WF congratulations on finding this a/c a home – it looked nice and in some variants they were aerobatic, which attests to the build quality.
Funny old thing that, the aircraft was sale agreed this morning for the asking price. It was priced well below book value. I don’t know what Euro IFR 2017 spec airplanes are on Planecheck for less than 35k euro. The people I know in Ireland who fly in IMC on the IFR system are flying ;
SR22
C180
C210N
TB20
B58P
C310
T182R
All their aircraft are easily worth 2x the price (and often much more) of the C23 Sundowner. That is only a very select group, there are 100’s of airplanes very happily flying long distances VFR giving their owners vast enjoyment. That is the mode in which the C23 Sundowner will serve its owner well. Roomy VFR 115tkt 4 seat transport. A Garmin 795 or iPad on the control yoke with mains power can do amazing things for the VFR pilot, much more so than a 1998 designed panel mount GPS.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
I think Narco avionics are better than what people say about them
The analogue side of my old Narco functioned fine, however, the display (I had an 810 like the ones in that stack) was very unreliable. In the end with the transition to 8.33 spacing not too far away, I ended up getting rid of it when the display failed for the nth time.
Well, the Sundowner is not really an ideal IFR platform, is it. This one lacks an autopilot first and foremost for IFR, but it’s more than enough for a VFR pilot who wants a capable airplane to fly. She looks nice and clean, yes, will need a 8.33 com in a year but other than that? Replace the Loran Rig which appears to be in there with a 2nd hand GNS430 and you’re done in all respects for VFR ops.
I think Narco avionics are better than what people say about them. I had a 122a in my Cessna for years and it worked just fine, gives a full ILS/MKR capability. 2 VOR’s like that plus the DME and the ADF are still valid avionics, so would the coms be if it wasn’t for the 8.33 mania in Europe. Maybe this plane would be better off in America, where it would be seen as pretty well equipped.
I would have thought for a high proportion of flyers such a nav kit would be ideal. And is far better kitted out than most flying school aircraft that I fly. Also you have a year to upgrade to 8.33 and the addition of a GPS/com would give excellent capability.
Yes. Marco stuff isn’t great but you only need to replace it when it fails.
Thanks Boscomantico
Avionics mosty from a different era; would need 30-50k to get it to 2017 European IFR standards. Plus a very old engine.
I don’t expect to have any difficulty selling it. I am dealing with aircraft everyday, bought one yesterday and looking at another this week. I know how the dance goes! Of the 100’s of pilots I know I can only think of a handful that fly IFR in IMC conditions so your perceived use is not representative of the whole GA community. Whoever buys it can and will, spend as much or as little on avionics as their heart desires. A 1991 O-360 with 400hrs with good compressions, burning no oil, clean oil filter and boroscopes well is good enough for me. There are engines flying that haven’t been opened since the 60’s so its not old in the context of whats out there. I didn’t make any secret of the fact it would be for sale, that was in the first sentence of the OP.
I posted to see if anyone else had flown one, and had experienced first hand how nice they are to fly.
Looks like this one is now online… 
Avionics mosty from a different era; would need 30-50k to get it to 2017 European IFR standards. Plus a very old engine. Also, the aircraft must have sat quite a bit. But otherwise it’s looking quite nice.
I flew about 15hrs in a C23 many years ago. A nice solid feeling plane, comfortable and spacious compared to others. A bit stiff-legged on landing. Much better built than the Cessna or Piper equivalents. They are now great value for money.
Our club had a Musketeer – the 200hp IO-360 version. Due to the C172 needing a new engine part way through my training I transitioned to the Musketeer to do my cross country flights, and flew it a fair bit after getting the PPL. I really enjoyed it, it felt solid – it wasn’t fast, but with the 200hp the climb rate was good.
It had a reputation for being “difficult to land” but that was only because people were adding 5 knots for Grandma on approach. If you flew it at book speeds you could consistently make perfect landings (and thus it was a great plane for taking non-pilot passengers flying, since your ability as a pilot is judged solely by the quality of the touchdown).
Incidentally, during PPL training I flew 3 different types. It did not delay my training, and I think it made me a better pilot come the PPL checkride. Too many people suck the air between their teeth and say “oooh, you mustn’t change aircraft during training, it’ll add at least $MANY hours to training and set you back”. I found this to be completely untrue and I’m glad I did fly three different types during training (C152, C172 and the Musketeer).
My maintenance company maintain a Musketeer and they always say its so much better built than a PA28
