I just saw the 421 here for sale, originally almost 500k, been for sale on/off since December of 2013, 13 years since overhaul, flightaware shows last flight 13 weeks ago. Now reduced to 369k (a what,120K adjustment?). I think it's going to have to hit 300K, advertised before an actual sale happens.

I think as far as the market goes, the 421 sits in a small little niche right between barons and king air 90's and MU2's. Tricky, too cheap it definitely won't sell due to neglect or dated parts. Too much, someone will opt for the KA or MU2. Puts the nice 421's in a tough spot, as I'm seeing with the one mentioned above. That small stepping stone between the small turboprops and the small twins is shrinking. Great time to be on the buyer side, I guess.

There is far more downside risk in a more expensive airplane.

There is more loss of investment return in money tied up in a more expensive airplane, or interest on a loan.

There is more money spent on insurance on a more expensive airplane.

If you buy a 1976 straight leg for $200K and it sells 3 years later for $150K, I predict you are better off total dollars in and out than a $350K later model, even if it sells for $350K, which is doubtful.

To fly it 65 hours/year, budget about $50K, roughly $17K fuel, $17K maintenance, $17K hangar, insurance, misc. So you are "losing" that $50K every year regardless. In 4 years, you will have spent as much flying it as it is worth.

As to FIKI, there is a growing awareness of the cost of the glass windshields and how often they break and need to be replaced. A fully deiced 421C with an alcohol windshield may not be as punished in the market as you think. Also, you will get it cheaper because of that, so I think there is no real net money here.

From a practical standpoint, the alcohol windshield is enough, IMO. I fly a turboprop (which finds ice year round) without a glass windshield, though it is technically FIKI.

I'm a fan of 1976-1979 straight leg 421Cs, with plex windshields. Best bang for the buck, cheaper to maintain than the glass or later models, more useful load.

Mike C.

Based on what?

I sold a 7,000 Ahrs 1050/1250 Ehrs straight leg for more than that.

As for Flightaware....my planes show no flights, yet they fly every week. Sometimes there is more to the story. I think that aggressive price drop will get 'er done.

Best,

Based on what?

I sold a 7,000 Ahrs 1050/1250 Ehrs straight leg for more than that.

As for Flightaware....my planes show no flights, yet they fly every week. Sometimes there is more to the story. I think that aggressive price drop will get 'er done.

Best,

Just to be clear, many 421Cs have plexi windshields which are heated and fiki. Heated windshields <> glass.

I think the alcohol windshield is a rare item... I wasn't aware, until this thread, that they even were an option for C models.

Robert

That scenario will never happen. It is my airplane and I don't have to sell it. I am already losing my ass on it at $369k, before I even consider the 1031 recapture. I'll mount it on a pole in my front yard. I'd prefer that someone would buy it and fly it.

The "cash buyer" thing is puzzling to me. Why would I care if somebody pulls up with a pickup truck full of $1 bills or a letter from a bank. Either way, I get my money when the airplane closes. How it got there is irrelevant.

It has a lot to do with taking a $50K hit. It was not a comment on your financial abilities, I have no knowledge there and even if I did, I would not comment. It's a comment on realities of airplane ownership. FAA could ground all of them, and I don't carefully your plans were made, it will be worthless. Or more likely, oil shoots up to $150 due to geopolitical instability and your $500K twin is now worth $250K if you can even find a buyer. Relax.

10 years ago there was the twin Cessna wing spar controversy. It has faded into the mists of time but the FAA came VERY close to putting spar life limits on the twin Cessnas, including the 421.

Indeed, they did put a spar life limit on the 414A which, unfortunately, was similar to the 402C used in airline service, it got caught in the AD process while the rest of the twin Cessnas escaped.

If a twin Cessna sheds a wing somewhere, for whatever reason, the spar AD thing could come back in a heart beat. Cessna wants it and used data of extremely questionable quality to try and get it back in 2004. For example, holding up the Goldsby, OK crash as an example of the problem to be fixed, when in fact, it had nothing to do with spar fatigue.

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviat ... 0460&key=1

The Australians DO have spar life limits on twin Cessnas and those planes get retired from service or exported when they reach them.

I'll also note that your "flying long enough" theory hasn't work an a great many other airplanes. The FAA has become increasingly deaf to owners and increasingly incompetent at vetting manufacturers data, which makes more and more likely we get onerous and unnecessary ADs.

Mike C.

Tim,

I looked long and hard at twin Cessna's a couple of years ago so although I didn't buy one I have an educated opinion about the market I think.

I think you should buy the cheapest 421 that meets your mission. You sound like you are planning to keep the plane for some time so you are going to lose far more than $50,000 on any of them you buy. The cheaper the plane the smaller the loss will be on a per cent basis.

Yes, some planes will sell faster than others in a few years time but they will all sell more slowly than today and all of them at a loss compared to todays prices. I would not get hung up on the windshield. There are plenty of more expensive things that can happen to these airframes than a $25-35 AMU windshield and I think the alkyd windshield and the heated will retain their relative price relationship over time.

If you're a long term owner I think that the most commons sense approach to owning a 40 year old piston twin is to approach it the way Dave S does and figure the thing is worthless when you are done with it. If you are a short term holder take the average depreciation over the past 5 years, double it, apply it to any plane you are considering and you probably won't be too unhappy when you sell it 5 years from now.

Tony- Buying an older plane is certainly a path I'm considering because newer planes have issues to then take into account the capital cost, my usage and value. I'm coming to end of my search and suspect I'll move forward soon in 1 direction soon. Thanks to all.

I can't wait to see what you end up with Tim. I've got a fair bit of 421 yearning going on right now but more that a few folks trying to talk me out of it. I'm concerned about the overhead and time commitment to mx and care / feeding as I don't have a lot of time for that type of thing. I'm curious to see what your first year of ownership looks like. Please give lots of feedback on the process.

Don-
Finding a good 421C is a bit more of a needle in a hay sack approach with so many more airplanes than the P Baron search. A lot depends on previous owner mx with the 421 but all things being equal I'm figuring 60 hours per year being $15K more for the 421- I thin I'm in the ball park not factoring in for unforeseen items..

Honestly for myself Tim, I'm a bit less concerned about the total $$ and more concerned about the time commitment. If it cost $10K or $30K more for mx or unforeseen costs / yr than what I had figured, I would be less bothered than if it required that I spend time every week or after every flight talking to mechanics, digging through mx manuals trying to constantly troubleshoot gremlins. I don't have the time to be a flight ops manager and mx director at this point in my business.

How many miles per year do you fly Don?

How many miles per year do you fly Don?