Why are 162s so cheap

[ShawnM]

Who do Piper Sport owners go to for parts etc ... ?

They go to Czech Sport Aircraft (formerly Czech Aircraft Works) who still supports all Sport Cruisers, regardless of how they were labeled. (I understand CSA has not been particularly forthcoming with LoAs, but that's another matter.)

Correct, the PiperSport was always supported by CSA, not Piper, it was only badged as a Piper because they wanted a name in the light sport market. That whole marriage only lasted one year, 2010, and Piper wanted out as they could not deal with CSA. I think the divorce papers state "irreconcilable differences". The non-existent LOA's are another story for another day.

[Warmi]

Who do Piper Sport owners go to for parts etc ... ?

They go to Czech Sport Aircraft (formerly Czech Aircraft Works) who still supports all Sport Cruisers, regardless of how they were labeled. (I understand CSA has not been particularly forthcoming with LoAs, but that's another matter.)

Correct, the PiperSport was always supported by CSA, not Piper, it was only badged as a Piper because they wanted a name in the light sport market. That whole marriage only lasted one year, 2010, and Piper wanted out as they could not deal with CSA. I think the divorce papers state "irreconcilable differences". The non-existent LOA's are another story for another day.

Haha .. the stories you tell about how inflexible CSA can be in terms of supporting their users, sometimes it sounds like it may as well be managed as a dead product , the way C162 is

[MrMorden]

And there is still the echo of the two prototypes crashing during development.

I would not hold that against the airplane...that is actually what development is for. The tail was redesigned to solve the issues, and IIRC the crashes occurred in spins...I don't even know if spins are allowed in normal operations.

The primary problems are both related to Cessna's engine choice: Weight and fuel burn. The engine is 80-90lb heavier than a similar Rotax 912, and burns more fuel, which magnifies the weight problem be requiring more fuel to go the same distance. Most real-world C162s I have seen have a useful load around 480-490lb. That's fine for solo flight, but with two normal Americans in the airplane it doesn't leave much left, especially for travel.

Other than that, I do think the airplane is a good one and has some nice design elements.

[MrMorden]

sometimes it sounds like it may as well be managed as a dead product , the way C162 is

Not if you're willing to fly and maintain them *exactly* as the manufacturer intends, with no deviation. That's kind of how the S-LSA rules are meant to be, but many manufacturers are more accommodating of the realities of operating an airplane. I have to say Flight Design has been very good in thie regard, I would have been perfectly happy to keep my CTSW as an S-LSA, if I didn't want to do my own maintenance as a cost and convenience matter.

[ryoder]

Cheap is good. Get one and enjoy a great airplane at a low cost.
Or don't. I bought my Mooney cheap too. Got some hate for that.