These airplanes are a 40+ year old maze of wiring, solenoids, little motors, relays, gyros.. plenty of issues.. stuff keeps breaking. Nothing engine related thankfully.. those set one back by 100 AMUs . Before I bought it, I expected it to be no worse than my former pressurized Cessna piston twin and so far, that expectation is proving to be a bit on the optimistic side, mostly because I underestimated the recurring costs of routine calendar time inspections (even when nothing is broken).

Yes, I am lucky to have access to a local independent mechanic.

She fell out of escrow, which I'm secretly happy with, to be honest. Just begun the road to recovery.

I’m typed and fly both the Phenom and the Mustang and get asked this question daily.

Mustang – The aft seat and the small pedestal are great. The automobile style seat belts are useless in the bumps (I’m 6’3”). My guests always use disposable fluid bags and have never used the MID CABIN honey pot.

The steps (CJ style folding ladder) main cabin entry door, and cabin cross section are 30 years obsolete and not competitive in 2019… Despite this, the rear full-width bench seat is comfortable in the Mustang! Example, I do my paperwork inside the Mustang. I do my paperwork on the wing of the Phenom.

Phenom – The cockpit fits like a glove, you feel much more attached to the airplane. The Phenom has wonderful cockpit seats (for a VLJ). Both aircraft fly nicely, but the Phenom’s flight controls (pitch & roll) are better balanced and feel heavier. The yoke and glare shield mounted PTT in the Phenom are very nice.

The brake system in the Phenom is the best in class and everything else will feel disappointing after flying a Phenom.

The Mustang flies beautifully but in my opinion, the controls are a little too light (P210 vs 177).

The entry, cabin, windows, refreshment center and stowage in the Phenom takes the gold medal. The Mustang didn’t even enter the race.

The Mustang has ample external baggage for all normal missions. I had a regular guest in the Phenom that would fly with an adult sized road racing bicycle in aft baggage. This bicycle would not fit in the Mustang… The Mustang’s baggage is adequate and unless you have a special need, this category is a tie!

Maintenance management – Phenom takes the gold but that doesn’t make the mustang bad.

The Phenom’s airframe is integrated with the G1000. Failed components are marked with a red X. The Phenom also has a maintenance computer that also tracks impending failures. The system works very well. I was recently helping an owner with an international acquisition and we identified a failing component from thousands of miles away.

Embraer is always improving the Phenom and boosting reliability, so it’s very important to participate in EEC to get MOST of the improvements.

The experience for a Phenom that has a maintenance discrepancy works like this:
1. Email the CMC file to EMB.
2. EMB will call you in a few minutes and tell you what’s wrong, where the part is coming from, who is installing it and when you will be back in the air.

The engines are equal except for the Phenom has a full FADEC system with automated starts and hot start protection. The burner can on the Mustang is discounted from P&W and is part of the HSI and OH. The Phenom more so than the Mustang has the bearing seal (4) issue that P&W resolves during the HSI or OH on BOTH airframes. The Mustang has had a few issues of abnormal track wear. The engine needs to be shipped home to P&W to resolve this issue.

Pricing – The used market price delta has shrunk between the two fleets. If I wanted to self-insure against airframe/avionics maintenance and normally flew regional trips with my wife in the back seat and occasionally another couple, I would buy any S/N Mustang.

If my trips sometimes got longer, my wife wouldn’t fill a disposable fluid bag and wanted a flush potty or I was using the airplane to conduct business, I would buy a Phenom on programs.

Warning - Not all programs are equal, due your homework.

Warning – Many people in aircraft sales claim to be an expert in Phenoms and don’t know Sh*t about Phenoms. You can buy the right S/N and optioned Phenom for your mission or you can buy the wrong Phenom for your mission. You will need to do lots and lots and lots of homework. They didn’t make any bad Phenoms, but different Phenoms work better for different missions. This isn’t an issue with the Mustang fleet.

ESP (preferably Gold Plus) is a must for both aircraft.

Checkout my IG for videos of both aircraft https://www.instagram.com/heading365/

Does this hold true for newer models? In other words.... is it just the early serial numbers that varied so much? Can Phenom's still be specced so differently?

I don't think the P100s vary that much, but you have seating options (belted toilet, side facing seat) and equipment options such as SynViz, DME, ADF, Garmin GSR56 (Iridium texting), CDPLC, ADS-B Out.

