My 172 is for sale!

Wow, John. That's a nice looking Skyhawk. Good luck with the sale.

What are you looking at to replace it?
 
nddons said:
Wow, John. That's a nice looking Skyhawk. Good luck with the sale.

What are you looking at to replace it?
Click to expand...
Thanks,

Something along the lines of a Cessna 182 (maybe RG),
or a Mooney, or a Deb/Beechcraft.
 
Good times,good looks,good luck,should go fast.
 
I used to work for Phil. Good luck with your sale.
 
It was a very nice 172 when I was in it, plus it's flown by a girl...:D
 
Henning said:
It was a very nice 172 when I was in it, plus it's flown by a girl...:D
Click to expand...
At least you didn't say "little old lady". She'd have found you and killed you, even though she actually liked you.
 
500 hr engine, 530W, EDM 700, nice paint and interior? You wont have it long at 59K!! I'll ask around here see if anybody in market, send them your way...
 
bnt83 said:
I don't think you're asking enough.
Click to expand...
Well, there are a few reasons:
Log books were lost in 1980 at ~1,000 hours and were "recreated".
There is a small ding in the skin of the right wing where some idiot pulled it out of a hangar while one hangar door was partially open. (oops):redface:
It had a catastrophic engine failure in mid-flight (at 1,000) feet a few years ago and my wife had to land it on a highway, which explains the new engine. (I wrote that up on a thread here on POA).
But other than that, it is perfect.
 
JOhnH said:
Well, there are a few reasons:
Log books were lost in 1980 at ~1,000 hours and were "recreated".
There is a small ding in the skin of the right wing where some idiot pulled it out of a hangar while one hangar door was partially open. (oops):redface:
It had a catastrophic engine failure in mid-flight (at 1,000) feet a few years ago and my wife had to land it on a highway, which explains the new engine. (I wrote that up on a thread here on POA).
But other than that, it is perfect.
Click to expand...

None of that (minus the ding that's still there) should really change the price.

The engine was overhauled, no one really cares why you did it.

You have 34 years of logs, I mean unless they were going to frame them page by page and hang them like a montage, that's more then fine.

The only damage that matters is damage that wasn't repaired, or wasn't fully repaired.


Thus the only thing on there that I would point out would be the ding in your wing skin, which you could just as easily repair.
 
James331 said:
None of that (minus the ding that's still there) should really change the price.

The engine was overhauled, no one really cares why you did it.

You have 34 years of logs, I mean unless they were going to frame them page by page and hang them like a montage, that's more then fine.

The only damage that matters is damage that wasn't repaired, or wasn't fully repaired.


Thus the only thing on there that I would point out would be the ding in your wing skin, which you could just as easily repair.
Click to expand...


In this market he'll get beat up for everything, relevant or not. Buyers see 172s for $25,000, they should all be that. His is nice, they'll offer him $40k.
 
Sold! For the asking price! (I knew I didn't ask enough).
All the inspections are done and all the papers are signed.
But I'll believe it when the money arrives tomorrow.

Now to find a really good deal on a good 182RG. Anybody know of one?
 
No, but make sure you find one with the gear saddles done, you consider a 177RG? Do you need the extra load of the 182? Congrats on getting the 172 sold.
 
Henning said:
No, but make sure you find one with the gear saddles done, you consider a 177RG? Do you need the extra load of the 182? Congrats on getting the 172 sold.
Click to expand...
I hadn't really considered the Cardinal because I didn't think they would be much faster than a Skyhawk. But from what I have been reading today, I guess I was wrong. I would have to compromise on some load capacity, but that wouldn't be too big a problem. I'll add that to my list. It does seem to be less pricey than some others I have been considering.
 
JOhnH said:
I hadn't really considered the Cardinal because I didn't think they would be much faster than a Skyhawk. But from what I have been reading today, I guess I was wrong. I would have to compromise on some load capacity, but that wouldn't be too big a problem. I'll add that to my list. It does seem to be less pricey than some others I have been considering.
Click to expand...

