The best model C-172

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, I WAS Birddog

iflyforpie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8133
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
Location: Winterfell...

Re: The best model C-172

Post by iflyforpie »

Deltawidget wrote:On the question of this topic for Pipers, for some reason (lack of flight school demand? inability to use floats/skis?) Piper aircraft with equivalent performance to Cessnas sell for 25-30% less than Cessnas. Ocassionally, performance is better in some Piper Aircraft (other than shortfield performance..but are you operating out of the bush?)

I'm not sure why this continues to be the case..guess people stick with the type they are familiar with?
The answer lies in the type of Piper you refer to. I have mentioned in many other threads the 'Cub tax' that inflates rag-wing Piper singles (except the short wing ones...) far beyond comparable aircraft and Piper Navajos, and Chieftains tend to command more than the Cessna 402s and 404s do. All of these aircraft have the advantage of either greater utility or lower operating costs than the cheaper aircraft.

Performance and payload wise, we could replace our entire fleet (172, 206, 337) with Warrior, a Cherokee Six, and a Seneca. But the aircraft wouldn't be able to make money because a lot of our work involves being able to see down and being able to attach things to wing struts (cameras, antennas).
---------- ADS -----------
 
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?
User avatar
Shiny Side Up
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5335
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Group W bench

Re: The best model C-172

Post by Shiny Side Up »

iflyforpie wrote:
Beefitarian wrote: Then again maintained the same there's more steel strength in a 1955 Chevrolet than a 1996...
You sure about that Beef?
Well, in some ways you're both right. The old car would have fared better on a low speed fender bender for a variety of reasons. My 1970 ford came out on top in a fender bender with a new one mostly because mine still had a good solid steel bumper, but that was maybe at most a 20 kmph impact. There's a pretty low speed threshold where the construction of an old car doesn't help it as much anymore and worse its considerably less protective of the occupants as more of the impact is transferred to them. Patton because of a relatively low speed fender bender. But I digress.
To me, the best balance is the 172M. It has most of the comforts of the newer models and the simplicity of the old ones. Their prices have come down considerably because of the flood of restart used models.
I would tend to agree, this is also where Cessna started to standardize their instrument panel, instead of their previous shotgun approach to their placement. The M also still has the old 12 volt system as opposed to the 24 which is helpful when you want to charge your own battery up if she's been sitting a while. Not sure why, but I notice that the M also puts out more cabin heat than the Ns do, even though I can't see any apreciable difference in the set up, it does make it a better winter flyer. Best of all, the M model was when Cessna switched to their "new colors" that everyone was trying out in the 70's, so you're very likely to find them cheaper if they have original orange, powder blue or pea green interiors. :D
---------- ADS -----------
 
We can't stop here! This is BAT country!
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Re: The best model C-172

Post by Beefitarian »

RFlyer wrote:If cost is your main concern, stick with the C-172. just checked at ZBB and full service avgas is 1.95/litre. For an ~8GPH C-172 you're looking at $60/hr, or about $7.60/hour/gallon. The bigger machines suggested so far on this thread will burn between 10 and maybe 14 gph for an hourly burn of between $76 and $106. A lot higher operating cost and one that never goes away as long as you are flying.

And, with a C-172 and a 150 HP engine you are eligible for the Mogas STC, but not for the 160HP RAM conversions, (and higher HP).
So a 172P kind of like this one http://www.controller.com/listingsdetai ... 216787.htm? wouldn't be eligible because it has the 160HP engine?
Colonel Sanders wrote:
I'm under 280lbs Summer time, I think. My wife is 6 feet tall and likes bacon on her pizza. The dog seems skinny to me but he's 50lbs. The kids are growing like weeds
Run some W&B numbers. You need at least a 182, maybe a 206.

Back to the 172 ... try to find one with less than 10,000TT. Less than 5,000TT is better, that's never been crashed.

I am cheap and thus am partial to the 1973-1976 C172M.
Avoid the troublesome 1977-1980 C172N with bad O-320H2AD engine, unless it's been replaced.
1981-1986 C172P was good airplane.
Lawyers stopped production from 1987 to 1995.
1996+ 172's are expensive. I would get an older 182 instead, for the same money.
I've flown from YBW to DCA with my Dad and brother in a warrior, very similar load abilities, I had to limit the fuel but it was great. She can stay on the ground most of the time, even if I get down to 175lbs, if she wanted to fly we would have sold this house to buy an airplane like I planned when I bought it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
comfail
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: The best model C-172

Post by comfail »

Check out Kijiji, this one might be worth a look.

http://alberta.kijiji.ca/c-cars-vehicle ... Z339404132
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Post by Beefitarian »

Looks nice but it's $77k. I aint no dokter.
---------- ADS -----------
 
comfail
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: The best model C-172

Post by comfail »

Beefitarian wrote:Looks nice but it's $77k. I aint no dokter.
:lol: I kinda gathered that, but were you not hypothetically considering a restart 172 for 100K or so earlier on?

