane they might check RAM ?
>>
>> Posting this on RAH is spam.
>>
>> I'll give ya $10 for it.
>
> But Your Honor, does that mean that all the hundreds of 'experimental
> for sale' notices I saw on RAH for YEARS were also spam...

Yes.

> but you and the Content Police DIDN'T bitch them out?

Nope.

> That would constitute a
> "prescriptive easement", to use a common real estate term, meaning
> that if similar postings not 100% on-topic were tolerated on RAH in
> the past then at a certain point the Content Police lose their right
> to arbitrarily yip-yap about it at a later date.

It's still spam

>
> Postings not 100% on-topic in RAH... Perish the thought!
>
> Send me the ten dollars, I'll see whether the owner will take it.

Never mind. I won't buy from spammers.

[Victor Bravo]

On Jul 3, 5:10 am, "El Maximo" > wrote:

> > but you and the Content Police DIDN'T bitch them out?
>
> Nope.

Congratulations 'Max, you're dancing the Zero-Credibility Boogie !

[El Maximo]

"Victor Bravo" > wrote in message
>
> Congratulations 'Max, you're dancing the Zero-Credibility Boogie !
>

Gee, I'm heartbroken. A spammer doesn't like me. Boo hoo.

[Victor Bravo]

On Jul 3, 10:09 am, "El Maximo" > wrote:
> "Victor Bravo" > wrote in message
>
> > Congratulations 'Max, you're dancing the Zero-Credibility Boogie !
>
> Gee, I'm heartbroken. A spammer doesn't like me. Boo hoo.

Actually I do like you, you're a smart ass just like me, and I only
disagree with your POV on this particular issue. We may be the best of
friends if we meet at an airport someday. Have a nice day, and
remember - Friends don't let friends fly nosewheels!

[Victor Bravo]

On Jul 3, 10:09 am, "El Maximo" > wrote:
> "Victor Bravo" > wrote in message
>
> > Congratulations 'Max, you're dancing the Zero-Credibility Boogie !
>
> Gee, I'm heartbroken. A spammer doesn't like me. Boo hoo.

Actually I do like you, you're a smart ass just like me, and I only
disagree with your POV on this particular issue. We may be the best of
friends if we meet at an airport someday. Have a nice day, and
remember - Friends don't let friends fly nosewheels!

[Matt Whiting]

Victor Bravo wrote:
> On Jul 3, 10:09 am, "El Maximo" > wrote:
>> "Victor Bravo" > wrote in message
>>
>>> Congratulations 'Max, you're dancing the Zero-Credibility Boogie !
>> Gee, I'm heartbroken. A spammer doesn't like me. Boo hoo.
>
> Actually I do like you, you're a smart ass just like me, and I only
> disagree with your POV on this particular issue. We may be the best of
> friends if we meet at an airport someday. Have a nice day, and
> remember - Friends don't let friends fly nosewheels!
>

True, and real pilots don't spam newsgroups.

Matt

[El Maximo]

"Victor Bravo" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Jul 3, 10:09 am, "El Maximo" > wrote:
>> "Victor Bravo" > wrote in message
>>
>> > Congratulations 'Max, you're dancing the Zero-Credibility Boogie !
>>
>> Gee, I'm heartbroken. A spammer doesn't like me. Boo hoo.
>
> Actually I do like you, you're a smart ass just like me, and I only
> disagree with your POV on this particular issue. We may be the best of
> friends if we meet at an airport someday. Have a nice day, and
> remember - Friends don't let friends fly nosewheels!
>

Ya know, until you made that nosewheel crack, I though you may be a
reasonable person.

I also just realized you sell high-wing planes.

There is something seriously wrong with you.

p.s. Have a good 4th.

[Scott[_1_]]

What's wrong with high wing airplanes? Ever see a bird? Their wings
don't come out of their bellies! :)

Scott
High wing taildragger only pilot :)


El Maximo wrote:
> "Victor Bravo" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>On Jul 3, 10:09 am, "El Maximo" > wrote:
>>
>>>"Victor Bravo" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>>Congratulations 'Max, you're dancing the Zero-Credibility Boogie !
>>>
>>>Gee, I'm heartbroken. A spammer doesn't like me. Boo hoo.
>>
>>Actually I do like you, you're a smart ass just like me, and I only
>>disagree with your POV on this particular issue. We may be the best of
>>friends if we meet at an airport someday. Have a nice day, and
>>remember - Friends don't let friends fly nosewheels!
>>
>
>
> Ya know, until you made that nosewheel crack, I though you may be a
> reasonable person.
>
> I also just realized you sell high-wing planes.
>
> There is something seriously wrong with you.
>
> p.s. Have a good 4th.
>
>

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Victor Bravo]

On Jul 3, 7:51 pm, Matt Whiting > wrote:

> True, and real pilots don't spam newsgroups.

I'm a real pilot and I didn't spam your group. I put something up that
basically pointed to an auction. I was posting in an aviation group,
pointing to an aviation auction. The guys posting porn or cel phone
offers in an aviation group are the ones who are spamming.

