18 Apr 2024, 05:44 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 22 Jul 2018, 21:02 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/11 Posts: 465 Post Likes: +129 Company: Southwest Airlines Location: KGEU
Aircraft: Baron E-55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: If I was your mechanic, I would encourage you too Ha..... Thanks for the remark Florian. He actually feels he might be too busy, but I'm sure he will be there if I get another bird. I'm more worried about the bill he will send me after he gets back from Hawaii!!!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 22 Jul 2018, 21:26 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 12799 Post Likes: +5226 Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
|
|
. Username Protected wrote: Any thoughts on any of these particular aircraft. : Do a flightaware biopsy. Plane that has been flying frequently and is for sale - good possibility. Plane that has sat for years ... walk away Most people ballpark a 421 as a $750/hr aircraft to operate. So let's say $75k/year for 100 hours/year. But let's assume you are special and can run it for $421/hr. that's still $200k over 5 years. If you assume between insurance, taxes, depreciation, cost of capital, etc that hull value is about 10%/year annual cost, the difference between a $100K 421 and a $200K 421 is $10k/yr. There's just not much saving to be had in a cheap one unless you can buy, get lucky, and flip it in 9-18 months before anything bad happens. All that having been said, you can find nice B models. You can find well-maintained planes that aren't fancy ... but they need to have been flown and maintained. You need to see an annual every year, a lot of hours flown and a lot of log entries between annuals.
Last edited on 23 Jul 2018, 19:54, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 22 Jul 2018, 21:44 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/05/12 Posts: 783 Post Likes: +802 Location: KVCB
Aircraft: P35, BE60
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Any thoughts on any of these particular aircraft. : Do a flightaware biopsy. Plane that has been flying frequently and is for sale - good possibility. Plane that has sat for years ... walk away Most people ballpark a 421 as a $750/hr aircraft to operate. So let's say $75k/year for 100 years. But let's assume you are special and can run it for $421/hr. that's still $200k over 5 years. If you assume between insurance, taxes, depreciation, cost of capital, etc that hull value is about 10%/year annual cost, the difference between a $100K 421 and a $200K 421 is $10k/yr. There's just not much saving to be had in a cheap one unless you can buy, get lucky, and flip it in 9-18 months before anything bad happens. All that having been said, you can find nice B models. You can find well-maintained planes that aren't fancy ... but they need to have been flown and maintained. You need to see an annual every year, a lot of hours flown and a lot of log entries between annuals.
Words of wisdom!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 22 Jul 2018, 22:32 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/09/13 Posts: 911 Post Likes: +449 Location: Byron Bay,NSW Australia
Aircraft: CE525,PA31
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I'm more worried about the bill he will send me after he gets back from Hawaii!!! Don if you can accept this with the Baron you will be ok with the 421. I think they are the best piston twin available but I only ever owned a 340A. I’ve had several mates that have owned 421C, 414A and 340As and all move over to other planes such as A36s, TBMs and CJs due to the maintenance costs. I loved my 340A but I sure don’t miss the costs of running it. My CJ is so much more consistent and it never breaks. Andrew
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 22 Jul 2018, 22:57 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/07/12 Posts: 536 Post Likes: +891 Location: Addison, TX
|
|
Username Protected wrote: ...On to the subject at hand. I have continued looking at the 421's posted on controller and trade-a-plane. Many have continued on sale with continuing falling prices. Many that were suggested as possible good aircraft continue to remain for sale, for years now in some cases, with falling prices. Many Late 421 B models are now around the $100K range, some with low to mid time engines. Same with some early 421 C models that are now at or below the $ 150 K range. ... I still may pull the trigger someday. Especially as these prices keep falling. Simple: All us pilots drooling over owning a 421 someday came to BT to learn all we could before pulling the trigger. Then we started reading MC's posts...how you could fly the MU2 for close to the cost of a 421. The doubts started. Since BT encompasses all the smartest and brightest, the 421 market completely stalled as buyers delayed their purchases. Result: 421 prices will continue to fall with every MU2 post from Mike. Conversely, MU2 prices are increasing with every post. Conclusion: Wait until the day before MC buys his citation to buy your 421 (prices will be at their absolute lowest). For the MU2 owners, it will be the time to sell. Prices will have peaked and starting a rapid descent as we learn you can fly a jet for less than a MU2 in the coming days.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 22 Jul 2018, 23:31 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/09/13 Posts: 911 Post Likes: +449 Location: Byron Bay,NSW Australia
