Cessna 170 Resale values

[c170b53]

Well it's always nice to visit an old thread, if not for the revelation of " I wrote that?"
I worked myself solidly into a corner and in spite of the good advice from Gary, a smaller shovel hasn't helped. I've got two rebuilds on the go. My hanger suffered damage from a storm that ripped part of the roof off, then the rain soaked the drywall which fell from the ceilings onto the planes. Of course the drywall had asbestos in it!
Now I'm thinking I need another plane to fly now and good planes are hard to find especially as the times have changed,bringing owners higher prices. Hasn't helped that the Canadian dollar has crashed or rather the greenback has launched. Another obstacle is finding something that has had good mods, done well. And one more, finding good paperwork or rather real paperwork. I thought I had something when a 56 came along but it's low s/n around 25000 ish suggested that it might be a Frankinscessna, reserected from the back of a hangar.
Still having fun with the search though and make sure you give your plane a hug when you think of it

[blueldr]

My home state, California, is reknown for its excessive taxes. The pain of those taxes is mitigated by the gross number of pretty girls and the great weather we enjoy.
Taxes on the ownership of a Cessna C-170 are mitigated by public display of an aged airplane on a regular basis.
There are no taxes for admireing either the pretty girls or the aged airplanes.

[N2625U]

My home state, California, is reknown for its excessive taxes. The pain of those taxes is mitigated by the gross number of pretty girls and the great weather we enjoy.
Taxes on the ownership of a Cessna C-170 are mitigated by public display of an aged airplane on a regular basis.
There are no taxes for admireing either the pretty girls or the aged airplanes.

Yet....I'm sure the gov is thinking of that

[MoonlightVFR]

I am convinced that a late model C 170B delivers immense value to its owner.

We are talking all metal single engine, 4 seat, metal prop, 4 hours aloft full tank, correctly loaded.
A stable performer, a gentle cross country performer.

Compare the performance of a 1955 C170 B with a 2017 Cessna 172 tricycle model.

compare gross weight, empty weight, cruise speed, landing speed, fuel consummation, More...

The brand new Cessna does not hold any advantage over the 60 year old Cessna. Nothing. Oh the glass panel is unique

The Cessna was and is a genuine game changer

The value is there. Valuation is approximately $90,000. Market conditions constrain actual selling price to about 52,000. Compare the pricing to a lesser cloth covered Piper cub type and you will note the high value of a Cessna 170B.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

The value is there. Valuation is approximately $90,000. Market conditions constrain actual selling price to about 52,000. Compare the pricing to a lesser cloth covered Piper cub type and you will note the high value of a Cessna 170B.

It's a good thing a lot of Piper folks don't follow this forum or you would likely hear from a lot of them regarding calling a Piper Cub type a lesser cloth airplane. Fact is a Cessna 170 can not hold a candle to a Piper Cub type in many respects. And there are things a 170 can do much better thane a Cub type. They really are two different aircraft which is why I own one of each.

And the truth is I'm just as likely to sell the 170 and keep the Cub as I am to sell the Cub and keep the 170.

[sfarringer]

.........a lesser cloth covered Piper cub type.......

Looks like an opinion presented as if it were a fact!

[GAHorn]

I'm betting he was speaking in terms of speed, seating capacity/carrying capacity, range, instrument capability......etc etc etc.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

I'm betting he was speaking in terms of speed, seating capacity/carrying capacity, range, instrument capability......etc etc etc.

What?

He wasn't talking about taking off in the length of the runway numbers or landing in half the distance a 170 can. Or burning 4 pgh or dropping pumpkins.

Speed, seating capacity, range, instrument capability are of little concern to a lot of Piper Cub types.

[GAHorn]

[...
Speed, seating capacity, range, instrument capability are of little concern to a lot of Piper Cub types.

That's pretty evident.

[IA DPE]

Obviously a J3 and a C170 were designed in different times for different missions. Comparing apples to apples, and having flown both a PA-16 Clipper and a PA-20 Pacer, I’ll take a C170 over either, and twice on Sunday. To me there’s just no comparison in handling or ergonomics.

I know both of those have their adherents and I’m glad they like them otherwise they’d be trying to buy our 170s and driving the price even higher.

The only other airplane I would’ve considered would be an Aeronca Sedan. I’ve never flown one though did help restore one. There are so few that supply is an issue, but there seems to be more buyers than sellers of 170s lately.

[hilltop170]

Put 4 people in a Cub and fly 4 hours. See how many care how short it lands.

Try to take off on a 200' gravel bar in a 170.

Apples and oranges.

Both good at what they do.

[GAHorn]

I"ve flown 4-place Aeroncas and Stinsons and although they do about the same job as a 170.... they wallow-around and handle like a truck without shock abosorbers. The Tri-Pacer can be sporty, but not like the 170 which is so sweet, light, and responsive on the controls, and trying to get one of the Pipers above 8,000' can be a challenge.

[IA DPE]

The Tri-Pacer can be sporty, but not like the 170 which is so sweet, light, and responsive on the controls, and trying to get one of the Pipers above 8,000' can be a challenge.

My personal opinion of the Clipper/ Pacer/ Tri Pacer is the same as a Seneca- they do nothing well. I didn’t even consider a Piper when deciding to ultimately buy my 170. And this is from someone who learned in a Piper and my first airplane was a Piper. Apache that is

[hilltop170]

I flew a Stinson 108-3 with a Lycoming O-540 from Boston to Anchorage last June for a new pilot not tailwheel qualified. What a hoot it was to fly that plane! it was off in 300' with full gas and survival gear and cruised in the yellow. BUT, the seats were not very comfortable and had little adjustment. The 170 is much more comfortable and pleasant to fly. Plus, I just like metal skin airplanes more than fabric with their periodic major expense to recover.

[Joe Moilanen]

Twenty nine years ago today I bought my first airplane for 17K. It was a beautiful '53 170B and everyone told me that I paid too much. It was the best investment that I ever made. It may also be the last airplane that I ever buy. Hoping for another twenty nine years of fun with it...

Joe
4518C