Talar du svenska, Marcus?

Talar du svenska, Marcus?

Javisst, men jag pratar bättre än jag skriver (Yes, but I can speak better than I write)

Apparentlyyay I'myay onlyyay artsmay enoughyay otay eakspay americanyay andyay iglatinpay.

So I ran the numbers when looking at my first jet. Was looking at a 501SP, again because of the cap cost. But when I ran the spreadsheet, I would spend enough in extra fuel (the fuel burn on a 501SP is eye watering) where I could own the Mustang for essentially the same cost on an annualized basis. Now, that's assuming 200+ hours of flying per year, but in my case, it made it a no brainer for the Stang or the 100...

Now, if you're not flying that many hours, than the 501 comes out head by far because of the lower cap costs, as long as you don't get bit by a mx event.

Short answer - on these jets you REALLY have to look at TCO. Spreadsheet it out and model the flights in ForeFlight performance plus. The numbers can be very telling...

Latest JetAviva report shows light-jet airframe price depreciation at ~3% per year.

[/quote]
Bryan-

When you ran your numbers, what amount value decrease did you include for the Mustang? When you're comparing a low capex/thirsty aircraft vs higher capex/more efficient aircraft, it might look like the higher capex plane is comparable due to the operating cost savings. But the higher cost airplane could potentially be worth 1/2 or less in 5-10 years. I was curious what you assumed in your analysis.[/quote]

I assume 3% / year in depreciation. Although on aircraft like mine I've not seen that (I always purchase as close to the edge of the dropoff of the depreciation curve). If you buy new, then you're correct. But I don't see me ever buying new, as I can't financially stomach that loss in value. Mine was purchased in Oct 2017 and is a 2010. Strong market, but I've seen virtually no depreciation. But I bought right... The other factor is that I'm depreciating the crap out of it on paper, so the tax savings is awesome.

My airplane will not depreciate 50%. That just doesn't pencil out. Let's say for round numbers you pay $1.7 for a good used Mustang on programs. Those engines are worth $1m. G1000 is worth $150k. Hull is worth $150k. So realistically, I have a salvage value of about $1.3. (Don't shoot me on these numbers, they are for illustrative purposes only). So my downside is pretty protected when the 40-50% hit on new is already out of the plane...

Another factor is that jet fuel is cheap right now. Hasn't always been this way, won't always be this way. As soon as jet fuel moves up, the numbers rapidly skew towards the lower op ex aircraft.

Bottom line - between buying at the edge of the curve, limited real depreciation exposure, fantastic depreciation for tax purposes, and op ex efficiency, this makes a lot of sense. But I'm flying 200+ hours per year so op ex makes a big difference. If I were retired, couldn't write off the plane, and was flying 50-75 hours / year, the picture would look differently.

What age range did this report cover?

How much a light jet depreciates depends heavily on several factors, its age being one very important one. I have a hard time believing that all light jets average 3% decline in value. I would think it is much more. BWTHDIK

Prices are also very dependent on the economy, which has been good in recent years. Look at the average depreciation over a 5-10 year period that also includes a good recession and I think you'll see substantially more average depreciation.

Bryan makes a good point with regard to OpEx. If one is going to fly lots of hours, the savings in operating expenses can mitigate, if not eliminate, any loss in value.

I'd also like a definition for "light jet". IMO that's everything from an Eclipse to a Falcon. Mustang and Phenom 100 I would put in the VLJ or mini Jet category.

There is zero chance any new airplane depreciates only 3% a year. However, JetAviva is in the 2nd hand airplane business and don't sell new...... I don't think. So perhaps they only mean the 2nd hand market which could be possible especially over the last few years. But that doesn't mean it will stay that way.

I've never seen so many airplanes on Controller. There are 48 Phenom 100's listed right now. Granted, many could be fake listings but there have never been so many. I think it's a great time to be throwing out lowball offers on "light jets".

Good luck on that. The good ones are very much in high demand. A friend of mine put his P100 out there (one of the good ones) and had two offers inside of a week. Volume is up on these as more and more people turn to light turbine aircraft for their GA fleet.

I would personally define any "light jet" in the single pilot category. So everything from a Mustang and P100 up to a CJ4 and P300. But that's personal preference.