21 Oct 2025, 00:22 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: FS: 1964 Baron 55B $39,000  Posted: 09 Oct 2025, 13:20 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 07/18/22
Posts: 102
Post Likes: +88
Location: Morgan Hill, CA (E16)
Aircraft: 1964 Baron 55B
|
|
I am selling N5383, a 1964 Baron 55B model. The airplane needs two overhauled engines but is otherwise flyable. $39,000 OBO. Logbooks and photos: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... share_linkI have digitized the logs going back to 1993 but they are available on paper back to 1964. Location: Hayward, CA (KHWD) Tail number N5383 Serial number: TC-755 TT: 6663.3 LE: TCM IO-470L, 1152 SMOH, CS-91591-4-L RE: TCM IO-470L, 1152 SMOH, CS-91204-4-L LP: PHC-A3VF-2B/V7636B, BR305, PSOH: 959 RP: PHC-A3VF-2B/V7636NB, CC305, PSOH: 959 King Silver Crown avionics package KI-525 KMA-24 KFC-200 AP GTX-345 Out/In KLN 89b GPS JPI 790 RCA weather radar (inoperative) All ADs complied with Overhauled gearbox and landing gear system 2024 Overhauled gear motor 2024 Overhauled flap motor 2024 Challenger remote oil filter STC BAS shoulder harness STC G100UL STC New transponder antenna 2024 New position light 2024 Bruce's custom cover and cowl plugs IRAN KFC 200 flight computer 2023 New Eagle fuel bladder right aux 2023 New FCIII main tires and brakes 2025 Overhauled left prop governor 2024 New left engine alternator 2025 Overhauled right engine starter 2024 New ignition harness both engines 2024 Overhauled fuel selector 2024 New spark plugs 2024
_________________
-d
Last edited on 10 Oct 2025, 13:47, edited 5 times in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: FS: 1964 Baron 55B $39,000 Posted: 09 Oct 2025, 13:39 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/18/22
Posts: 102
Post Likes: +88
Location: Morgan Hill, CA (E16)
Aircraft: 1964 Baron 55B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: What's wrong with your engines? Spalled lifters were discovered at annual. The shop suggested repair was not recommended, due to being near TBO.
_________________
-d
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: FS: 1964 Baron 55B $39,000 Posted: 09 Oct 2025, 15:58 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/17/13
Posts: 2150
Post Likes: +3106
Location: Houston Texas (KDWH)
Aircraft: 1966 C55 Baron
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Never do that, ever.
The cam and lifters should always be considered "one".
Like sprockets and a chain on a motorcycle. I did it 7 years ago on an N35 Bonanza (IO-470). It's still flying with 500+ hours since then. The engine had 1700 hours when I did it. I'd do it again. Lifters are easy and not that expensive.
_________________
Flying - Because baseball, football, basketball, soccer, bowling & golf only take one ball.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: FS: 1964 Baron 55B $39,000 Posted: 09 Oct 2025, 16:01 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 05/05/14
Posts: 600
Post Likes: +491
Aircraft: 441, 414, PA-30T
|
|
|
David according to flightaware you've done a tremendous amount of flying hours/trips (many many hours) over the past several months in this amazing 55B, which tells me and everyone else that this plane is extremely capable of flying and very airworthy (outside of the engines). It seems strange that both engines would have the same exact problem at the same exact time, since I don't have a clue to which shop or A&P told you about the engines I would recommend a second opinion, if that's a possible option.
Just seems strange that both engines were noted as such at the same exact time, but I'm also not familiar with these engines. Is this something that these engines are known for?
Also you stated that since they are so close to TBO, you have them listed at TTSOH as 1152 hrs, what is TBO for these engines? I'm accustomed to flying planes with 1,700 to 2,000 hr TBO so typically for me 1,152 is barely past the "recommended" TBO but I've run some past 2,500 hrs and they were still ok even then but I personally chose to OH them, looking back I should have continued monitoring and waited until they indicated it was time.
So sorry you received this bad news because it appears you were really enjoying and using your plane alot.
I hope you can get this worked out or get a great buyer come along, good luck my friend and once again sorry you've received such bad news.
Todd
_________________
Blue Skies and Brisk Tailwinds
Todd Hardin
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: FS: 1964 Baron 55B $39,000 Posted: 09 Oct 2025, 18:02 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/18/22
Posts: 102
Post Likes: +88
Location: Morgan Hill, CA (E16)
Aircraft: 1964 Baron 55B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: David according to flightaware you've done a tremendous amount of flying hours/trips (many many hours) over the past several months in this amazing 55B, which tells me and everyone else that this plane is extremely capable of flying and very airworthy (outside of the engines). It seems strange that both engines would have the same exact problem at the same exact time, since I don't have a clue to which shop or A&P told you about the engines I would recommend a second opinion, if that's a possible option.
