Club Homepage Forums Classified Ads Buy & Sell - Everything But Airplanes A must see for all

I'll agree to a point Lionel... [color:"red"]So...here are my base needs - 50 hours/yr, VFR, plan to keep it for > 7 yrs, if I spend $27K US on it, I don't want to be doing a complete engine overhaul or paint in the first 5 years[/color]

I am at the stage of "Competent Incompetence"...meaning that I realize I know very little about the marketplace...and I can't ask an intelligent question yet.

So, what's the best value? I'm not sure yet...although I've realized from the members that a 0 time engine is likely not worth the premium as I'd only fly 50 hours a year...getting to TBO would take me 36 years.

Personal preference? I filter that out. I value posts like Dale's that sense my issue (without me even knowing it) and give tips on how to mitigate the risk.

Amphibs!

Okay, That was brain dead on my part, yes Bill, now we do have the ultimate flying machine,, only problem being, fierce competition for such a machine,, and limited resources

Rob excellent points,, As well if you determined the top end you'd pay, and from the looks of it you have, for that price you should be able to find one towards the top end of the scale,, IE probably avionics you'll be proud to show off, and fairly low time engine. I would imagine this would also include fairly decent if not new paint. One consideration to keep in mind regarding engine hours when you make your purchase. How long do you plan keeping it, at say 50 hours/year,, what time will it have if you plan reselling. I purchased mine roughly 2 years ago,, as a buyer, I was looking for an airplane that was "mint condition" with low time ours. Now, I looked all across Canada,, and then turned my look into the US, I did find 1, in Texas that had the colour scheme I wanted, with low hours on engine and redone interior, carpets, radios, plastics. In other words, something I could pay for, fly and not have to worry about having to do a bunch of stuff to it. So, did I pay more for this,, YES I did, The only problem is,, and this isn't my first time doing this,, and I'm sure many will agree with this, We're so proud of our 150's that you start doing little things to them,, Consequently, since I bought mine, that really didn't need anything,, Looking at the stuff I bought and installed,, I'm into this by another 5-7 thousand, and counting. The one positive thing,, Haven't had to do paint, engine and accessories, seats, avionics, although I am salivating over those new 530 Garmins. So, i guess what I'm saying is,, once you've evaluated your needs,, found the one that you want, step back a minute and consider what extra's you will probably want, and if it has a portion more of those things, go for it. The same analogy would apply to vehicles. There are many 70's 60's vehicles around that I'd love to own and drive. Why, because of the condition and up keep that the owner has put into it. This was a bit long, but hope it helps you,,

If a person is strictly looking at buying an airplane from the financial point of view. In other words, wants to buy and sell a few years later with little to no loss. Then I believe you must buy cheap! And keep it cheap! Find a decent looking plane for $15,000 to $18,000 with a mid time engine. Keep it maintained to it's present standards and you should have little problem selling it later on in that price range. You will find there are lot more buyers out there in the lower price range. The more money you have in a 150/152, the harder it will be to find that "special" buyer willing to pay for it.

Rob,

I just went through a pitot static check on my bird. (And yes, I am staying on topic.) The mechanics found that the plumbing leaked, and that one of the instruments was also leaking (the ASI).

From what they have told me, there is a real possibility that a number of the instruments in this plane may have deteriorated over the long period of idleness. Seals may leak, and electronics may have failed.

The plane needs a real thourough examination. Does the FAA consider it airworthy? Not an academic question. Haas this bird been out of annual so long that the FAA considers it a lawn orniment? It will take some good solid cash to return it to an FAA approved airworthy state (provided everything is working as advertised).

Also, Contintal has a time limit on an overhaul. (someone may have mentioned this.) This may not be an issue, but a good A&P can help you with this.

Good luck.

I'm just picking nits, Pat, but there is no time "limit" on overhauls. There are only recommendations, including recommended TBO, which an owner may or may not choose to observe. The recommendation for Continental O-200's is at least every 12 years or 1800 TSN/TSOH, I believe.

(That's only about 2.9 hours/week on average. Implied recommendation?).

Rob,
Buy >>> THIS BOOK <<< [cessna150-152.com] by Mike Arman. Read it cover to cover. Then, and only then, will you be well versed on the finer aspects of the 150-2 line of airplanes.

Basically, it's all a matter of personal preference for what you are looking for. Each sucessive year model had changes. Read the book and choose which one is right for you based on Mr. Mike Arman's findings. I'm sure it'll make you a better buyer.

Bengie Phillips

Nobody's ignoring you, Rob! We got sidetracked in the conversation. You should have started a new thread, maybe!

Anyway, my opinion about the 150F you asked about is biased by my own preferences (as is everyone elses). My first impression is I'm un-impressed by It. I prefer the newer style "flat top" panel, so the hump back panel turns me off. The radio stack is antique by modern standards, although it may be completely functional and rock solid. The GPS is not a plus, as the database card is no longer supported by the maker (that I know of) and is out of date. A moving map display available on any handheld is more useful, and easier to use, I think. I don't like the pull starter. I do like the articulating seats (rare). I don't like the Madras Super Droop wingtips. The paint is only a "3" by the owners admission, and the interior a "5" (I expected better at this price).

Where do you see 317 TSOH in 28 years or overhauled in 1979 (have you already talked to the owner)? How much of that time is recent? 317 hours in the last few years would be much better than 317 hours 28 years ago and then sitting for all these years.

I, too, subscribe to the "if it ain't broke ..." philosphy in certain situations, but only when reliably informed with accurate indicators of condition, such as internal borescope inspections of cylinders and crankcase, oil analyses trends, compression and leakdown checks, etc. There may or may not be risk in a 28 year old low time overhaul, but you can't assume anything is good or bad with this much age, until you look at the indicators! In aviation, It is usually guilty until proven otherwise!

With so little flight time in so many years, this airplane would require a very detailed (and likely expensive) annual inspection by a third party inspector prior to my purchase. A normal annual inspection usually DOES NOT cover all of the areas that can slowly deteriorate over years of inattention. Many assumptions are made about regularly flown airplanes. You can't make the same assumptions when inspecting an airplane that hasn't flown regularly in years, or maybe decades!

Personally, I think $19,900 may be a little high for this airplane, even if the engine time can be verified as fairly recent and performance has proven reliable. I think for the money there are similar or cosmetically better regularly flown airplanes available with proven mid-time engines.

Buy Mike Arman's book! Search the forum, and continue to read and ask questions. Arm yourself with knowledge, and you will find the right plane eventually.

Just my opinion!

Do you believe it? $14,100?