Why Buy This When You Can Get That?

spiderweb

spiderweb

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
9,488
Display Name
Display name:
Ben
In this months AOPA Pilot, there is an article discussing the Cessna TTx. It is a high-speed single turbo. It has a lot of great features, and it costs $730,000.

And though I understand training and upkeep would be more of a burden, looking through controller, I see this: http://www.controller.com/listingsd...NA-421C-RAM/1982-CESSNA-421C-RAM/1248391.htm? Arguably one of the best light twins one can buy--fast, pressurized and fiki.

They're asking $565,000.

I understand the allure of NEW, and I know these airplanes are for very different missions and have different training requirements, but come on! :rofl:
 
Well, that's the difference between new and used. A new Baron is over $1.5MM now I think. If I had a 421 mission, that is definitely a good one to look at even if it does need $100k spent on the panel.

Thing about new planes, if nobody buys em well run out of used planes and the primary support network for them in pretty short order. Luckily there are people with plenty of money and depreciation rules that make it enticing enough for them to spend the extra money.
 
Your financial analysis stopped too soon. Figure at least $2k/mo for MX on the 421.

spiderweb said:
In this months AOPA Pilot, there is an article discussing the Cessna TTx. It is a high-speed single turbo. It has a lot of great features, and it costs $730,000.

And though I understand training and upkeep would be more of a burden, looking through controller, I see this: http://www.controller.com/listingsd...NA-421C-RAM/1982-CESSNA-421C-RAM/1248391.htm? Arguably one of the best light twins one can buy--fast, pressurized and fiki.

They're asking $565,000.

I understand the allure of NEW, and I know these airplanes are for very different missions and have different training requirements, but come on! :rofl:
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Maybe so, since you only need ground coverage.
Click to expand...

My aren't we a snide ******* tonight. How about full cover? I'll get full coverage on the 421 for non commercial use right around 1.5%-1.7% of insured hull value. I'd have to be able to get coverage on the TTx at around 1% to match that premium. I don't know what rates they charge on the TTx, but if the Cirrus is any indicator, it's way over 1%.
 
The folks who buy new TTs for that much probably have very little knowledge of aviation and very little common sense.

For that price I could get a

Extra 300
NXT Nemesis
Glassair RG
T-6 Texan
Stearman
SuperStinson
Pa-18-180 on floats
Anfib 70' 206 with a 550
Beaver on floats
Helio
etc
etc
etc

All of which MUCH more airplane


Also remember once your ass signs that paper that airplane is USED
 
Henning said:
My aren't we a snide ******* tonight. How about full cover? I'll get full coverage on the 421 for non commercial use right around 1.5%-1.7% of insured hull value. I'd have to be able to get coverage on the TTx at around 1% to match that premium. I don't know what rates they charge on the TTx, but if the Cirrus is any indicator, it's way over 1%.
Click to expand...

A Cirrus, Bonanza, and TTx should be about the same as a percentage of hull value. Insurance will be over 1% but way less than 1.5%.
 
Then there's the rest of us. For that price, I could buy my house, a vintage porsche, a older twin piper and still have money left to enjoy it all.
 
Last edited:
> The folks who buy new TTs for that much probably have very little
> knowledge of aviation and very little common sense.

Good grief. What a biased generalization and stereotype.
 
NineThreeKilo said:
The folks who buy new TTs for that much probably have very little knowledge of aviation and very little common sense.

For that price I could get a

Extra 300
NXT Nemesis
Glassair RG
T-6 Texan
Stearman
SuperStinson
Pa-18-180 on floats
Anfib 70' 206 with a 550
Beaver on floats
Helio
Click to expand...

Or like an acquaintance of mine you have a profitable business with travel needs and none of the aircraft you quote would do anything for him.

A super-stinson, seriously ?
 
Facts and logic have no place here.
weilke said:
Or like an acquaintance of mine you have a profitable business with travel needs and none of the aircraft you quote would do anything for him.

A super-stinson, seriously ?
Click to expand...
 
Henning said:
I don't know what rates they charge on the TTx, but if the Cirrus is any indicator, it's way over 1%.
Click to expand...

My boss just picked up insurance on his Cirrus for 1.6% of hull value. He has 350 hrs in a C172 and no HP or retract time. All he needs is 3 hrs with instructor before solo.
 
And within the past couple of weeks you were advising some guy to go naked until he had accumulated some time in his new plane.
Henning said:
My aren't we a snide ******* tonight. How about full cover? I'll get full coverage on the 421 for non commercial use right around 1.5%-1.7% of insured hull value. I'd have to be able to get coverage on the TTx at around 1% to match that premium. I don't know what rates they charge on the TTx, but if the Cirrus is any indicator, it's way over 1%.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
And within the past couple of weeks you were advising some guy to go naked until he had accumulated some time in his new plane.
Click to expand...

You don't see the difference in a $10,000 risk and a $700,000 risk?
 
I can see that you're advising a guy on a strategy that can quickly result in losing 100% of his investment, right after you bragged about a similar strategy with your own plane. Do you have more or less than $10 invested in that relic?

Henning said:
You don't see the difference in a $10,000 risk and a $700,000 risk?
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
I can see that you're advising a guy on a strategy that can quickly result in losing 100% of his investment, right after you bragged about a similar strategy with your own plane. Do you have more or less than $10 invested in that relic?
Click to expand...

I did not go bare to save on an initial high premium as I would get the same base premium regardless due to prior experience and time in type. For someone with zero experience the initial hours can come with a 500-1000% premium on the premium. In those cases with low loss potential, one can make a bet on doing the first 25 hours with a high quality CFI then applying for the insurance and saving a considerable amount of money. Yes, there is a risk of loss and it is a bet, but it is one I would be willing to make.

I went bare on the 310 because I prefer to self insure in low risk environments on principle. OSH is a high risk environment so I decided to insure and spread the risk at that time. Typically flying and boating are low risk endevours for me, I have not had a claim against me in even making a living with work boats and yachts or planes ever in over 25 years operating commercially and privately nor had a claim in a car in 30. I had one wind damage claim on my Travelair that paid $2500. Had I self insured in those days my aggregate savings would have been over $15,000 over my period of ownership.
 
Last edited:
weilke said:
Or like an acquaintance of mine you have a profitable business with travel needs and none of the aircraft you quote would do anything for him.

A super-stinson, seriously ?
Click to expand...

A glassair wont do it for him?? Need more seats how about a used PA-46,

Yea seriously the Stinson,

I know alot of you kids have little knowledge of quality aircraft or why someone would want a very classic TRUE 4 place aircraft that will climb out at 1800fpm and is built like a tank yet still has classic ramp appeal.
 
NineThreeKilo said:
Yea seriously the Stinson,

I know alot of you kids have little knowledge of quality aircraft or why someone would want a very classic TRUE 4 place aircraft that will climb out at 1800fpm and is built like a tank yet still has classic ramp appeal.
Click to expand...

And none of those features are relevant for a '1 guy and his briefcase year around in the northeast' mission.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top