I was thinking more about the aircraft in Germany which has the price with and without VAT.
https://www.planecheck.com?ent=da&id=57669
planecheck_N219RT_57669_pdf
has been reduced to 225k
I viewed it yesterday (and had a test flight!)
Avionics great, autopilot great
Engine wasnt zero timed during overhaul (i asked specifically as the system gve the hours as 1350 or so) – didnt go into details as wanted the engineer to check that. But cylinders werent changed – i think it was in response to some AD where they had to change the crankcase. A cylinder was found to be busted during last annual and replaced.
So engine is 20yo and 1350 hours or so for all intents and purposes
No TKS
Owner probably the most honest ive met so far in the business. If something wrong with it, he definitely doesnt know.
Hes quite stuck at 225 (+VAT) – which i still think is too high. Avionics are great but i dont really need them. Dont know about other potential issues as didnt have engineer inspect yet.
What does everyone think? I feel at around 270 all in, its really top dollar so should have TKS + newer engine.
Rami1988 wrote:
So engine is 20yo and 1350 hours or so for all intents and purposes
The engine, if in good shape and taken proper care of might outlive you
Rami1988 wrote:
Avionics are great but i dont really need them
But why would you say that? Assuming you would want to use the plane to its full potential the glass would be a huge help. Maybe even a life saver.
Rami1988 wrote:
Owner probably the most honest ive met so far in the business. If something wrong with it, he definitely doesnt know.
IMHO It’s hard to overestimate the value of having a trustworthy partner on the other side of any high value transaction
Peter wrote:
I see this everywhere. In the meantime I fly everywhere with a KLN94+KMD550. Not even a 1999 GNS430. Ask yourself how this is possible, and don’t be afraid to face the facts. But there is one proviso: the stuff has to work!
I agree- I have 430W and its soo good! I didn’t know the 430, but its an excellent tool, working great with my STEC.
Rami1988 wrote:
Avionics are great but i dont really need them.
LOL, that is one of the most expensive things to say. You don’t need them NOW. By the time you do, the cost to buy and install them are totally exorbitant. One of the biggest lessons I have learnt over time is that if I buy an airplane, it should have 90% of the avionics I want, most of all an usable autopilot, as that one is the most expensive to install. I would not shy away from run out engines but I would never buy an avionics project.
Having said that, apart from TKS this thing appears to tick most boxes just fine indeed.
@Rami1988 I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: you are waaaaayy too hung up on the engine. This one has quite some time to run and you’ll run it on condition anyway. Further – and importantly – an engine overhaul / swap is a known quantity in terms of AMUs. A panel upgrade? Not so much. I’ve been through both in our club as board member and, as @Mooney says, I’d buy an airplane with a perfect panel (ok, doesn’t exist, but you know what I mean and this one comes prett darn close) and a run out engine any day of the week. The other way round – no way, unless it was only about changing one component. Cannot comment on the price here, as I don’t know the TB values in Europe.
So engine is 20yo and 1350 hours or so for all intents and purposes
The engine was for sure completely disassembled and inspected 475 hrs ago, at some more recent date than 2003. The date matters because the only thing that kills an engine is corrosion and the calendar time which may allow it, plus operational time. The corrosion and calendar time issue was reset as a concern more recently than 20 years ago, and 1350 hrs is not high operational time yet. The compressions look great, 78/80 or higher on all cylinders. Nothing obviously indicates to me that this engine should be a substantial issue in your purchase decision, and it is not the same thing as a 20 year old engine that’s never been inspected (not that 20 years is outrageously long).
Re the sellers claim of 475 SMOH: major overhaul means something and by definition as part of engine overhaul the cylinders do need to be inspected part by part to verify compliance with service limits before reassembly. At 850 hrs since new this might lead to some level of cylinder overhaul, so as a buyer I’d be interested in what was done. Maybe for example the logbook entry might indicate new rings and some valve work, although at 1350 hrs it’s not unusual for Lycoming cylinders to be fine with good compressions like these even if nothing was done.
RV14 wrote:
But why would you say that? Assuming you would want to use the plane to its full potential the glass would be a huge help. Maybe even a life saver.