Also nice flying and good visibility. The 200hp 177RG is a 140kt airplane that leans out very efficiently for a 135 it cruise for 7.7 or so an hour. Fuel Injection is generally advantageous. Also the 177RG has a different gear saddle system than the 182RG and 210 which is not subject to the problems, including parts supply, the others are experiencing.
 
JOhnH said:
Sold! For the asking price! (I knew I didn't ask enough).
All the inspections are done and all the papers are signed.
But I'll believe it when the money arrives tomorrow.

Now to find a really good deal on a good 182RG. Anybody know of one?
Click to expand...

So TWO happy people today! Congrats! They got a nice aircraft. Good luck in your search.
 
Beautiful 172, good luck on the sale!
 
182RG over 177rg any day imo.
 
Seanaldinho said:
Looks groovy. You would think the seller would list an autopilot if it had one...
Click to expand...
I have followed up on several ads where they didn't mention an AP but it actually had one. I sent these people an email to ask them. But I don't see anything on the panel that looks like an AP to me.
 
JOhnH said:
I have followed up on several ads where they didn't mention an AP but it actually had one.
Click to expand...

Having an autopilot and having a working autopilot are two very different things...
 
JOhnH said:
What do you think of this one? (I can't tell if it has an autopilot).
http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/CESSNA-210/1963-CESSNA-210/1293753.htm
Click to expand...

Beauty. I personally wouldn't buy anything older than 1964. At that price I'd be looking at 1966 thru 1970s.

Just a few noteworthy changes in years:

1960 thru 1961 is basically a 182RG, no rear window, hydraulic flaps, IO470 powered. The hydraulic console is goofy looking like an afterthought.

In 1962 the airframe became the same as the 210-5, otherwise known as the 205. It has a rear window, longer fuselage, just looks right. I believe in 1963 electric flaps replaced the hydraulic ones. The hydraulic center console is redesigned and it just looks much more modern. 4 regular seats with two small child seats

In 1964 the IO520 replaced the IO470. This has one of the highest service ceilings of any normally aspirated airplanes I've seen to 21,000 feet.

1967 was the first cantilever wing. (pretty sure its a wet wing)

1970 the flat springsteel gear was replaced with the round tubular type. The track was widened allowing the wheels to be placed further aft when retracted which allowed the two small child seats to be replaced with regular seats making it a 6 seat airplane.


67 or 68 also came with the standard T instrument panel layout. Many have been update of course.
 
Henning said:
Good engine, strutted wing, saddles done, not bad.
Click to expand...

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/detail/aircraft/Single+Engine+Piston/1967/Cessna/210G/1761515.html


$25k less with stech 50

Garmin GNS430 GPS/Nav/Com
Garmin GDL 69 weather
Garmin GTX 330 Mode-S Transponder
Garmin GMA 340 Audio Panel / Stereo intercom
Garmin MX 20 MFD
Bendix King KX155 Nav/Com
Bendix King KN 64 DME
Electronics International Fuel Flow Totalizer. Century 360 HSI
S-Tec 50 Autopilot with GPSS
Davtron M655 OAT, Density Altitude, etc
JPT 700 Engine analizer {EGT, CHT, Oil Pressure}
Bose built in headset
Stand By Vacuum
Castleberry electric stand by attitude indicator.
 
That does look nice. A little more time on the engine than I would prefer though. And it is in AL, which is closer to FL than CA.

