Why are 162s so cheap
Moderator: drseti
Why are 162s so cheap
I'm looking to buy a plane an just plain hate the looks of high wings. I don't want to start the conversation about there are no low wing birds blah blah blah. I have been following the values of aircraft and 162s seem to be taking it on the chin. More so than other LSAs. My question is why? I would think that because it is a Cessna it would not be hit so hard. They still will make replacement parts right? They are butt ugly to me so that is why they aren't worth much to me. But 36k asking price for a name brand plane???? Why?
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
It's an orphan airframe. Cessna literally crushed all the remaining airplanes, and they're not making parts or even really supporting the 162 anymore. The only option to keep one running is to go experimental, and even then you might have to fabricate replacement parts at some point.Atrosa wrote:I'm looking to buy a plane an just plain hate the looks of high wings. I don't want to start the conversation about there are no low wing birds blah blah blah. I have been following the values of aircraft and 162s seem to be taking it on the chin. More so than other LSAs. My question is why? I would think that because it is a Cessna it would not be hit so hard. They still will make replacement parts right? They are butt ugly to me so that is why they aren't worth much to me. But 36k asking price for a name brand plane???? Why?
Savings on the front end, cost on the back end.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
That is pretty rotten on their part. I've always thought Cessna planes were hit with ugly sticks but i thought their customer service would be a bit better than that. Don't get me wrong they are the Toyota Camry of the sky.
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
Yeah, my thoughts exactly , I have yet to see a good looking single engine classic Cessna - especially if you combine that weird-misshapen boat-like-thing-with-wings look with their usual mid-70s color paint schemes. Frankly that’s why I always though LSAs, for all their faults, at least looked like something designed and manufactured within our lifetimes.Atrosa wrote:That is pretty rotten on their part. I've always thought Cessna planes were hit with ugly sticks but i thought their customer service would be a bit better than that. Don't get me wrong they are the Toyota Camry of the sky.
Actually, imho the C-162 is probably one of the best looking Cessnas out there and combined with the low price - I mean, it is a risk given lack of commitment from the manufacturer , but it is a pretty good deal if you are handy and not afraid of maintenance work.
Flying Sting S4 ( N184WA ) out of Illinois
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
I think you also need to look at the performance. How much will it carry, speed, etc. It has an empty weight of 830 lbs., which means 2 grown male adults and a few misc items leaves only 90 lbs available for 15 gallons of fuel - or 2 hours with 30 min reserve. And that is at 110 kts per the spec sheet. Not outstanding.
As stated before, it is orphaned. Which means that besides no one at Cessna answering the support line when you call, if your widget goes out and they don't make that exact replacement, you'll never get a letter from Cessna that another widget is acceptable. Which is why you need to take it experimental, which lowers the cost.
And there is still the echo of the two prototypes crashing during development.
As stated before, it is orphaned. Which means that besides no one at Cessna answering the support line when you call, if your widget goes out and they don't make that exact replacement, you'll never get a letter from Cessna that another widget is acceptable. Which is why you need to take it experimental, which lowers the cost.
And there is still the echo of the two prototypes crashing during development.
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
I suspect most people who like to bad-mouth the Cessna 162 have never flown one. Like most things, ever aircraft has it's strengths and weaknesses. Not every pilot is looking for the same things. For me, it's an all metal airplane with a Continental engine. The useful load is not an issue and all LSA are basically slow.
Last edited by TimTaylor on Wed Sep 18, 2019 6:09 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Retired from flying.
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
I think just about every LSA sold these days is somewhere around 830 or so empty lbs - my Sting S4 for instance is but the difference is that I get to 830 lbs with a ballistic parachute and a few other goodies that the 162 does not have.
Flying Sting S4 ( N184WA ) out of Illinois
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
Spend ten hours or so in a rental 162 and report back.
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
Yep. I have a couple hundred hours in 4 of them, all identical. I love the SkyCatcher and I've flown a lot of light aircraft over the years. Mooney M20C is my favorite, but not an option for me now.ryoder wrote:Spend ten hours or so in a rental 162 and report back.
Retired from flying.
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
Don't get me wrong - I don't have a dog in this fight either way.
I'm just speculating on what buyers may be thinking, and thus what could be driving the low demand and low prices.
I'm just speculating on what buyers may be thinking, and thus what could be driving the low demand and low prices.
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
Cool. The M20C was my first airplane and I still have access to it. I love the feeling of manually retracting the gear and flaps and slipping through the sky swiftly. The 162 is so spacious and cool inside so it is my choice for hamburger runs or helpijg a friend learn to fly.TimTaylor wrote:Yep. I have a couple hundred hours in 4 of them, all identical. I love the SkyCatcher and I've flown a lot of light aircraft over the years. Mooney M20C is my favorite, but not an option for me now.ryoder wrote:Spend ten hours or so in a rental 162 and report back.
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
Regardless of what people think of the airplane personally, I believe that when the manufacturer throws in the towel and crushes it's remaining inventory, that should be a very clear sign as to why demand and prices are in the toilet, just my 2¢. They would make a great E-LSA for someone.WDD wrote:.....I'm just speculating on what buyers may be thinking, and thus what could be driving the low demand and low prices.
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
Well, pretty much the same thing happened with the Piper Sport line right ? Who do Piper Sport owners go to for parts etc ... ?ShawnM wrote:Regardless of what people think of the airplane personally, I believe that when the manufacturer throws in the towel and crushes it's remaining inventory, that should be a very clear sign as to why demand and prices are in the toilet, just my 2¢. They would make a great E-LSA for someone.WDD wrote:.....I'm just speculating on what buyers may be thinking, and thus what could be driving the low demand and low prices.
Flying Sting S4 ( N184WA ) out of Illinois
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
The thing is the Piper Sport was basically an existing design that was supported by a different company both before and after Piper's involvement.Warmi wrote:Well, pretty much the same thing happened with the Piper Sport line right ? Who do Piper Sport owners go to for parts etc ... ?ShawnM wrote:Regardless of what people think of the airplane personally, I believe that when the manufacturer throws in the towel and crushes it's remaining inventory, that should be a very clear sign as to why demand and prices are in the toilet, just my 2¢. They would make a great E-LSA for someone.WDD wrote:.....I'm just speculating on what buyers may be thinking, and thus what could be driving the low demand and low prices.
Re: Why are 162s so cheap
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.)Warmi wrote: Who do Piper Sport owners go to for parts etc ... ?
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, KLHV
[email protected]
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, KLHV
[email protected]
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US