10 Jul 2025, 09:16 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 10:15 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/07/17 Posts: 6976 Post Likes: +5869 Company: Malco Power Design Location: KLVJ
Aircraft: 1976 Baron 58
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Yes, there's an MU-2 in the area for $175k currently flying with great avionics, decent P&I, but high time engines that we'd get 20 years of usage at our usage rate before we had to do the engines. I'd be 68/69 and probably looking to downsize - who knows what would be available by then in terms of GA. There's a second one that has "decent" avionics (same as Laz actually) that we'd never hit HSI or OH at our usage for $240k that they can't move and probably go lower, good P&I as well, but it's out in Arizona. Capex on the earlier short body models is certainly reasonable. We just got Laz and I'll want to fly him a year anyway and work out the kinks, get an engine monitor and such in, etc, but if I could get $140k back out of Laz when everything is perfect and flying regularly with these low-time engines, it wouldn't be a stretch to move to $175k, maybe even the $220k-225k range. Good to have options and the knowledge now to make a good comparison. If I could just get that company up in WA to let me bring a donor MU-2 and put Garretts on the Duke as part of a new STC... Just sayin' it's a lot cheaper to put used Garretts on something than it is two brand new PT-6's. There's probably a better market there for them. Wonder what their all-in profit margin is on the Grand Duke conversion...?  Something I would highly consider is that you wouldn't want to be in a turbine airplane that you can't financially swallow an unexpected catastrophic engine problem. While I too have put my dollar votes toward the turbine (for all the reasons I used to argue against), you have to be able to absorb the (extremely rare) occurrence of a thrown turbine blade giving you a $100,000 uninsured event. The next step of that problem is if you have a nearly depreciated older airframe, you;re putting that money into an assert that won't appreciate enough to cover the money you just had to put in to keep it airworthy. Engine issues like that may be very rare, but the occurrance rate is greater than zero.
Is there really no insurance available for this? Such low probability, high impact, events are what insurance is ideal for.
Also can you really get a new Garrett for $100k? That isn’t all that much worse than the $80k you’d be looking at if a big bore Conti puts a rod through the side of the case.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 10:47 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/11/11 Posts: 2383 Post Likes: +2677 Location: Woodlands TX
Aircraft: C525 D1K Waco PT17
|
|
Username Protected wrote: That isn’t all that much worse than the $80k you’d be looking at if a big bore Conti puts a rod through the side of the case. And Garretts won’t push rods through the side of a case. There is a very high probability a turbine will reach TBO without a catastrophic failure forcing an OH - the decision to cease its operation is a paper time limit.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 11:28 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 04/09/16 Posts: 564 Post Likes: +167 Location: Utah
Aircraft: MU-2, L-39, SA341B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have two 2,400 remaining mid time Garretts sitting in my hangar that I paid $60K for both motors. Let's not scare the world with 100K repair bill stories. Sure, those problems exist but I have a lifetime of Mitsubishi motors for less than the cost of a new IO-550. Traver, these images are almost pornographic to a prospective MU2 owner. 
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 11:49 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/07/17 Posts: 6976 Post Likes: +5869 Company: Malco Power Design Location: KLVJ
Aircraft: 1976 Baron 58
|
|
Username Protected wrote: That isn’t all that much worse than the $80k you’d be looking at if a big bore Conti puts a rod through the side of the case. And Garretts won’t push rods through the side of a case. There is a very high probability a turbine will reach TBO without a catastrophic failure forcing an OH - the decision to cease its operation is a paper time limit.
Is TBO somehow more mandatory for turbines than pistons? What keeps you from just continuing to run them?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 11:55 |
|
 |

|

|
Joined: 05/05/09 Posts: 5215 Post Likes: +5236
Aircraft: C501, R66, A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have two 2,400 remaining mid time Garretts sitting in my hangar that I paid $60K for both motors. Let's not scare the world with 100K repair bill stories. Sure, those problems exist but I have a lifetime of Mitsubishi motors for less than the cost of a new IO-550. Traver, these images are almost pornographic to a prospective MU2 owner. 
I obviously love my Mitsubishi if I hunted the planet to find a spare set of motors! The -10s are even more plentiful than finding -1s.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 12:57 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/21/09 Posts: 693 Post Likes: +40 Location: KBJC
Aircraft: MU-2B-60
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Wondering out loud why there are no Garrett driven SETPs ?
IMHO: A Garrett -10 driven Meridian would be a hot set-up ! Intercontinental Jet Service Corp in Tulsa does a Caravan conversion to a Garrett. The the long TBO's and lower consumption costs make it very attractive to some commercial operators.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 13:12 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 03/22/18 Posts: 3724 Post Likes: +2104 Location: Nashville, TN
Aircraft: Lazarus - a B60 Duke
|
|
Given the $60,000-$75,000 cost of overhaul on just about any turbo charged piston engine, a Garrett giving up the ghost wouldn’t be all that more costly.
You can buy an entire running short body MU-2 these days for $200-$225,000.
The one I’m considering buying to rob engines off of is $160k. Near-original avionics on a high time airframe, the engines are worth more than the plane.
That said might be easier just to eventually sell both Dukes and buy an MU-2.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 13:40 |
|
 |

|

|
Joined: 05/05/09 Posts: 5215 Post Likes: +5236
Aircraft: C501, R66, A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Given the $60,000-$75,000 cost of overhaul on just about any turbo charged piston engine, a Garrett giving up the ghost wouldn’t be all that more costly.
You can buy an entire running short body MU-2 these days for $200-$225,000.
The one I’m considering buying to rob engines off of is $160k. Near-original avionics on a high time airframe, the engines are worth more than the plane.
That said might be easier just to eventually sell both Dukes and buy an MU-2. I don't think you could stick Garretts on an Experimental Duke for anything under $750,000 even if you did all the work yourself. Abandon this terrible idea please!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 14:32 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/11/11 Posts: 2383 Post Likes: +2677 Location: Woodlands TX
Aircraft: C525 D1K Waco PT17
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Is TBO somehow more mandatory for turbines than pistons? What keeps you from just continuing to run them? Part 91 - nothing - as noted, you just need to conduct a hot section.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 14:33 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/11/11 Posts: 2383 Post Likes: +2677 Location: Woodlands TX
Aircraft: C525 D1K Waco PT17
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I don't think you could stick Garretts on an Experimental Duke for anything under $750,000 even if you did all the work yourself. Abandon this terrible idea please! Exactly - why waste the time, effort and money - just buy an MU2 and be done with it.
Last edited on 16 Dec 2019, 18:18, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 16 Dec 2019, 15:05 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 03/14/15 Posts: 225 Post Likes: +182
Aircraft: Piper Cheyenne II
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have two 2,400 remaining mid time Garretts sitting in my hangar that I paid $60K for both motors. Let's not scare the world with 100K repair bill stories. Sure, those problems exist but I have a lifetime of Mitsubishi motors for less than the cost of a new IO-550. Yup - I agree... I have just dealt with a few people who are looking at buying an old depreciated turboprop on the basis that the engines simply will never have an expensive failure, and make their financial plans accordingly. Indeed I came to the same conclusions you have, a rod through a TIO-540 case will likely cause just as much expense (although in a turbine you can spend all that and be right back where you started, but without a freshly overhauled engine to boost your equity). In the long run the math is simply better on turbines. It's just not accurate to think there is no exposure.
|
|
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 2007-2025
|
|
|
|