Glass cockpit avionics does not add any benefit from a legal point of view in terms of navigation and IFR flight plan filing. So, no benefit from that point and possibly the view of the OP.
Yes, if you´ve got Synthetic Vision System (SVS) on the Primary Flight Display (PFD) or terrain and obstacle data displayed on a Navigation Display (ND), you significantly improve your position and situational awareness. Of course the presentation of performance data is, in most cases, superior on a PFD (as opposed to conventional dial instrumentation instrument-T). Glass cockpit is great – when you utilize it (and understand it fully). If you learned to fly instruments on the conventional instrument-“T”, you should be fine with that – and in fact you could be safer flying on what you´ve learned, at least until you´ve “re-learned” to fly on glass instrumentation (which is very “different”).
RV14 wrote:
IMHO It’s hard to overestimate the value of having a trustworthy partner on the other side of any high value transaction
I would agree to the point, that for most of us it simply brings a much better experience when you trust and have a good relationship in any business. However, what would you prefer? a fair good value purchase from an @sshole, or an overcharged low value purchase from a genuinely nice guy? I´d still cho0se the first option.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
One of the biggest lessons I have learnt over time is that if I buy an airplane, it should have 90% of the avionics I want, most of all an usable autopilot, as that one is the most expensive to install.
Keywords here is “..avionics I want..”. You might add, avionics I need. So much depends on the general mission, or mission critical, objective(s). The value of glass cockpit is very limited, as I´ve replied further up in this post, for as long as you have the required avionics/navigation for your mission. I honestly (subjectively) don´t see any greatly added value in upgrading working conventional (eg. “steam”) avionics/navigation for most private aviation flying for day to day flying. Again, I´m not advocating against the value added from terrain and obstacle database presentations – it will of course add value when flying in areas with terrain.
I would believe that you´re very right in that – if you want or need some particular avionics/navigation setup and you can find an airframe already having it installed, your much better of buying it like that, than having to go and invest in these upgrades yourself (and all the know “unknows”).
Rami1988 wrote:
Hes quite stuck at 225 (+VAT) – which i still think is too high. Avionics are great but i don’t really need them. Don’t know about other potential issues as didn’t have engineer inspect yet.
270K is a lot of cash. That is one beautiful airplane with superior avionics (from what I can see). You asked the question yourself – is it what you need? or is it overkill?.
It´s your first aircraft investment, set yourself up for success and attempt to assure that you have that “feel good” about the relatively big “investment”. It´s easy to underestimate the importance of happiness in aviation, where so many things can bring your overall experience down. Don´t push your finances – and remember what you set out to archive.
This just seem to have come up: https://www.planecheck.com?ent=da&id=57332 (a real “overhaul” or another fake one?).
If your gut is telling you it is too expensive, then it probably is.🙂
Avionics is a mixed bag. I really loved the G1000 compared to the steam gauges and Garmin 155 I had become used to.
Then WAAS became the must have thing and I rethought what I would look for if I was to buy another aircraft.
1985 – I would caution any novice owner from buying an old plane which will need loads of parts. In the European Part M system you are continually over the barrel… Form 1 for this, Form 1 for that, otherwise the plane is grounded for ever. One TB20 was grounded for many months because the owner could not get some flap motor relays with a Form 1. I have a box of them, brand new Mathushita ones, but his maintenance company would not touch them. N-reg is much better but has other issues; more so nowadays if you have to get the FAA papers.
Buy something in a good condition, not necessarily with “glass” which doesn’t make it more reliable, doesn’t make it go faster, but does require you to go back to a dealer to sort anything out, and Europe has very few competent avionics dealers.
I gradually realised the above since buying a then new TB20 in 2002. I got vastly more fun out of it because I bought something which didn’t keep going wrong and needing work. Well, due to Socata’s duplicity, much of the panel had to be changed under warranty because they built it with secondhand parts which were returned to them with intermittent faults; the warranty work came to about 100k.
I’d like to know why that engine was “overhauled” at 850hrs. There will be a reason. Socata built a lot of TB20 GTs with improperly stored engines which were rusty when installed, and they appear to have manipulated the dates in the logbooks to be just inside Lyco’s 12 month limit for that preservation method. This is obvious from the dates, and one of Lycoming’s dealers (no longer in business) also told me the same.