Ok, if I'm allowed to I'll throw in a vote for an early 172. Just bought a 57 for under 30K. Just one Com radio, Mode C, carries 800 lbs, and best of all the wife shows next to zero interest going with me. You may need more equipment for the trips you want to go on, but for me it should work for a while.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Post by Beefitarian »

Sorry com, I didn't mean to insult your airplane.

As a guy that currently can only afford to fly less than 10 hours per year, I know renting is actually a better choice. However if I got enough money for Christmas or something and could afford to buy I'd have to lean toward.
Colonel Sanders wrote:I am cheap and thus am partial to the 1973-1976 C172M.
Meaning not the $77 000 ones.

I started the thread with no budget so I wouldn't exclude the 2012 ones in case someone (probably a dokter) wants to tell us how you're crazy to be flying a second hand airplane. Also if the bag of money was really big and full I might like one of those "R" models. I think they are very nice.
---------- ADS -----------
 
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4153
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re:

Post by CpnCrunch »

Beefitarian wrote:Looks nice but it's $77k. I aint no dokter.
Looks very nice, and a bargain, but I'm suspicious. It was imported in 2010, he put in a new engine and prop and now he's selling it? Why? Seems very odd thing to spend $150k importing and overhauling a plane and then sell it for $77k the very next year.

$70-80k seems to be the sweet spot for buying a nice plane in good condition with low-time engine. There's a lot of choice too, not just 172s - I recently saw a nice Grumman Tiger with low-time engine for sale in Alberta in that price range. Also lots of C182s and 180hp 172s, even some twins.

If you can't afford it, you could always go for a partnership.

There's also Olds Didsbury flying association - they have a 150 and a 180hp cherokee that you can rent pretty cheaply (http://www.odfa.ca).

You can buy a flyable plane for $30k or less, but you might have to compromise. I owned a 1960 C172 for a few years which I bought for just over $30k and sold for roughly the same price (and I see it's now for sale again). Pretty decent plane, if you're not concerned about the over-TBO engine and slower cruise speed than the newer models (95-100ktas). For the same price you could probably get a 150 with a newer engine.

Right now I'm in the same situation as you, not really wanting to sink a bunch of cash into buying another plane, but not really wanting the hassle of renting from a flying school.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Post by Beefitarian »

Maybe he went broke importing it and now is hoping to get part of the money he put in back.

Olds sounds interesting. I don't know if I fly enough to take advantage of a partnership currently either. I got a PM about one that sounds excellent based in Okatoks.

Mostly I like to chit chat about it so I can learn more in case I ever can buy/get in a partnership. Olds seems far but I should probably compare it to Okatoks.
---------- ADS -----------
 
comfail
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: The best model C-172

Post by comfail »

No insult Beef, as it's not my plane anyway, and even if it was I find it really hard to get all mopey if someone doesn't like my stuff. I just threw the link your way in case it struck your fancy. Maybe I should study real hard and become a dokter - then I will give you first chance to buy mine cheap!

Nevermind, just realized you would rather get an "R" model, not one like mine which is a few letters less than R. I get confused easily sometimes...
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Post by Beefitarian »

Ah, I do like the "R" model, but I respect the opinions of some of the peoples in here.
Big Pistons Forever wrote:The best C 172 from a purely flying point of view are the early square tail fast backs (1956-59). They have the low cowl so you get great visibility, manual flaps and very nice light controls. But they have a low useful load, narrow cabin, and an expensive to maintain and overhaul Continental O300 engine and the accumulated problems of a 50 + year old airplane. From a purely practical point of view than a 1974 -76 M model is probably the best bet. It has a bullet proof Lycoming O320 E2D engine, roomy cabin, modern panel and Cessna made thousands every year so there are a ton to choose from. Quite decent ones are available in the low 40 K range...but the square tails are still my favorite because they are so nice to fly.
Therefore I would certainly like to try one of them out. Maybe I'd like it more than them silly "R" models.
Earlier in the thread I wrote:Something about enjoying many hours in the dreaded "N" model.
So if things lined up right (read beef wins lotto and finds nice C-172, you know a pretty blue one. ~Giggles like a girl~) I'd buy which ever model best suited my needs. :D
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: The best model C-172

Post by Colonel Sanders »

IMHO the ideal used 172 would be an early to mid 70's M model with no damage history, no corrosion, less than 2000TT, recent engine overhaul (less than 5 yrs/500 SMOH), recent paint and interior (less than 5 yrs), and a G430 in the panel. In fact, I have my eye on one just like that (sans G430, but you can buy them used cheap now).
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Post by Beefitarian »

I don't know what a G430 is. What advantages does it have over a yoke mount and some form of hand held that I could take in my Christen Eagle* as well?