Aircraft: CE525,PA31
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Conclusion: Wait until the day before MC buys his citation to buy your 421 (prices will be at their absolute lowest). For the MU2 owners, it will be the time to sell. Prices will have peaked and starting a rapid descent as we learn you can fly a jet for less than a MU2 in the coming days. Shannon...you forgot the most important economic reaction! Citation proces will sky rocket. Only reason I brought one a couple of years ago. Get in now before the tsunami Andrew
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 23 Jul 2018, 00:54 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/11 Posts: 465 Post Likes: +129 Company: Southwest Airlines Location: KGEU
Aircraft: Baron E-55
|
|
Hello Charles Username Protected wrote: Any thoughts on any of these particular aircraft. : Do a flightaware biopsy. Plane that has been flying frequently and is for sale - good possibility. Plane that has sat for years ... walk away Most people ballpark a 421 as a $750/hr aircraft to operate. So let's say $75k/year for 100 years. But let's assume you are special and can run it for $421/hr. that's still $200k over 5 years. If you assume between insurance, taxes, depreciation, cost of capital, etc that hull value is about 10%/year annual cost, the difference between a $100K 421 and a $200K 421 is $10k/yr. There's just not much saving to be had in a cheap one unless you can buy, get lucky, and flip it in 9-18 months before anything bad happens. All that having been said, you can find nice B models. You can find well-maintained planes that aren't fancy ... but they need to have been flown and maintained. You need to see an annual every year, a lot of hours flown and a lot of log entries between annuals.
I agree, I would not look at one that was a non flyer. And I would not buy a 'cheap' one.
With that said, It appears that there are now many inexpensive ones on the market that once were much more expensive just a year or two ago. They also seem to be well maintained. I know that a proper pre-purchase will weed some of these out, but it seems to me that these aircraft are staying on the market due to serious downward price pressure.
Also, the idea of fliping one of these aircraft for financial gain would be a foolish idea for me. A guaranteed loss.
No, I would assume that I would be one of the last owners. It would be essentially given away for scrap value, charity or something of that sort. Maybe done by my estate after I'm gone.
But while I'm here, I might as well enjoy it. Burning avgas has been a pleasure for me in the Baron. And I have enjoyed the maintenance part of it too.
I get a nice, well maintained 421, it should provide at least a decade or two of fun flying when I want a cabin class twin for a longer flight.
I am aware of the possible costs and I can handle it, but there is no reason to be the richest man in the grave. And when you are gone, you can't take it with you.
So is anyone familiar with any of these aircraft.
Do you have any recommendations on any that are for sale.
Last edited on 23 Jul 2018, 15:57, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 23 Jul 2018, 12:06 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/21/14 Posts: 280 Post Likes: +86 Location: KPDK
Aircraft: C421B MU2-40 Solitai
|
|
I've had several twin Cessnas. If you want a piston twin, the 421 is the most enjoyable plane you can get. As long as you stay with a 1973 or later 421, you'll be happy. Generally, a 421 is not any more expensive than any other turbocharged piston twin. If you find a well maintained plane, with good glass, your maintenance will be minimal. My annuals averaged around $8-10k. I must add, that my MU2 has been worth the upgrade. It does cost 25-30% more in scheduled maintenance, with a much higher reliability. Then again, I fly in the mid 20s at 300ktas
_________________ Sandy
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 23 Jul 2018, 12:24 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 12799 Post Likes: +5226 Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
|
|
Username Protected wrote: So is anyone familiar with any of these aircraft.
