2.5 million for a 421??

N747JB

N747JB

Final Approach
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
6,248
Location
Atlanta
Display Name
Display name:
John
Another great aviation idea designed to make a small fortune out of a large one! $2.5 mill for a 421 with a Pratt conversion, isn't that what a Conquest I is for half or less price?? :dunno: I'd love to see how they get 327 knots out of it!

"The remanufactured Cessna 421C will feature Pratt & Whitney PT6A-135A turboprop engines, Garmin G600 avionics, winglets, new tires and brakes, and new cabin, de-icing, hydraulic and electrical systems. Including airframe, the aircraft will retail for $2.5 million, complete with a new-aircraft warranty. Preliminary specifications include a 327-knot top speed and 1,420-nm range. A prototype Excalibur 421 is now flying, and FAA STC approval and deliveries are expected by year-end. In addition, a similar program is in the works for the Cessna 414."

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ainalerts/2013-01-24/new-aircraft-remanufacturing-firm-formed
 
I just had lunch yesterday with someone who was/is asked to be an investor in that project. I recommended he pass. He asked, why? My response as a consumer I'm buying a PC-12NG all day vs. having $3M in an old 421 conversion, two different planets. Besides the Royal Duke conversion is $900K and they can't even sell those as sexy as they are.
 
When they come out with the 350hp Diesel, that will bring new life to these airframes, until then, I just can't see justifying the conversion. The only advantage I see here is that the SID issue apparently doesn't apply to the 421 but does the 425.
 
Alexb2000 said:
I just had lunch yesterday with someone who was/is asked to be an investor in that project. I recommended he pass. He asked, why? My response as a consumer I'm buying a PC-12NG all day vs. having $3M in an old 421 conversion, two different planets. Besides the Royal Duke conversion is $900K and they can't even sell those as sexy as they are.
Click to expand...

I personally don't see the value in these conversions, I mean it's not like you a filling a void in the market. You can't pay more than $1.2 for a Conquest I with the Blackhawk conversion and a great panel!! Here's one with 1200 TT and new engines, no glass panel, asking $1,250,000.00 throw in a $50-75K in the panel and you've got a much better airplane for half the money. I just don't see the value, but I am just a lowly car guy. :rolleyes:
http://www.controller.com/listingsd...CONQUEST-I/1984-CESSNA-CONQUEST-I/1262157.htm
 
Henning said:
When they come out with the 350hp Diesel, that will bring new life to these airframes, until then, I just can't see justifying the conversion. The only advantage I see here is that the SID issue apparently doesn't apply to the 421 but does the 425.
Click to expand...

But once the SID is complete, you are pretty much good to go and most of the 425's have had the inspections done. I agree with you on the diesels, I think it would be a great retrofit if it's affordable! I don't see paying $4-500K for a conversion, which is what I think it will end up costing, if it becomes available. :dunno:
 
I've never seen the benefit in turbine conversions either. You pick up some useful load, but you have to give it back in spades in the extra fuel you have to carry, either that or you have to give up range. Typically the airframes aren't set up to take advantage of the higher altitudes required to get the turbines in their element.
 
I'm sorta surprised they are not using the GE ex Walter PT clones.
 
N747JB said:
But once the SID is complete, you are pretty much good to go and most of the 425's have had the inspections done. I agree with you on the diesels, I think it would be a great retrofit if it's affordable! I don't see paying $4-500K for a conversion, which is what I think it will end up costing, if it becomes available. :dunno:
Click to expand...

I agree on the turbine and 425, as I said, it was the only thing I could think of, beyond that...:dunno:

When I spoke last with the Continental guys, they were saying that it was going to be around the same price as a 100LL engine and/or doing a RAM conversion.
 
N747JB said:
But once the SID is complete, you are pretty much good to go and most of the 425's have had the inspections done. I agree with you on the diesels, I think it would be a great retrofit if it's affordable! I don't see paying $4-500K for a conversion, which is what I think it will end up costing, if it becomes available. :dunno:
Click to expand...