*Beefitarian enterprises does not or has at any time in the past owned or even sat in a Christen Eagle.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: The best model C-172

Post by Colonel Sanders »

Image

G430 is Garmin IFR GPS. Smaller version of G530. Now
obsolete. Prices dropping, esp for non-WAAS version

Has comm, VOR, LOC, GS and IFR GPS for enroute, terminal
and approach. Colour moving map and NA database.

It can be handy to file IFR in a 172, through a cloud layer.

However, for bang for the buck for VFR-only ops, get a
portable GPS with a gizmo docking station in the panel:

http://www.airgizmos.com/Panel-Docks_c_1.html
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Post by Beefitarian »

Ooooo, it gots a com in it. That could replace a clunky 1956 Cessna radio and shave some pounds I suspect. I love it when I get unexpected bonus lurnin' in a thread.
---------- ADS -----------
 
azimuthaviation
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 9:34 pm

Re: The best model C-172

Post by azimuthaviation »

G430 isnt obsolete. The G430W is still in production and is a garmin supported product and the non WAAS version can be sent to Garmin fro a waas upgrade. Still a good unit and quite common in a lot of A/C, 100 000 installed by 2009 (whole GNS family)
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Post by Beefitarian »

Don't go being all cool and making me like you AA. :P

What are the prices like on those units?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: The best model C-172

Post by Colonel Sanders »

I didn't know you could upgrade a G430 to a G430W simply
by sending it to Garmin. Hmmm.

Anyways, my ideal panel for a single or light twin which is
flown mostly VFR but occasionally IFR would be:

PM 1000 ICS (new - save $1000 on audio panel)
G430 comm/vor/loc/gs/ifr gps (used, but do IFR paperwork)
G320A transponder & ACK blind encoder (new)

No HSI, no autopilot, no stormscope. Use a battery-powered
VFR portable GPS as backup in case everything goes black. Get
XM wx if you want.
---------- ADS -----------
 
azimuthaviation
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 9:34 pm

Re: The best model C-172

Post by azimuthaviation »

9 or ten thousand, maybe the same to install. 400 dollars a year for annual subscription for database updates
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: The best model C-172

Post by Colonel Sanders »

For a VFR-only aircraft, all you need is

intercom (I like PS eng, PM 1000 is 4 place)
single slim-line digital flip-flop comm radio
transponder w/encoder

You really don't need to blow the bucks on an audio
panel, a second comm, one or two VOR's, ADF,
DME, marker beacon receiver, etc. Complete
waste of money for VFR-only.

Instead get a gizmo docking station for your
VFR GPS. Goes into the panel real slick-like.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Post by Beefitarian »

In my opinion anyone with a stormscope in a single engine airplane is probably looking to justify pushing weather beyond the capability of their aircraft. Maybe WAY beyond.
---------- ADS -----------
 
azimuthaviation
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 9:34 pm

Re: The best model C-172

Post by azimuthaviation »

Yeah they will upgrade it all you have to do on the aircraft is change the antenna (same bolt pattern and same connector, easy) and a bit of wiring that may take a couple hours.
Colonel Sanders wrote:Anyways, my ideal panel for a single or light twin which isflown mostly VFR but occasionally IFR would be:PM 1000 ICS (new - save $1000 on audio panel)G430 comm/vor/loc/gs/ifr gps (used, but do IFR paperwork)G320A transponder & ACK blind encoder (new)
Youre still missing a second Comm and second Nav...
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: The best model C-172

Post by Colonel Sanders »

anyone with a stormscope in a single engine airplane
is probably looking to justify pushing weather beyond the capability
of their aircraft
Nope. You don't understand. Just like a GPS takes the stress out
of navigation, a stormscope takes the stress out of summer IFR.

10+ years ago, I used to fly IFR in an M20J. We put a WX-900
stormscope in it. Incredibly simple install, opposite of what all
the "experts" told us. It wouldn't keep you dry, but it would
keep you out of the really nasty stuff.

I highly recommend stormscope for summer IFR. Not quite
sure it has been completely replaced by XM radar yet.

Image

Image
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Colonel Sanders on Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: The best model C-172

Post by Colonel Sanders »

Youre still missing a second Comm and second Nav
Don't want 'em for mostly VFR and only occasionally IFR.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Post by Beefitarian »

I might take further IFR training and I have flown (yes dual with an instructor) in actual cloud in a 172 but think that's far from a really good idea. Yeah I know there's tons of twins that can't fly on the engine that's still running, same deal. If I'm in clouds I want maximum protection from becoming a glider. Therefore I'm not doing it intentionally in nearly any single and many twins.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”