Do you have any recommendations on any that are for sale.
lower priced 421B for sale on TAP today N92AM - '72 short body. At TBO No history on FA. $75K Pass N5371J - 75 FIKI (first year avail, desirable) WAAS/STEC. Good cosmetics, mid-time engines. Active on FA. $110K. Looks like a very good potential N1944J - high time engines, nothing on FA. Pass N35FS - decent older panel with WAAS, hard to support autopilot, mid-time engines. Some activity on FA. has potential $169 N421WD - see picture of tip tank to left. interesting story to plane; I flew it for a year. Call with questions, decent option for the right price. N421RH - 515 hours since OH in 2004. Nothing on FA. Original cosmetics. Old AP. Meh.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 23 Jul 2018, 14:34 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/25/16 Posts: 1820 Post Likes: +1382 Location: 2IS
Aircraft: C501
|
|
Username Protected wrote: ...As long as you stay with a 1973 or later 421, you'll be happy... What changed in 1973?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 23 Jul 2018, 14:42 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 12799 Post Likes: +5226 Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
|
|
Username Protected wrote: ...As long as you stay with a 1973 or later 421, you'll be happy... What changed in 1973?
cabin stretch
If you somehow find a well maintained B model (long nose) with a short cabin, it could be a decent choice.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 23 Jul 2018, 14:47 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/21/14 Posts: 280 Post Likes: +86 Location: KPDK
Aircraft: C421B MU2-40 Solitai
|
|
Username Protected wrote: ...As long as you stay with a 1973 or later 421, you'll be happy... What changed in 1973?
The cabin bulkhead was moved back around 18" allowing for the seat to be moved to right of the door for easier ingress and an extra seat can be placed there. More important to me the a/c system has overhead vents and crew armrest vents. Twin Cessnas have very large windshields and the cabin can get very hot. Those A/C vents are a life saver. From 1975 onward it is FIKI.
_________________ Sandy
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 23 Jul 2018, 16:10 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/11 Posts: 465 Post Likes: +129 Company: Southwest Airlines Location: KGEU
Aircraft: Baron E-55
|
|
Good morning BT 421 flyers, Hello Sanford. Username Protected wrote: I've had several twin Cessnas. If you want a piston twin, the 421 is the most enjoyable plane you can get. As long as you stay with a 1973 or later 421, you'll be happy. Generally, a 421 is not any more expensive than any other turbocharged piston twin. If you find a well maintained plane, with good glass, your maintenance will be minimal. My annuals averaged around $8-10k. Thanks for the response. I agree with your sentiment. I have maybe 10 hrs in a 421 many years ago. I remember it was smooth, comfortable, and quiet!!! And for the prices that we see today on many 421B models and some early 421C models, a possible great deal. Not 'cheap' airframes, but nice ones that have languished on the market for quite some time now and have become much less expensive.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 23 Jul 2018, 16:22 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/11 Posts: 465 Post Likes: +129 Company: Southwest Airlines Location: KGEU
Aircraft: Baron E-55
|
|
Hello Charles, Thanks for the PM. I may try to contact you. Username Protected wrote: So is anyone familiar with any of these aircraft.
Do you have any recommendations on any that are for sale.
lower priced 421B for sale on TAP today N92AM - '72 short body. At TBO No history on FA. $75K Pass N5371J - 75 FIKI (first year avail, desirable) WAAS/STEC. Good cosmetics, mid-time engines. Active on FA. $110K. Looks like a very good potential N1944J - high time engines, nothing on FA. Pass N35FS - decent older panel with WAAS, hard to support autopilot, mid-time engines. Some activity on FA. has potential $169 N421WD - see picture of tip tank to left. interesting story to plane; I flew it for a year. Call with questions, decent option for the right price. N421RH - 515 hours since OH in 2004. Nothing on FA. Original cosmetics. Old AP. Meh.
I love this list. I have seen these adds and agree with the assessments.
There are a couple on Controller that I have been looking at.
52JV is one that has been for sale for quite some time now. Its price is getting attractive.
It has been for sale for a couple of years now.
Any thoughts on that one.
|
|
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 2007-2024
|
|
|
|