Thanks for the info.
bnt83 said:
http://www.trade-a-plane.com/detail/aircraft/Single+Engine+Piston/1967/Cessna/210G/1761515.html


$25k less with stech 50

Garmin GNS430 GPS/Nav/Com
Garmin GDL 69 weather
Garmin GTX 330 Mode-S Transponder
Garmin GMA 340 Audio Panel / Stereo intercom
Garmin MX 20 MFD
Bendix King KX155 Nav/Com
Bendix King KN 64 DME
Electronics International Fuel Flow Totalizer. Century 360 HSI
S-Tec 50 Autopilot with GPSS
Davtron M655 OAT, Density Altitude, etc
JPT 700 Engine analizer {EGT, CHT, Oil Pressure}
Bose built in headset
Stand By Vacuum
Castleberry electric stand by attitude indicator.
Click to expand...
 
bnt83 said:
http://www.trade-a-plane.com/detail/aircraft/Single+Engine+Piston/1967/Cessna/210G/1761515.html


$25k less with stech 50

Garmin GNS430 GPS/Nav/Com
Garmin GDL 69 weather
Garmin GTX 330 Mode-S Transponder
Garmin GMA 340 Audio Panel / Stereo intercom
Garmin MX 20 MFD
Bendix King KX155 Nav/Com
Bendix King KN 64 DME
Electronics International Fuel Flow Totalizer. Century 360 HSI
S-Tec 50 Autopilot with GPSS
Davtron M655 OAT, Density Altitude, etc
JPT 700 Engine analizer {EGT, CHT, Oil Pressure}
Bose built in headset
Stand By Vacuum
Castleberry electric stand by attitude indicator.
Click to expand...

All it needs is a G-500 and BT control on the radio. :D Although the 470 and struts are bonus features for the other, plus the saddles. I don't see any mention addressing the gear saddles. That is an issue these days.
 
Last edited:
JOhnH said:
That does look nice. A little more time on the engine than I would prefer though. And it is in AL, which is closer to FL than CA.

Thanks for the info.
Click to expand...

Don't be afraid to go to CA, very clean planes corrosion wise out there.
 
Henning said:
All it needs is a G-500 and BT control on the radio. :D Although the 470 and struts are bonus features for the other, plus the saddles. I don't see any mention addressing the gear saddles. That is an issue these days.
Click to expand...

Saddles are only life limited on 210 /210A.


210B thru G unlikely to find any issue:
3. Within 100 hours time in service after August 16, 1976, or prior to April 1, 1977, whichever occurs later, replace P/N's 1241423-1 and 1241423-2 main landing gear saddles with improved saddles of the same part number in accordance with Cessna Service Letter SE 75-26 dated December 5, 1975, or later approved revisions.

Especially on a plane that has $20k+ in avionics in the last decade.

I'd buy a cheaper decent shape 210D thru E in a heartbeat. You can replace all the hydraulic hoses using bulk hose and re-using the fittings. The later 210s have a crimped on fittings.

The wiring and switches in those older planes would likely need help too, I'd be all over that easy.
 
Last edited:
Why is it that when I'm looking at old Cessnas, nearly all of them STILL have that ugly ass black, tan, or grey plastic crap on the panel? It's clear they've added or changed instruments over the decades, yet they kept that plastic? I'd pay a premium if someone put an aluminum panel in even if the instruments didn't change.

Is the weight that significant? Is it really a big cost?
 
nddons said:
Why is it that when I'm looking at old Cessnas, nearly all of them STILL have that ugly ass black, tan, or grey plastic crap on the panel? It's clear they've added or changed instruments over the decades, yet they kept that plastic? I'd pay a premium if someone put an aluminum panel in even if the instruments didn't change.

Is the weight that significant? Is it really a big cost?
Click to expand...

Labor. That plastic typically hides an ugly mess.

Even 177s don't look great with brand new aluminum panels because the yoke glides are kinda ugly. A guy could make something that looks nice and pitch the ugly ones tho.

Some of the most beautiful upper panels are accompanied by hideous original lowers because all the engine control and ventilation cables have to be completely removed to get the plastic off without cutting it up.

like this:




The older planes with fuses suck too because each fuse holder was put in the panel then the wires/buss bar was soldered to it.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
WAY better than this side of the country.
Click to expand...

Yes and no, more to do with the owner then the state line, also planes go for more $$ in CA.

Ether way any one willing to spend six figures but unwilling to travel to checkout a plane has more money than..well.

Some of the nicest and cheapest planes I've found have been in places like IN, SD, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top