I've bought 15 airplanes in my 30 years of flying, and more than once
I was looking for one thing and found something slightly different
that made sense, so I bought that instead.

[Victor Bravo]

On Jul 4, 11:42 am, "El Maximo" > wrote:

> I though you may be a
> reasonable person.

Incorrect! How reasonable is a guy who flies a 67 year old airplane
navigating through Los Angeles airspace with no transponder?

> I also just realized you sell high-wing planes.

I'm afraid I have multiple disorders that cross too many lines. I've
owned (and sold) four racing sailplanes, an RV-3a, a Formula One
racer, four Taylorcrafts, a J-3, a Grumman Yankee, and a Cessna
airframe project.

[Al Giazirra]

What about the Midget Mustang?

On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 17:43:21 -0700, Victor Bravo >
wrote:

>On Jul 4, 11:42 am, "El Maximo" > wrote:
>
>> I though you may be a
>> reasonable person.
>
>Incorrect! How reasonable is a guy who flies a 67 year old airplane
>navigating through Los Angeles airspace with no transponder?
>
>> I also just realized you sell high-wing planes.
>
>I'm afraid I have multiple disorders that cross too many lines. I've
>owned (and sold) four racing sailplanes, an RV-3a, a Formula One
>racer, four Taylorcrafts, a J-3, a Grumman Yankee, and a Cessna
>airframe project.

[Victor Bravo]

On Jul 4, 6:19 pm, Al Giazirra >
wrote:
> What about the Midget Mustang?
>
Well, I didn't even list any of the incomplete projects:
Midget Mustang
Mitchell Wing
Chilton Monoplane
Mooney "Dust Devil" glider
Starduster Too

I'm gettin' old, can't remember them all now!

[Matt Whiting]

Victor Bravo wrote:
> On Jul 3, 7:51 pm, Matt Whiting > wrote:
>
>> True, and real pilots don't spam newsgroups.
>
> I'm a real pilot and I didn't spam your group. I put something up that
> basically pointed to an auction. I was posting in an aviation group,
> pointing to an aviation auction. The guys posting porn or cel phone
> offers in an aviation group are the ones who are spamming.

True, for the r.a.m group.
False, for the r.a.h group. Sales posts there are spam, especially when
they aren't even sales related to a homebuilt. However, even so, they
are still spam since r.a.m is the group for sales posts.

Matt

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Victor Bravo wrote:
>> On Jul 3, 7:51 pm, Matt Whiting > wrote:
>>
>>> True, and real pilots don't spam newsgroups.
>>
>> I'm a real pilot and I didn't spam your group. I put something up
>> that basically pointed to an auction. I was posting in an aviation
>> group, pointing to an aviation auction. The guys posting porn or cel
>> phone offers in an aviation group are the ones who are spamming.
>
> True, for the r.a.m group.
> False, for the r.a.h group. Sales posts there are spam, especially
> when they aren't even sales related to a homebuilt. However, even
> so, they are still spam since r.a.m is the group for sales posts.
>
> Matt

While I hate SPAM as much as the next guy you have to admit R.A.M. is pretty
much useless. Who reads it.

The occasional post selling an item that is on topic from a normal user of
the group doesn't bother me and luckily SuperNews does a pretty good job of
filtering the real SPAM.

[Matt Whiting]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>> Victor Bravo wrote:
>>> On Jul 3, 7:51 pm, Matt Whiting > wrote:
>>>
>>>> True, and real pilots don't spam newsgroups.
>>> I'm a real pilot and I didn't spam your group. I put something up
>>> that basically pointed to an auction. I was posting in an aviation
>>> group, pointing to an aviation auction. The guys posting porn or cel
>>> phone offers in an aviation group are the ones who are spamming.
>> True, for the r.a.m group.
>> False, for the r.a.h group. Sales posts there are spam, especially
>> when they aren't even sales related to a homebuilt. However, even
>> so, they are still spam since r.a.m is the group for sales posts.
>>
>> Matt
>
> While I hate SPAM as much as the next guy you have to admit R.A.M. is pretty
> much useless. Who reads it.

And spamming r.a.h will make this ng useless.


> The occasional post selling an item that is on topic from a normal user of
> the group doesn't bother me and luckily SuperNews does a pretty good job of
> filtering the real SPAM.

It won't remain occasional.

