Club Homepage Forums Classified Ads Buy & Sell - Everything But Airplanes Help me estimate the value of this 152

Ken asks a valid question. Personally, a 150 offers more value then a 152. They can be had much more inexpensively. Unless you modify to the Sparrowhawk, my experience has been to have the 150 out preform the 152. and the biggest detractor for me with the 152 is that 24 volt electrical system.

Lots of decisions, huh?

John,

Welcome to the club!

Here's another 152 for sale. You can see pictures of it here.

Bryan knows about his C152.
-corey

One simple trick for making a low-ball offer is to preface it with "...this is not what I think your plane is worth, but all I can afford to pay is $xx,xxx".

Takes some of the sting out, deflects the blame, and helps keep the negotiations civil.

Well said Kirk. Reminds me of the advice for those who can't say "No." Try: "I'm sorry but I'm going to have to decline." The answer is the same, it's the delivery that counts.

So John, don't be surprised if the owners say "...I'm going to have to decline." ;-)

You mentioned you want to put it on leaseback and hope to recoup some of the expenses? This may help, but then again, with new students flying it, with a lot of full power and then 1500 rpm glide for landings, hard landings, etc. it may actually cost you money instead of generating money? Check out the insurance needed for this and make sure you have an honest person in charge of the renting and an honest mechanic that will do the maintence on it. Also, know the instructors. Are they going to spin it, how do they demonstrate loss of power situations, do they go to full power and chop the power fast etc. Just my 2 cents worth.

Lots of great insight. Thanks for the comments, folks.

I'll try to fill in some more information as much as I can.


Yeah, I agree. When you first open the door, it looks good, but then when you go to operate a switch, like the master, you notice that it is recessed. It is not a deal killer, though.


I think you may be on to something there. They definitely made sure I knew how much it cost to replace this or that. They may have bought a worn out plane and had to put some serious money into it to keep it in the air. Their biggest contribution, in my opinion, is they improved the interior cosmetics and fixed the existing mechanical issues.


Carl, I agree with you. This was what I was thinking when I posed my initial question. Everybody always puts an initial asking price slightly above what they really want, assuming they will get a lower offer with a compromise somewhere in between. The problem here is they are so high, I think a reasonable counteroffer is going to sound insulting because it will be such a large dollar amount off what they are asking.


Yes, very true. However, the price needs to be framed with some sort of reality, especially if it is on the high side.


Excellent thought, Ron. I certainly not going to pay more for it than I can insure. I will check into that. That may also bring them back to reality, since all buyers will have that same issue.


I believe the overlay is legal, but I will leave it to the experts here to answer that one.

I am glad to hear some agreement on the value of the plane. I thought their asking price was too high, but I wasn't sure if I just didn't know what I was looking at.

As far as 152 or 150. At the moment, I am staying with the 152. There are two main reasons for that. Number one, I believe the interior of the 152 is a little bit bigger (please correct me if I am wrong). The second, and more important reason, is that the flight school already has a 152. I don't want my plane to get less business because it is 2 less (really vague Spinal Tap reference).

I know, I know, there are lots of reasons why the 150 is every bit as good as the 152, if not better, but my main customers are going to be new students. If you didn't know any better, and had to choose between an older 150 vs a newer 152, what would you chose?


Someone point Bryan in my direction, please. Or let me know how to get some more info on this plane. Remember, I'm new here

I am open to looking at other 152s. If anyone knows of a good one for sale with similar specifications to this one, let me know.


I appreciate the concern, Bruce. Believe me, I am researching the heck out of this. I do have some unique insight into the school, as I am currently a student there. I have dealt with several instructors, and have even talked to the owners about the leaseback. I know the conditions of the rest of the fleet, and know how they maintain them. Heck, I'm flying the other 152 during my lessons right now.

Students can be rough on a plane. I know, I am one of them! My goals in this leaseback situation are modest. All I am looking for, in the end, is a cheap way to build some time/experience and reduce the cost of a couple of ratings. By the time I find the right plane, I may be done with my private. That's OK, too. I also want to get an instrument rating.

This idea is not without risk, of course. But the existing (and only) 152 in the fleet is the most popular plane with a two week waiting list to use it. I definitely see a potential market there.

Thanks for all the great comments. Keep them coming!

John

Corey,

I have read the converstation about the 152 that was posted
in Ohio. In order that I not step on something that
someone else has dibs on. Where are you with this?

Bill

I once considered leaseback when I was a student pilot at Jax Navy Flying Club years ago. KNIP's Runway 9-27 is 8,000 feet long, and I watched from the clubhouse as a club 150 with two aboard took off ..... twice! About halfway down the runway, and maybe 500 feet in the air, the airplane suddenly pitched nose down, and didn't recover until just before the moment of impact! The 150 hit very hard on all three gear at the same time .... bounced back into the air .... and continued the climb! My jaw dropped at the sight of the cockpit belly nearly hitting the ground, and the wings flexing what must have been a foot and a half or more at the wingtips, enough to be clearly seen from over a mile away! I was sure the airplane would immediately circle and land for a hard landing inspection.