The other problem with conversions, all of those I am aware of at least, is no yellow arc. Top of the green becomes Vne, so I don't see how a 421 is going to see those speeds. I'm also not sure I want to take a 240 Knot airframe to 320 either.

BTW- Doesn't Riley offer this same kind of turbine conversion? Never mind, here's one for $330K

http://www.controller.com/listingsd...NE/1973-CESSNA-421B-RILEY-TURBINE/1250785.htm

This new deal is CRAZY!
 
Alexb2000 said:
The other problem with conversions, all of those I am aware of at least, is no yellow arc. Top of the green becomes Vne, so I don't see how a 421 is going to see those speeds. I'm also not sure I want to take a 240 Knot airframe to 320 either.

BTW- Doesn't Riley offer this same kind of turbine conversion? Never mind, here's one for $330K

http://www.controller.com/listingsd...NE/1973-CESSNA-421B-RILEY-TURBINE/1250785.htm

This new deal is CRAZY!
Click to expand...

I wonder who they see as the potenial customers for these conversions? If I needed/wanted to go 300+ knots in a Cessna, I would buy a 441 with -10's, and have a much better pressurization system as well as a better useful load and available RVSM. :D
I think the one in that ad used to belong to Hill aircraft, Mr Hill bought it as a project I think, about 15-20 years ago, the shop HATED it. :mad2:
That one has been for sale pretty much forever!:rolleyes:
The yellow arc restriction is another concern, but I would have a lot of concerns about this, including the strength of the entire tail structure. :dunno:
 
A friend has a 530-430 Garmin C-90 with 1,400 hr dash 21's (2,200 remaining until TBO) that can be bought ready to fly away for $500k. It will run 240 now, would pick up 30-40 with a Blackhawk if you wanted to spend the money (I wouldn't) but you would have a comfortable cabin from the get-go. Why in hell would anybody but a squat-body 421 instead?

N747JB said:
I wonder who they see as the potenial customers for these conversions? If I needed/wanted to go 300+ knots in a Cessna, I would buy a 441 with -10's, and have a much better pressurization system as well as a better useful load and available RVSM. :D
I think the one in that ad used to belong to Hill aircraft, Mr Hill bought it as a project I think, about 15-20 years ago, the shop HATED it. :mad2:
That one has been for sale pretty much forever!:rolleyes:
The yellow arc restriction is another concern, but I would have a lot of concerns about this, including the strength of the entire tail structure. :dunno:
Click to expand...
 
Count me in the "I don't get it" crowd. Buy a 421 or a 425. If you buy the former and want the former, you can restore it to be like new. Same for the latter.

The sales have shown the market doesn't exist. I agree with Henning that the next significant revitalization will be diesels or MoGas. Prices need to come down, not up.
 
Flew a 421TP for a while with the Riley conversion. Great airplane but very limited loading capabilities. Couldn't fill all of the seats up...ever. I wonder how they'll improve this one.
 
HPNPilot1200 said:
Flew a 421TP for a while with the Riley conversion. Great airplane but very limited loading capabilities. Couldn't fill all of the seats up...ever. I wonder how they'll improve this one.
Click to expand...

I don't see how they could, a 421C has a useful load of 2200 lbs +/- the engines will be lighter, maybe a couple hundred pounds, so say you have a 2500 lb useful load, and I think that's optimistic, it's far short of the 425's 3-3300 lb useful load. :dunno: And you will be burning more fuel than a 421, going faster, but burning more fuel just the same.
 
N747JB said:
I don't see how they could, a 421C has a useful load of 2200 lbs +/- the engines will be lighter, maybe a couple hundred pounds, so say you have a 2500 lb useful load, and I think that's optimistic, it's far short of the 425's 3-3300 lb useful load. :dunno: And you will be burning more fuel than a 421, going faster, but burning more fuel just the same.
Click to expand...

My understanding was that it is a limitation of the wing spar. The 425 had a MGOTW 1000# heavier than the 421TP I flew. With PT6A-112's, I planned a TAS around 265-275 kts and a burn of 400-450#/hr depending on altitude.
 
