A real dog TB20 (CS-DDK) for €99000

Peter wrote:

An OH, by a good US shop, would be about €40k, unless the crankshaft is corroded in which case it would be roughly €60k. With the obvious external corrosion, plus presumed internal problems, the €70k is fiction.

So basically the engine alone would eat up around 50k with transport to and from.

The rest is guesswork, based on pics nothing can be determined. Clearly the price is high but reflects todays massive shortage of airframes.

If you check todays offers of TB20, there is no GT available, most of the airframes have an AP without FD (one offer even has an inop AP) and those who do have decent avionics are in the quarter million range. Under normal prices like a while ago, I’d agree that this airframe as is should not be more than about 30-40k, but exactly what has to be done is clearly not visible from pics but needs an on site assessment by a qualified maintenance engineer who knows the TB20 in and out. The airplane has been flying until 2 years ago and had valid ARC until 2021, so at least then it was airworthy. My guess is that the engine was declared unairworthy and the owner could not or would not caugh up for the overhaul, so it was left grounded.

This may well be an interesting airframe as a “fixer upper”, as TB20GT are rare and far between.

I’d think that unless they are totally deluded they will accept offers significantly below the asking price in order to rid themselves of the liability.

The same goes for the TB20’s sitting in that hangar (as well as the Senecas), they need to be assessed and put in order by someone who knos their business.

Since we now live in a world where 50-yr-old C150s are being sold for >50k and practically everything under 100k looks suspect, it’s becoming difficult to understand how people are pricing these airplanes. I’m beginning to think the 140k invested to get my TB to better than new condition isn’t money thrown away after all…

dutch_flyer wrote:

Since we now live in a world where 50-yr-old C150s are being sold for >50k and practically everything under 100k looks suspect, it’s becoming difficult to understand how people are pricing these airplanes.

Several ways. Either they go on sales sites, look for similar planes and set the price accordingly. Or quite a lot of makes have valuation forms and sites, which give you a good idea how your plane should be valuated. Depending on the market conditions you can then take those valuations at face value or add a quota according to how similar planes are priced.

Certainly it is a different ballgame today, where you can actually expect to have some of your avoinics and upgrade expenses recovered than a few years ago. And the added value of the compulsory mods such as 8.33 and Mode S are a must while generally updated avionics will be beneficial for the attractiveness an airframe has on potential buyers.

Up to 2019 I would have taken e.g. the Mooney valuations and deduct 20-30% for the European market, today I would add 20-30% for the asking price to achive 10-20%.

Currently TB10’s go from anything between 60k to 120k (asking) as far as I’ve seen, so 140k is not out of the ballpark for a pristine example.

(And while we are at it: If you list your plane, do care to take nice pictures in and out. People will disregard adds where a seller can not evenbe bothered to take good pics but relies on stuff collected from the internet and leave the inside of the airplane like the dog’s had a birthday party in it… how lazy can you get. I think quite a few of those sloppy adds are “yes, dear, look it’s for sale” type adds. )

Mooney_Driver wrote:

Certainly it is a different ballgame today, where you can actually expect to have some of your avoinics and upgrade expenses recovered than a few years ago. And the added value of the compulsory mods such as 8.33 and Mode S are a must while generally updated avionics will be beneficial for the attractiveness an airframe has on potential buyers.

Before upgrading an aircraft with new avionics last year, we asked an aircraft broker if we could expect to recover at least 50% of the costs in increased market value. His said we could expect much more than that…

I would work on 75% of the hardware value, declining at about 10% per year. This assumes a quality installation with new harnesses and cleaning out old wires, stuff and dodgy antennas.

Also make sure the hardware is legit and under warranty. Some dodgy knock off installations out there, unsupported by the manufacturer.

Here’s an example of a pretty nice german TB20 which just came up on the marketplace for € 210k.

Only 1000 hrs total time, original engine, GTN set, KAP150 AP (no Flight Director!), and the usual other avionic stuff, nicely kept and in very good condition. In other words, a nice plane you can buy and fly away in.

210’000 Euros. That is what a plane like this is offered today.

https://www.planecheck.com?ent=da&id=52994

tb20german_pdf

puts the 100k Euros for the GT model in perspective kind of. If that one gets taken care of properly, extensive annual, paint brushed up, new or overhauled zero time engine, the better AP which also Peter has and upgraded with GTN’s or similar? 250k possible? I’d not wagger against it.

Have you actually looked at the photos of that GT closely, particularly the interior ones:

While certain things might of course be considered “cosmetic”, how would you, as a private buyer, consider this aircraft your “pride and joy”, with:

• corroded instrument knobs
• crazed VSI
• melted trim switch
• worn yoke
• all the plastic (centre stack, centre pedestal, glareshield) worn
• all avionics boxes with corroded edges
• flap lever corroded
• all electrical switches corroded
• static air knob corroded

One would have to deal with all that (and much more, which is not seen in the photos). I tend to agree with Peter, it’s likely not a matter of how much it would cost, but it would likely be impossible to bring this aircraft back to decent condition. Many of these parts are not available any more.

RobertL18C wrote:

I would work on 75% of the hardware value, declining at about 10% per year.

I wonder how this works out if you install say a GNS530 vs brand new. I know when I was shopping I added a certain factor for a WAAS GPS unit regardless of what it was, and I still feel that way. I guess the question is whether a new Garmin/Avidyne gets you substantially more value than a GNS unit, especially if paired with GI275’s, Avidyne PFD, etc.

I wonder how this works out if you install say a GNS530 vs brand new. I know when I was shopping I added a certain factor for a WAAS GPS unit regardless of what it was, and I still feel that way. I guess the question is whether a new Garmin/Avidyne gets you substantially more value than a GNS unit, especially if paired with GI275’s, Avidyne PFD, etc.

So did I. In my opinion, an IFR approved NAV GPS (STC, AFMS) isn’t just worth the price of the hardware at spot used prices + typical labor / installation costs but also a „hassle factor“ for avoiding finding a shop, ferry flights, downtime and risk of problems unfolding during installation.