WRONG!

They continued their flight, and left the area. I shook my head and went inside to prepare for my own flight, but didn't report what I'd seen (I wanted to give them the opportunity to do the right thing themselves!)

When I'd finished my flight, the aircraft I had seen nearly crash on the runway was tied down in it's normal spot. I did a cursory visual inspection from a distance as I walked to the clubhouse to turn in my keys and write the reports. I expected to see obviously bent main gear, sagging engine, bent propeller blade tips, popped rivets and badly wrinkled skin on wing and fuselage .... none of which was evident from that distance. I know what I saw! This airplane should be badly damaged!

Once inside to turn in my keys, I asked to see the records for that aircraft (this is common when planning your next flight, so I raised no suspicion). Neither the student nor the instructor had reported the hard landing, and the aircraft had been released for flight, with no further maintenance or inspection required!

I reluctantly reported what I had seen, and we discussed why the instructor had seen fit not to file a report on the incident, at least indicating the need for a thorough inspection. We could think of no good reason for his not doing so! I was assured that the matter would be handled appropriately.

The following visit to the club, I again surreptitiously requested to see that aircraft's records! I was shocked to find that the aircraft had flown every day since the incident, and no record whatever of my verbal report, or of a hard landing inspection being conducted at any time since. I asked about this, and was told that the chief pilot (club president) had been told what I'd seen, and had done a thorough preflight/postflight inspection and found nothing out of the ordinary with the aircraft. It was then released for flight under his "authority"! Since no discrepancies had been written against the aircraft by the previous pilot, there was no "legal" requirement for an inspection and signoff!!!!!!!!!? Whatza .....?

I was flabbergasted!

The aircraft was available, so (containing my concern) I requested and received the keys to the aircraft in preparation for my previously scheduled "flight"! I walked out and began my "preflight" (I had no intention of flying this aircraft). It was soon apparent that both main landing gear boxes had "smoking rivets", indicating looseness and wear of the landing gear attachment. The upper surface of both wings was more than moderately wrinkled outboard of the wing struts from being stretched beyond normal limits, and "smoking screws" were found around both fuel tank covers, indicating continuous movement. The engine mounting appeared normal, but the lower engine mount tubes and nose gear mounting had cracked and chipped paint around their circumference near the firewall and nose gear, exposing unpainted and not yet rusted steel tube, indicating some amount of recent flexing and bending had occured.

I'd seen more than enough! I went back to the clubhouse and detailed what I'd found on the aircraft's discrepancy report, stating that the aircraft had "obviously suffered a very hard landing" and was no longer safe for flight! This form was required to become part of the aircraft's records (by base regulation), and required a signoff before next flight by a certified A&P mechanic.

I insisted to the Manager that the students and instructor pilots who had flown this aircraft since the incident NOT receive any blame for the aircraft's current condition (which was the custom in such cases, incouraging thorough preflights/postflights). I would keep our prior knowledge (and the identity of the errant instructor) to myself, on that one condition!

In all fairness, none of the "smoking fasteners" would probably have shown signs of wear immediately after the incident. Chipped paint is normal on a 30 year old airplane (but you can tell when it's the result of bending)! All 30 year old airplanes have some wrinkles in the skin (but these were the worst I'd seen on top of the wings).

What really ticked me off was that I was ignored on a potential safety of flight situation, and unsuspecting students and instructors had flown this aircraft since. Had they not noticed the same discrepancies I noted? Maybe they had, but individually, these discrepancies are somewhat common. It's not until you specifically look for the commulative affects of a hard landing that the full extent of the damage becomes evident! I might have missed the signs myself, had I not been experienced in aircraft repair.

I never again saw the instructor who failed to file the report. I've no idea why, but I have my suspicions. The aircraft had both wings deskinned for inspection, resulting in replacing both wings due to bent and damaged main spars. The main gear was slightly bent and required replacement, as did the engine mount. A leaseback, the aircraft was pulled from service and sold at a loss by it's owner after repairs were made by the club.

For me to simply say "Do not leaseback your aircraft!" would carry little weight! I hope this long-winded tale better relays to you my true feelings on the subject. I have more stories if THIS one isn't enough!

Anyway, I quickly forgot the notion of leasing back any aircraft of mine! Ain't gonna happen! Not ever!

Nice truck, Bill! They sure don't make them like that anymore. Whatever it was, I think you got the right deal.

Regarding the $39K 152, it's just too much for the mission.

He could buy a decent 172 for less than that, and generate far more rental income.

Furthermore, for less than half that price, he could buy a decent 150, fly it 100 hours, and sell it again for the same amount. That way he could minimize his costs, even without the lease back.

That 152 is a showpiece, and will eventually be sold to a like-minded buyer.

Cheers!

Bill,

A private message has been sent too you.