I dint get the turbine conversion market either. 25 year old airplanes re-engined sounds like a lot of effort and $ for a 25 year old oddball.
 
Everything on the 421 conversion is NEW except the aluminum. we are not exceeding Vne at altitude...there is NO tail issue for the last 20 years..and none on the Riley conversions....the price includes an airframe.....you can load the plane with 7 200lb pax and still go over 1,000nm with reserves...or 4 pax-w-baggage and go 1300+nm with reserves..in 3 hours !!! 1000 ft/min and 20,000ft on one engine !!! you can't buy this much NEW and this performance for less than $5,000,000 and even then the single engine numbers are not as good..Will be sold with a new airplane nose to tail warranty and costs the same as the cheapest SINGLE engine tuboprop (piper) and will run and hide from anything up to and over twice the price with the Excalibur's level of finish and equipment........Pelton and company are not fools...every pressurized piston twin(with few exceptions)is undergoing some sort of turbine retrofit.add the cost of a COMPLETE new panel.....Interior, boots, paint, systems and brand new Pratts, props and speed enhancements and I defy anyone to accomplish what the excalibur does for less.............
 
Oh ! I forgot to mention the plane is now pressurized and heated by bleed air from the turbines so the shortcomings that may have existed in the 421C are not relevant after the conversion.....Just so non-instrument rated pilots will understand; Vne of 240 ktias @28,000 ft on an ISA standard day equals about 360 knots true air/ground speed.....no 421 C can do that except in a dive......we will not exceed 210 ktias at altitude with a resultant ground speed of about 325-330 and are not exceeding design limits
 
You can with the Riley conversioned planes with the PT6A-135 engines...not with the lycoming or 112 engines...We are flying a riley converted plane for baseline info and it is a 290-305 kt airplane...the 135A engines will enhance that along with the winglets .strakes,hubcaps speed stacks...etc...we can absolutely haul 1,400 lbs a thousand miles in 3 hours .
 
geoff miller said:
You can with the Riley conversioned planes with the PT6A-135 engines...not with the lycoming or 112 engines...We are flying a riley converted plane for baseline info and it is a 290-305 kt airplane...the 135A engines will enhance that along with the winglets .strakes,hubcaps speed stacks...etc...we can absolutely haul 1,400 lbs a thousand miles in 3 hours .
Click to expand...

Used to fly one with -112 engines. I guess that explains it. Wish we had the -135's.
 
bnt83 said:
What's the advantage over a Cheyenne 400LS?
Click to expand...

Or a Conquest II?
The 421C airframe is almost identical to the 425, I'd like to know how they are getting 30-40 extra knots out of the same airframe, engine and prop combination?? :dunno: A 425 with the Blackhawk 135 conversion claims 285-290 knots and I'm sure they aren't being conservative with their claims.;)
In a nutshell, I am calling BS on the 325 cruise speed.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
to answer he question on how can we go as fast or faster than a 425...

1. the 425 weighs over a thousand pound more than the excalibur conversion.

2.our engines are flat rated to 475 a side as opposed to the BlackHawk Converted 135's @ 450 a side.

3.If the blackhawk mod will take the plane to 295 ktas at 1,000 lbs heavier we should pick up some advantage by saving 1/2 a ton...say 4-8 Kts..
Add 5-10 Kts for the winglets
Add 5-10 Kts for the strakes
Add 4-6 Kts for the speed stacks
Add 3-5 Kts for the wheel hubs
Add 3-6 kts for the 5 bladed MT props.....

so if we accept 295 kts + 4kts for weight +5kts for the winglets +5 kts for the strakes +4 kts for the speed stacks +3kts for the hubs +3kts for the props...We get a minimum of 322 kts and as much as 336......

Prliminary data shows us going flat out @ 24,000-26,000 ft at 327 ktas...
Cruise should be around 300-310....long range @ 280........

All the tail issues with the 400 series Cessna's were solve over 25 years ago...we are not exceeding Vne at altitude which is 240 kts True Airspeed...which is impossible to reach with the piston engines at altitude unless it's in a dive....we will not exceed 206-210 kts true airspeed at altitude...