Matt

[Jerry Springer]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>> Victor Bravo wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jul 3, 7:51 pm, Matt Whiting > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> True, and real pilots don't spam newsgroups.
>>>>
>>>> I'm a real pilot and I didn't spam your group. I put something up
>>>> that basically pointed to an auction. I was posting in an aviation
>>>> group, pointing to an aviation auction. The guys posting porn or cel
>>>> phone offers in an aviation group are the ones who are spamming.
>>>
>>> True, for the r.a.m group.
>>> False, for the r.a.h group. Sales posts there are spam, especially
>>> when they aren't even sales related to a homebuilt. However, even
>>> so, they are still spam since r.a.m is the group for sales posts.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>
>>
>> While I hate SPAM as much as the next guy you have to admit R.A.M. is
>> pretty much useless. Who reads it.
>
>
> And spamming r.a.h will make this ng useless.
>
>
>> The occasional post selling an item that is on topic from a normal
>> user of the group doesn't bother me and luckily SuperNews does a
>> pretty good job of filtering the real SPAM.
>
>
> It won't remain occasional.
>
> Matt


LOL as if it is not already useless,

[Barnyard BOb]

Jerry Springer > wrote:

>>
>> And spamming r.a.h will make this ng useless.
>>
>>
>>> The occasional post selling an item that is on topic from a normal
>>> user of the group doesn't bother me and luckily SuperNews does a
>>> pretty good job of filtering the real SPAM.
>>
>>
>> It won't remain occasional.
>>
>> Matt
>
>
>LOL as if it is not already useless,
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

ALREADY USELESS, eh?

Be intellectually honest, Jerry.
Some of the faces and names have changed, otherwise...

RAH has survived many ups and downs over the years.
After all, it still is an UNMODERATED group with the same ol
whining and bitching that can only occur in a group free to
express the many diverse opinions. This is it's strength...
and weakness. Others have said as much over the years.

What is taking place here right now is hardly a CLASSIC low....
other than the selfish minority making the same old useless
comments about how useless this OR ANY OTHER group may be.


- Barnyard BOb -

[Jerry Springer]

Barnyard BOb wrote:

> Jerry Springer > wrote:
>
>
>>>And spamming r.a.h will make this ng useless.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The occasional post selling an item that is on topic from a normal
>>>>user of the group doesn't bother me and luckily SuperNews does a
>>>>pretty good job of filtering the real SPAM.
>>>
>>>
>>>It won't remain occasional.
>>>
>>>Matt
>>
>>
>>LOL as if it is not already useless,
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> ALREADY USELESS, eh?
>
> Be intellectually honest, Jerry.
> Some of the faces and names have changed, otherwise...
>
> RAH has survived many ups and downs over the years.
> After all, it still is an UNMODERATED group with the same ol
> whining and bitching that can only occur in a group free to
> express the many diverse opinions. This is it's strength...
> and weakness. Others have said as much over the years.
>
> What is taking place here right now is hardly a CLASSIC low....
> other than the selfish minority making the same old useless
> comments about how useless this OR ANY OTHER group may be.
>
>
> - Barnyard BOb -
>
>
Hi Bob how you doing still flying your RV-3?

I know I am getting old but I don't believe I have commented before on
how usless this or any other NG is.

Jerry

[Montblack]

("Jerry Springer" wrote)
> I know I am getting old but I don't believe I have commented before on how
> usless this or any other NG is.


What is useless is almost 40 lines of quoted text. :-)


Paul-Mont

[Dave Hyde]

Unka BOb wrote:

> Some of the faces and names have changed, otherwise...

And some of the names have changed faces. ;)

Howya doin', BOb?

Dave 'two-bagger' Hyde

[Nauga]

Barnyard BOb wrote:

> Some of the faces and names have changed...

and some of the names have changed faces. ;)

Dave 'NDY' Hyde

[Barnyard BOb]

>> Jerry Springer > wrote:

>>>LOL as if it is not already useless,
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>> ALREADY USELESS, eh?
>>
>> Be intellectually honest, Jerry.
>> Some of the faces and names have changed, otherwise...
>>
>> - Barnyard BOb -
>>
>>
>Hi Bob how you doing still flying your RV-3?
>
>I know I am getting old but I don't believe I have commented before on
>how usless this or any other NG is.
>
>Jerry
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Hi Jerry.
I was addressing your...

"LOL as if it is not already useless,"
as a stand alone current comment/observation by you.

I believe anyone of your stature making such a comment here is far
more damaging than someone that is a Johnny-come-lately wannabe
.....AND certainly quite out of character for you.

I still have the RV-3, but haven't flown it in some time.
Most of my current flying is in a C-172 carrying a passenger or two.
Can't do that very easily in the RV-3. :-)

Thanks for asking!

- Barnyard BOb -

[Barnyard BOb]

>Unka BOb wrote:
>
>> Some of the faces and names have changed, otherwise...
>
>And some of the names have changed faces. ;)
>
>Howya doin', BOb?
>
>Dave 'two-bagger' Hyde

>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Hi Dave.

WoW!!!
Good to see you're still around!!!!

Names have changed faces????
Hmmmmm....
Is that a description of DIVORCE?

You still on the left coast?

Assuming you are still flying your RV,
how many hours and close calls to date? :-)


- Barnyard BOb -

[Nauga]

Barnyard BOb wrote...

> Hmmmmm....

Still married, still on the left coast. The RV finally joined us this
winter, disassembled in a truck.
Life got in the way, so when it's reassembled it will still be in phase 1
with a few hours to go.
I'm taking the opportunity to do a few things a little better this time and
get an engine I trust for a change.

Sorry for the thread-stomp, Bill.

Dave 'older and wiser' Hyde