Man, I be perplexed.

As I continue to search for my perfect plane, I see asking prices substantially above what I arrive at with NAAA and Vref evaluators. For example, there's a '73 M4-210C on Barnstormers. $39500 firm. It only has 771TT but that means a 771 hour 43 year old engine, which in some ways could be considered run out as who knows how much longer before it'll need an OH and a new VAR crank. If I use the 771 SNEW for the engine the estimated value is about $27K on Vref, $32K on NAAA. Going with a run out engine number values drop to $14.7K to $16.3K and again Vref has the lower estimated value.

I'd take my A&P/IA friend with me (he has a lot of Maule experience) to look at the plane, but am wondering when it comes to appraisal time I'm wondering what has been other's experience with this. It's a lot of time and effort to go through only to have an appraisal come back far from the firm price of the seller.

Opinions and personal experiences welcome! Thank you.

The question I think you have to ask is what is it worth to you. It's had to find comp's in aviation to help establish the value like you find in real estate. Some lenders have history to refer to but either way run the info by yours to see what they will loan. That will give you some insight into what a neutral party thinks it's worth. That may not be a lot of help but that's my thinking any way. Good luck happy hunting.

I'm somewhat familiar with VRef and I can say that the value of the various Maule options are not even close to what VRef estimates. For example, VRef doesn't cover all of the Maule year/model combinations and doesn't include any provision for the value of new fabric and paint, which would cost you at least $30,000. The person who completes the online form has to "estimate" the cost of all the items that are not listed in the model and plug in a dollar figure. I think it's mostly good for hull insurance calculations, not for price negotiations.

Value being what it's worth and price being what you have to pay they will never be the same. It all boils down to what the seller is willing to take and what you are willing to pay.

Veef and B/B are better on aircraft where there are greater numbers.

Thanks. It really seems like a crap shoot trying to guess what an appraisal will come in at.

I use BlueBook and always find it more accurate to work with than Vref.
40 years of evaluating Maules has proven that it is very different than evaluating more common marques with many more numbers of aircraft.
One has to know the market, but it is also important to understand how to adjust for accidents/incidents, airframe time, engine time, options and mods etc.
Don't get tied in a knot wondering how much you "can get it for"
What is the airplane worth to you regardless of asking price, only then can you be a happy buyer, and if the seller sells then you have a happy seller.
The perfect sale.
Do take into account, there is nearly Always sellers remorse and buyers remorse even if it just comes to you as a question.

maules.com wrote:I use BlueBook and always find it more accurate to work with than Vref.
40 years of evaluating Maules has proven that it is very different than evaluating more common marques with many more numbers of aircraft.
One has to know the market, but it is also important to understand how to adjust for accidents/incidents, airframe time, engine time, options and mods etc.
Don't get tied in a knot wondering how much you "can get it for"
What is the airplane worth to you regardless of asking price, only then can you be a happy buyer, and if the seller sells then you have a happy seller.
The perfect sale.
Do take into account, there is nearly Always sellers remorse and buyers remorse even if it just comes to you as a question.

That is how I work as well, thanks in part to Jeremy's help in working with me.

Another consideration is how much you value your time. Specifically, if you do find a plane in your price range but "needs work" expect to dump a bunch of your time and more money into it. Like the old adage goes you either pay for it before or you pay for it after, but either way you pay.
So bottom line it might have a higher purchase cost but if the engine is still decent and it was recently recovered those are two of the three big money pits (the third being avionics). I think I would much rather spend another $5-10k up front finding the right plane and not have to spend 6 months in the shop and maybe $5-10k more to make something the right plane... Just a thought...

James

maules.com wrote:I use BlueBook and always find it more accurate to work with than Vref.
40 years of evaluating Maules has proven that it is very different than evaluating more common marques with many more numbers of aircraft.
One has to know the market, but it is also important to understand how to adjust for accidents/incidents, airframe time, engine time, options and mods etc.
Don't get tied in a knot wondering how much you "can get it for"
What is the airplane worth to you regardless of asking price, only then can you be a happy buyer, and if the seller sells then you have a happy seller.
The perfect sale.
Do take into account, there is nearly Always sellers remorse and buyers remorse even if it just comes to you as a question.

I appreciate the professional opinion given by you and Wup.

I do like nice, and flying over fixing. There's a good looking M4-210C on BS, very low time but my big concern is the 800 hour engine that's 43 years old. It spent most of it's life in dry climate, but that's a long time. For almost double the money a 75 M5-210C in IL now that's gorgeous, almost all new stuff in the last 6 years, but $70K seems like a lot of coin. The green MX7-180 that just sold of TAP was really nice IMO, I'd have moved the 696 and airgizmo out and stuck that 430W and Xponder in the center to make it more user friendly. I fly an Airbus, gotta have comfort lol.

I'm financing through my CU (AKUSA) and they require an appraisal and I really don't want to spend the bucks on one to have it miss by $20K or some crazy number.

Well, today I sat in a really nice M5 I was considering and I just do not fit well. I'm 6'3" 250 and could not move things around to where I felt good. It's now off to find a nice spam can.

Did it have a skylight, or did your head hit the headliner?

There are two different seats and many cushion options.
The older seats had very thick cushioning and by changing one can add 3" headroom and 3 of legroom.

Nevertheless, one does have to admit that the Maules have a somewhat unusual, cramped-feeling cabin in the vertical dimension. It took me forever to get used to, and I'm 5'8" and 175 pounds. The combination of the semi-reclined seat and the lowish yoke in the knees are what I noticed most. I actually use a pad behind my mid to upper back to get a more upright seating posture, but I don't have the head clearance issue. Yes, I've checked and my seat is not broken. I also built a drop section into the floor for my heels to get more knee clearanc on the yoke.

Width-wise, the Maule actually has more room than a Cessna 185, or even 206, I believe.

At my new height measurement of 5'5" I don't see what the height restriction issue is

Now seeing over the glare shield is a totally other issue. Oregon Aero booster seat to the rescue!

My head didn't hit, but even with the seat all the way aft I didn't have enough legroom, I would have to move my legs to turn the yoke.

I like comfort and wouldn't want to go to thinly padded seats.