Cessna 172 upkeep

A good engineer will do an annual inspection on a typical 172 in about
16 hrs. Multiply by your local hourly rate and you have it.

Now, if he finds problems, thats extra.

Our last, (1974 M) included 3 cowl mounts, and we replaced a throttle
cable that was "sticky" (our choice) and a yoke universal, (our
choice) that "passed" but we could feel some "play" in it....

The inspection, according to 3 engineers here that we know well and
respect, should take 14 - 18 hrs..

YMMV!

Dave





On 10 Feb 2005 10:14:02 -0800, "redman" wrote:

I am currently taking flying lessons to get my private license. I've
been thinking about buying a 172 sometime after I get my license.
Looking for some input on a ballpark amount of the annual upkeep.
How much does an annual cost? How much does the 100 hr. inspection
cost? I realize that if something is broken it needs to be fixed, but
right now just wanting to find out how much I will be looking for to
spending if nothing is broken.

Thank for the info. It really helps alot to kinda get an idea what I'm
looking at.

Jon Kraus wrote:
I second the opinion on the Mooney... :-) But, our Mooney is
costing
us arount $500.00 a month in unanticipated maintenance... Funny, the
previous owner failed to tell us that he was skimping on some of the
squawks!! Anyway our first anual is in April and I full expect it to
be
in the 4-5000 range. That way if it comes in less it will seem like
I'm
money ahead!! Airplanes.... ya just gotta love 'em...

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Mooney 201 4443H

Colin W Kingsbury wrote:
"redman" wrote in message
ups.com...


How much does an annual cost?


If you're in a high-cost area and you don't do an owner-assist,
you're
probably looking at 2-3k in a normal year with 4-5k very possible.
Two small
items cost us $2200 on our 1979 172N annual last year (paperwork
problems on
a Precise Flight standby vacuum and some rash on trailing edge of
the
elevator) at a Cadillac shop (Keyson Airways, ASH). Year before was
about 4k
too, bunch of little crap that just kept adding up.


I realize that if something is broken it needs to be fixed, but
right now just wanting to find out how much I will be looking for
to
spending if nothing is broken.


If you buy a typical 60s or 70s vintage Skyhawk, things will always
be in
the process of breaking. Don't like that? Buy new. This year we had
two
ignition leads (read: a wire) go bad and replacing the harness cost
$700.
Oil changes will cost anywhere from $50-$300 depending on how you
do them
and whether you do it or pay a mechanic.

My feeling with a Skyhawk is that you should be prepared to spend
$5000 at
the drop of a hat if necessary every couple years. If you buy
carefully you
probably won't need it, but if that number scares you, get a
partner or
stick to renting.

People ask me how expensive flying is, I tell them "more expensive
than
skiing, but cheaper than polo." You'll spend money on nothing but
fuel and
oil for 10 months and then one day something will crack that Cessna
charges
$500 for and takes the mechanic six hours to get to. Them's the
breaks.

Anyhow, if you do buy, a Skyhawk is about the best plane you can
buy,
stupid-simple in the best sense of the phrase. If I had it to do
over again
I'd look for one with the Penn Yan 180HP conversion for just a
little more
speed and climb, but the one I have is still my favorite because
she's
*mine*. When the bank account looks a little better I'll probably
look to
step up to a 182 or maybe a Mooney so I can go places but you'll
never go
wrong with a 172.

-cwk.

wrote:

Colin W Kingsbury wrote:
: How much does an annual cost?

That's the largest "it depends" there really is. Best case scenario if
*NOTHING* is broken/worn is a few hundred if you get your hands dirty and the mechanic
watches and does paperwork. Since things are always broken/worn, it's more. Many
time *a lot* more. It's a gamble. I don't think of it as "how much does an annual
cost," but rather, "what needs to be fixed now." You either need to pay now or later,
and the latter generall costs more since things going bad can break other things.
The big trick is to make sure you don't buy a plane that someone else decided to "fix
later."

: Anyhow, if you do buy, a Skyhawk is about the best plane you can buy,
: stupid-simple in the best sense of the phrase. If I had it to do over again
: I'd look for one with the Penn Yan 180HP conversion for just a little more
: speed and climb, but the one I have is still my favorite because she's
: *mine*. When the bank account looks a little better I'll probably look to
: step up to a 182 or maybe a Mooney so I can go places but you'll never go
: wrong with a 172.

At the risk of starting a flamewar, not to knock anyone's personal choices (I
learned in a 172), but a PA-28-140 is an undervalued plane by comparison.

for those of us who do not yet (hopefully yet) own, let's keep it that
way by not bringing this up, OK )))

Robbie,
There was a pretty sad corrosion story posted at the CardinalFlyers
forum, after something like 10 years of owning and lots of money spent
on improvements (GPS, autopilot, paint etc), the owner decided to get
the interior redone at a new shop. The shop discovered corrosion in the
spar, wings etc. and claimed that these parts were unairworthy and
needed to be replaced. The estimated bill was something like $12-$15
and kept adding up. The owner was pretty frustrated and had thought
about giving up his plane and flying all together. The advice given was
to ship the dismantled plane on a flatbed to another shop for a second
opinion. Just hope that everything turns out OK for him.
Hai Longworth

wrote in message
...
Colin W Kingsbury wrote:
: How much does an annual cost?

