23 Apr 2024, 17:16 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 18:25 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/24/10 Posts: 6756 Post Likes: +4422 Location: Concord , CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1967 Baron B55
|
|
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.
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. Before you say it, I still do not want an OLD Turbo Prop. I will take a like New 421C before and old Turbo Prop any day of the week.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 18:32 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/13/11 Posts: 745 Post Likes: +460 Location: Sandpoint, ID (KSZT)
Aircraft: 58P, DG800B
|
|
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
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 18:33 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/29/10 Posts: 2559 Post Likes: +2218 Location: Dallas, TX (KADS & KJWY)
Aircraft: T28B,7GCBC,E90
|
|
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
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 18:37 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/24/10 Posts: 6756 Post Likes: +4422 Location: Concord , CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1967 Baron B55
|
|
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
Engines are at TBO and still Running great. I have a huge income year and I can write them off otherwise I would run them another 400 hours.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 18:53 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 6318 Post Likes: +3809 Location: San Carlos, CA - KHWD
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
|
|
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...
_________________ -Jon C.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 19:17 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/17/11 Posts: 1762 Post Likes: +1086 Location: KFRG
Aircraft: 421C
|
|
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.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 19:17 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/24/10 Posts: 6756 Post Likes: +4422 Location: Concord , CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1967 Baron B55
|
|
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...
You can buy a 421C for just the cost of 2 New Turbo Prop engines.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 19:17 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 6318 Post Likes: +3809 Location: San Carlos, CA - KHWD
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
|
|
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.
_________________ -Jon C.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 19:40 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/20/09 Posts: 2407 Post Likes: +1880 Company: Jcrane, Inc. Location: KVES Greenville, OH
Aircraft: C441, RV7A
|
|
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.
_________________ Jack Stull
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 19:49 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 6318 Post Likes: +3809 Location: San Carlos, CA - KHWD
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
|
|
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.
_________________ -Jon C.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 20:01 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/03/08 Posts: 16187 Post Likes: +8797 Location: 2W5
Aircraft: A36
|
|
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.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna 340 vs 414 vs the 421 Posted: 07 Jun 2018, 20:03 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/20/09 Posts: 2407 Post Likes: +1880 Company: Jcrane, Inc. Location: KVES Greenville, OH
Aircraft: C441, RV7A
|
|
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. The Marquise is the same interior size as the 421, it doesn’t have as much external baggage capacity, the most expensive part isn’t less than 75k, and ‘roughly’ is pretty broad on cost/hr.
_________________ Jack Stull
|
|
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
|
|
|
|