BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 18:25

Username Protected wrote:

No 75,000 each.

Shipping, taxes, misc hardware, etc.

No way it nets out at $75K/side.

And then there is the exhaust...

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 18:32

Username Protected wrote:

Mike I always fix everything to like new. That includes exhaust, props,governors, engine mounts , turbos etc. The cost is more like 90,000 a side.

What was the condition/issues of the previous engines that prompted you to replace?

Doug

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 18:33

Username Protected wrote:

I am only quoting Twin Cessna Owners group numbers. YMMV.

A few bad maintenance years with these planes and a King Air later looks like steal.

Sorry, but this just isn't true. Sure, a bad 421 year can be better than a good KA year, but for the same vintage airplanes the 421 is cheaper to maintain on a routine basis. A bad KA year can eat you alive.

Robert

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 18:37

Username Protected wrote:

Mike I always fix everything to like new. That includes exhaust, props,governors, engine mounts , turbos etc. The cost is more like 90,000 a side.

What was the condition/issues of the previous engines that prompted you to replace?

Doug

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 18:53

Username Protected wrote:

I will take a like New 421C before and old Turbo Prop any day of the week.

Since the last 421C was produced in 1984 (-85?), that means there is no 421 that is newer than 33-34 years.... Sorry, but none of these is "like new" anymore. Definitely including my 38 yr old turboprop, not casting aspersions, but I don't think the additional few years is as significant as whatever the history of the given example is. And new engines can be put on turboprops, too...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 19:12

I don’t think it’s a 421 vs Turboprop decision. It’s the known vs the unknown.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 19:17

Username Protected wrote:

Two Factory “NEW” engines. Every thing firewall forward will be be new which a couple of overhauled items.

Hey Gerald,

May I ask what your all in costs were for the two? I wouldn't mind finding a low time well maintained airframe with high time engines and do the same.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 19:17

Username Protected wrote:

I will take a like New 421C before and old Turbo Prop any day of the week.

Since the last 421C was produced in 1984 (-85?), that means there is no 421 that is newer than 33-34 years.... Sorry, but none of these is "like new" anymore. Definitely including my 38 yr old turboprop, not casting aspersions, but I don't think the additional few years is as significant as whatever the history of the given example is. And new engines can be put on turboprops, too...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 19:17

Username Protected wrote:

I don’t think it’s a 421 vs Turboprop decision. It’s the known vs the unknown.

In my experience between owning a Cessna 340A and the Mitsubishi, there are more knowns about the Mitsubishi. I think the main issue is if there's an unknown, it is potentially large. But I had a lot more unexpected stuff on the 340.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 19:35

Gerald knows his 421 and probably feels good about his decision for his airplane. I would.

I know nothing, or least not enough, about a turboprop to make an informed decision between the two.

I know that through analyzing the issue I might change my mind, but if it’s close, I’ll go with what I know.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 19:40

If you could point me to a turboprop with an interior of equal size (not smaller), more baggage space than what will fit in the bed of an F150, aquisition cost below $500k, all in costs of $800/hr or less (including 5% on capex), most expensive failed component cost of $75k or less, and a potty, I’d really appreciate it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 19:49

Username Protected wrote:

If you could point me to a turboprop with an interior of equal size (not smaller), more baggage space than what will fit in the bed of an F150, aquisition cost below $500k, all in costs of $800/hr or less (including 5% on capex), most expensive failed component cost of $75k or less, and a potty, I’d really appreciate it.

Well... mine is darn close to that. Minus the potty.

And if you got a long body Mitsubishi (Marquise or one of the similar earlier models), you'd have a BIGGER airplane that could haul MORE stuff and have a potty. At roughly the cost numbers you specify there.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 20:01

Username Protected wrote:

Capital cost can vary a lot between the two. A really nice 340 can be more than a average 421.

Apples to apples. Same engine hours, same update status on avionics P&I a 422C is going to cost more to buy than a 340 or 340A.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 20:03

Username Protected wrote:

If you could point me to a turboprop with an interior of equal size (not smaller), more baggage space than what will fit in the bed of an F150, aquisition cost below $500k, all in costs of $800/hr or less (including 5% on capex), most expensive failed component cost of $75k or less, and a potty, I’d really appreciate it.

Well... mine is darn close to that. Minus the potty.

And if you got a long body Mitsubishi (Marquise or one of the similar earlier models), you'd have a BIGGER airplane that could haul MORE stuff and have a potty. At roughly the cost numbers you specify there.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2018, 20:13

I looked at MU-2 and older commanders, and bought an Aerostar.
For one and only one reason...

I could afford the maximum probable maintenance event (MPME) on the aerostar
(~75K ) I could not afford the maximum probable maintenance event on a turboprop.
(New engine 250K) Now that I've experienced an engine failure and MPME my estimate was off... I blew an engine and all told it was about 110K for everything...

Unfortunately I have no legitimate business use for the Aerostar, I can't write this off....

Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421