OregonMaule wrote:I can see Kent's point of view. If you are a real buyer you will call, because it looks like a plane worth looking at.

If I was in the market for a 180 and saw that add on BCP I would simply PM Kent or call.

On the other hand I feel there is no deal to be had here. But I could be wrong.

See all the interest Kent is getting by not putting a price. This post keeps popping back to the top of the list. Sneaky smart.

G'Day

I agree. And while I don't prefer the method it must work to some degree because it gets used a lot.

For me it feels kind of like buying something at an auction, sometimes you win, most of the time you don't.

CW

I'll give you 45k for it.

kase wrote:I'll give you 45k for it.

Raise it to 45.5 Now we have an auction.

Tim

That's one disadvantage of not listing a price here. The plane is now subject to a low ball offer in a public forum. Now that 45k has been thrown out there, any prospective buyer who looks at this forum topic will have trouble imagining that it's worth much more than that. It looks like a nice plane that I would estimate is probably worth 75-80k with a low time engine, and 50-55k or so with 1400+ hours on the engine.

A year and a half ago I looked at a 1956 182 with leather seats, mid time engine, better avionics (would not take much) ext baggage, double pucks, 850's, STOL kit , he wanted 68 and took my offer of 62. I bailed when I saw what insurance would cost.

And a 56 is 100 pounds lighter.

Tim

qmdv wrote:A year and a half ago I looked at a 1956 182 with leather seats, mid time engine, better avionics (would not take much) ext baggage, double pucks, 850's, STOL kit , he wanted 68 and took my offer of 62. I bailed when I saw what insurance would cost.

And a 56 is 100 pounds lighter.

Tim

Tim, insurance was high for a 182? Why? What is considered high for insurance?

David

A1Skinner wrote:

qmdv wrote:A year and a half ago I looked at a 1956 182 with leather seats, mid time engine, better avionics (would not take much) ext baggage, double pucks, 850's, STOL kit , he wanted 68 and took my offer of 62. I bailed when I saw what insurance would cost.

And a 56 is 100 pounds lighter.

Tim

Tim, insurance was high for a 182? Why? What is considered high for insurance?

David

My mistake. What I was looking at was a 56 180 as described above. Ended up with a 56 182 with great paint and interior, ext baggage, 310 fork but avionics not worth mentioning. 208 hrs on fresh overhaul. Paid 40K.



Only now and then do I wish I had a little wheel in back. Not worth 30 K more IMHO

Tim

Ok. I thought you had a 182. Haha.

High time engine. Old style gyros. Bare radio and transponder. Be real easy to get up side down if you did anything to it.

qmdv,

Nice looking 182! You got a lot of airplane for 40 grand! I think straight tail 182's are a bargain compared to 180's, they do almost as much as a 180 at a much lower purchase and insurance prics. If you need skis in the winter then you will need a 180 but for most other applications the 182 will do just fine. Having owned 2 185', a 180 and a 182 this is the conclusion I have come to. I do love the 180/185 but it cost's more.

G44

G44 wrote:qmdv,

Nice looking 182! You got a lot of airplane for 40 grand! I think straight tail 182's are a bargain compared to 180's, they do almost as much as a 180 at a much lower purchase and insurance prics. If you need skis in the winter then you will need a 180 but for most other applications the 182 will do just fine. Having owned 2 185', a 180 and a 182 this is the conclusion I have come to. I do love the 180/185 but it cost's more.

G44

Kurt,

Actually, I know a couple guys who are operating straight ski equipped 182s in AK, and they do fine. They're not a Cub, but they can work there too.

MTV

I'm with the consensus, no price, pass right over the ad, don't even read it properly. And I mean when I am looking for that exact item with cash in my pocket. I think any seller loses at least 50% of potential buyers this way. But if that's what they want to do - good luck to them.

And yet this thread is at the top of the heap 3 days running. Bold move, 494, but it's paying off!

Well now that Mike has made the ski comment, all the more reason to pick a 182 over a 180 unless you really want a 180. Not that a 180 is a bad airplane, its a fantastic airplane, I am stating my opinion on the 180/182 topic based on cost.

G44