That's the largest "it depends" there really is. Best case scenario if
*NOTHING* is broken/worn is a few hundred if you get your hands dirty and
the mechanic
watches and does paperwork. Since things are always broken/worn, it's
more. Many
time *a lot* more. It's a gamble. I don't think of it as "how much does
an annual
cost," but rather, "what needs to be fixed now." You either need to pay
now or later,
and the latter generall costs more since things going bad can break other
things.
The big trick is to make sure you don't buy a plane that someone else
decided to "fix
later."

Right, and that's why I said my "you should be prepared to drop 5k on a
moment's notice" line. So long as you don't have corrosion (which a good
pre-buy will find) or some relatively exotic and rare problem, there just
sin't much on your average Skyhawk that can bit you that much worse. The
engine could unexpectedly go TU, but you can get an overhaul loan if that's
the case. You won't need to drop 15K+ in cash.

: Anyhow, if you do buy, a Skyhawk is about the best plane you can buy,
: stupid-simple in the best sense of the phrase. If I had it to do over
again

At the risk of starting a flamewar, not to knock anyone's personal choices
(I
learned in a 172), but a PA-28-140 is an undervalued plane by comparison.
A 172 is

Agreed. I learned in Cherokees and switched to a 172 only because it was the
first good deal to come along. Both are IMHO great choices. I actually
marginally prefer a low-wing for traffic visibility but only just so.

Historically, Cherokee/Skyhawk/Skylane-class planes have seen their value
remain relatively stable so, even if a 172 costs $10k more to buy, you have
typically gotten it back when you sold it. Of course, the money does come
out of your pocket now, so that is a factor. Also, I am beginning to wonder
whether the availability of sub-100k factory-built light-sport planes are
going to cause a bloodbath in this end of the market in the next 5-10 years.
Most skyhawks and the smaller cherokees are pretty much used as 2-seat day
VFR planes anyway, so switching to an LSA is pretty much all gain (no
medical).

-cwk.

Colin W Kingsbury wrote:
: out of your pocket now, so that is a factor. Also, I am beginning to wonder
: whether the availability of sub-100k factory-built light-sport planes are
: going to cause a bloodbath in this end of the market in the next 5-10 years.
: Most skyhawks and the smaller cherokees are pretty much used as 2-seat day
: VFR planes anyway, so switching to an LSA is pretty much all gain (no
: medical).

I would speculate that perhaps on the low end (Cessna 15{0,2}, Traumahawk,
Yankee's) the LSA might take a bite. Although many a plane like a 172 or a PA-28 are
pretty much used as 2-seater VFR, they've got a fair bit more potential than that.
The limitations on LSA (HP, speed, gross weight) limit them a fair bit. I, for one,
would much rather fly something with a few hundred pounds more capacity to go than one
that's at gross with two people and half tanks.

-Cory

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

wrote in message
...
Colin W Kingsbury wrote:
: out of your pocket now, so that is a factor. Also, I am beginning to
wonder
: whether the availability of sub-100k factory-built light-sport planes
are
: going to cause a bloodbath in this end of the market in the next 5-10
years.
: Most skyhawks and the smaller cherokees are pretty much used as 2-seat
day
: VFR planes anyway, so switching to an LSA is pretty much all gain (no
: medical).

I would speculate that perhaps on the low end (Cessna 15{0,2}, Traumahawk,
Yankee's) the LSA might take a bite. Although many a plane like a 172 or
a PA-28 are
pretty much used as 2-seater VFR, they've got a fair bit more potential
than that.
The limitations on LSA (HP, speed, gross weight) limit them a fair bit.

130mph? I would love to see my Skyhawk do that in level flight. HP-weight
ratio is often *better* in LSAs than 150/160HP GA 4-seaters leading to much
better climb rates, for instance. Gross weight is definitely a limit, but a
Zodiac with 600# useful load isn't bad so long as you're not carrying two
250-pounders.

And don't forget that fuel costs alone will be cut at least in half as
you're burning 4gph of mogas instead of 8 of 100LL.

I, for one,
would much rather fly something with a few hundred pounds more capacity to
go than one
that's at gross with two people and half tanks.

Once you get to something like a 182 you are talking about a fairly
different critter and I don't suspect LSA will have too much direct effect.
But when you can buy a factory-built Zodiac with the new-plane smell for
$75k or so I suspect you will see at least a 50% drop in prices of low-end
4-seat GA singles. Look at what fuel and insurance costs have done to light
twins- compare what 150k will buy you in a 182 versus a C-310 that carries
as much or more and does so 50kts faster. It will be interesting to see what
happens, and long term it can only be good for GA as a whole.

-cwk.