To put some costs in line......Brand new PT6 engines with all the accesories...starter generators...nacelles with extra fuel tanks...props and hubs...etc.....will tear up $1,500,000 plus 2,000 man hours of labor......add about $300,000 plus for a digital integrated panel and autopilot plus back up systems and cabin entertainment equipment.....add a drop dead new interior....flushing toilet.....speed equipment and the labor to install all this plus paint....plus zero timing all systems etc...$2,500,000 seems more than fair...Same price of a single engine piper turboprop..with 100 more kts speed.....safety of 2 engines...2 more seats...and a flushing toilet with a hard door and much more complete an avionics suite and a cabin entertainment system....I know what Blackhawk conversions cost, before I get beaten up about that...remember they start with a turboprop plane and keep the take-off engines...They do a great job and are very sucessful.

As for the comments about the Duke...Royal Turbine had done quite a few of them and are starting on P Barons.....O&N are converting 340's and P210's.....Nextant is converting Beechjets etc.....
We are providing the MOST aircraft for the LEAST money.......
 
You have to forgive my typing as I never learned in school...When I was school age guys didn't take typing...on the above post my max speeds should be labeled INDICATED AIRSPEED....instead of true airspeed...which if there is no wind, should be the same as ground speed...Indicated airspeed allows for altitude and temps.....for instance...240 ktias @ 28,000 ft @ -30c= 366 kts true(or groundspeed under neutral conditions).....

sorry about that........:rolleyes2:
 
As for the Cheyenne lV question...there are only about 30 or so out there...I've flown in one in the late 80's.....Hell of an airplane, just brutal !!!

Garrett engines @ 1,000 shp each (flat rated)400 mph........I suppose you could put BRAND NEW ENGINES and SYSTEMS in it along with a GARMIN 950 panel....overhaul and zero time everything....a new interior and paint..
and you'd be in it around 2 1/2 to 3 million dollars....and it would be about 20-30 knots faster.........The folks at Eagle aviation are remanufacturing tuboprop Commanders and are spending up to 3 million on them and getting a hell of a plane.....ther are 800 421C's out there.....continental does not want to keep supporting the engines so the type is ripe for an upgrade.......and for less than most single engine turboprops will give an operator the safety of many motors plus everything else being upgraded to state of the art.......gee, a new non-pressurized Baron is well over a million dollars now........:rolleyes:
 
Geoff: They havn't made pressurized baron since 1985; still, I think the NA baron is over $1MM. All these conversions have fuel endurance issues compared to the recip. They are faster if you can get up to best altitudes, range may be descent, but one can't always do that. How much fuel will this hold? My KA has 386 to drive two PT-21s. Your engines have a higher consumption rate. My P baron holds 186 useable. Even when Rocket added extra fuel in the nacelles, it was maybe an 800 mile IFR with reserves machine.
Not saying it isn't a great deal if it fits one's mission, but folks have a lot of options for than amount of money.

Best,

Dave
 
OK, I'll play along that with all the mods and a lighter weight you can get 327 knots out of a $2.5 million dollar 421 airframe.:rolleyes: But, for that money you can buy a VERY NICE CJ1 or maybe a CJ2!:D The useful load is going to be less than a 425, and the pressurization limits you to FL 250, to keep the cabin altitude at a reasonable level. I think it's 10-11K at Fl 250. I'll say it's a cool idea, it's just that Cessna thought of it in 1979 and built it from 1981-1986. :dunno:
I read the max takeoff weight is increased to 7700 lbs, about 300 more than a stock 421C, the website didn't list a projected empty weight, but an average 421C would have an empty weight of 51-5300 lbs, normal useful load is about 2200 for a C model. Assuming a little better empty weight, newer avionics, maybe a little lighter engine/prop install, but adding the weight of winglets, I am guessing 26-2700 lbs useful load with a published 2200 lb fuel capacity. It appears that the useful will be a good bit lower than a 425, at least 4-500 lbs.
I'll just say that anyone buying one of these is going to lose a cool million bucks minimum if they try to sell it.:dunno: Just my humble opinion. :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top