Just seems strange that both engines were noted as such at the same exact time, but I'm also not familiar with these engines. Is this something that these engines are known for?
Also you stated that since they are so close to TBO, you have them listed at TTSOH as 1152 hrs, what is TBO for these engines? I'm accustomed to flying planes with 1,700 to 2,000 hr TBO so typically for me 1,152 is barely past the "recommended" TBO but I've run some past 2,500 hrs and they were still ok even then but I personally chose to OH them, looking back I should have continued monitoring and waited until they indicated it was time.
So sorry you received this bad news because it appears you were really enjoying and using your plane alot.
I hope you can get this worked out or get a great buyer come along, good luck my friend and once again sorry you've received such bad news.
Todd Thanks Todd. It has been a been a hard, bitter pill to swallow especially since I have been an involved, conscientious and caring owner and definitely not starved the airplane of maintenance or money. You’re correct in that I have flown quite a bit with this airplane in the 3 years I’ve flown it, about 300 hours. In fact, I took it to Oshkosh this summer from California. It is capable and airworthy outside the engine problems. Savvy has recommended that I replace the lifters and keep on flying however, the shop disagrees and we’re at an impasse. The engines haven’t been overhauled since 1993, so even though they’re mid-time, they aren’t calendar wise. The cylinders aren’t new either.
_________________
-d
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: FS: 1964 Baron 55B $39,000 Posted: 09 Oct 2025, 18:13 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/31/10
Posts: 13604
Post Likes: +7731
Company: 320 Fam
Aircraft: 58TC
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Never do that, ever.
The cam and lifters should always be considered "one".
Like sprockets and a chain on a motorcycle. Not in my experience with airplane engines. I’ve saved several motors that all went past TBO after replacing some spalled lifters.
_________________
Views are my own and don’t represent employers or clients
My 58TC https://tinyurl.com/mry9f8f6
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: FS: 1964 Baron 55B $39,000 Posted: 09 Oct 2025, 18:56 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 04/05/22
Posts: 3520
Post Likes: +4324
Aircraft: D50E Twin Bonanza
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Never do that, ever.
The cam and lifters should always be considered "one".
Like sprockets and a chain on a motorcycle. Yeah, no. If the cam is good run it.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: FS: 1964 Baron 55B $39,000 Posted: 09 Oct 2025, 20:25 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/05/14
Posts: 600
Post Likes: +491
Aircraft: 441, 414, PA-30T
|
|
Username Protected wrote: David according to flightaware you've done a tremendous amount of flying hours/trips (many many hours) over the past several months in this amazing 55B, which tells me and everyone else that this plane is extremely capable of flying and very airworthy (outside of the engines). It seems strange that both engines would have the same exact problem at the same exact time, since I don't have a clue to which shop or A&P told you about the engines I would recommend a second opinion, if that's a possible option.
Just seems strange that both engines were noted as such at the same exact time, but I'm also not familiar with these engines. Is this something that these engines are known for?
Also you stated that since they are so close to TBO, you have them listed at TTSOH as 1152 hrs, what is TBO for these engines? I'm accustomed to flying planes with 1,700 to 2,000 hr TBO so typically for me 1,152 is barely past the "recommended" TBO but I've run some past 2,500 hrs and they were still ok even then but I personally chose to OH them, looking back I should have continued monitoring and waited until they indicated it was time.
So sorry you received this bad news because it appears you were really enjoying and using your plane alot.
I hope you can get this worked out or get a great buyer come along, good luck my friend and once again sorry you've received such bad news.
Todd Thanks Todd. It has been a been a hard, bitter pill to swallow especially since I have been an involved, conscientious and caring owner and definitely not starved the airplane of maintenance or money. You’re correct in that I have flown quite a bit with this airplane in the 3 years I’ve flown it, about 300 hours. In fact, I took it to Oshkosh this summer from California. It is capable and airworthy outside the engine problems. Savvy has recommended that I replace the lifters and keep on flying however, the shop disagrees and we’re at an impasse. The engines haven’t been overhauled since 1993, so even though they’re mid-time, they aren’t calendar wise. The cylinders aren’t new either.
David I don't think anyone on this forum (besides Arnie) would go against Savvy, personally myself I'd get me a ferry permit and fly it to someone that would replace the lifters and I keep right on flying like you have been and as far as the 1993 OH calendar time, who cares its a part 91 airplane, I know owners that are flying planes with the last OH in the 60's. I'd keep doing oil analysis and change oil, every 25 or so hours and let the engines tell you when its time for OH, not a calendar...but that's just my thoughts.
Once again if it were mine I'd get it out of what airport or shop you have it at and take it somewhere else, this is crazy especially with Savvy telling you to replace lifters only.
Best of luck my friend, I sincerely hate this for you.
Todd
_________________
Blue Skies and Brisk Tailwinds
Todd Hardin
Last edited on 09 Oct 2025, 20:27, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|
