An Archer with a rather new engine asking 125k€ VAT free !!
People are getting crazy.
https://www.planecheck.com?ent=da&id=51454
I agree with PetitCessnaVoyageur and Mooney_Driver. I have lots of time in a 2006 glass 172S and I have yet to find any issues with the KAP140.
Certainly there are lots of functionality that it doesn’t provide but the GFC700 does, but what it does provide, it does well.
Bosco is right that the non-SBAS G1000 is (for practical purposes) a dead end, but the only important thing it doesn’t provide is LPV. It does provide both RNAV 1 (P-RNAV) and roll steering with the KAP140.
Regarding KAP140 we have been flying ours 1000h in 10 years and had only two problems. Fixed a loose connection in the harness and changed one roll servo.
Performance was greatly enhanced when the altitude encoder was changed as a part of an avionics upgrade.
I would assume that as a rate based system it is more sluggish and not the same experience as a GFC700 – but have not tried that.
Can a new thread be started, if required, on these SR22 airframe issues? I don’t think a C172 is competing with an SR22 for a flying school application.
This is unlikely to happen in a C172SP. (foto)
Also the airframe life limit of 12.000 hrs will bring down the prices of used SR22s sooner or later.
Surely it is like the Jetprop case i.e. a G1000 can be removed and whatever (G500 etc) installed under the usual STC, but it is regarded as uneconomical to do that. I don’t think anybody ever answered that one for the Jetprop case.
Or are the G1000 airframes specifically excluded on the Garmin G500 STCs, by S/N range, to ensure the aircraft becomes worthless for any other kind of “Garmin glass”? Obviously you could always remove a G1000 and install separate avionics; these don’t need an STC.
To add: a new 172 was quoted in 2002 by the UK dealer (CSE) at GBP 140k + VAT (to a flying school I hung around in back then, as a 3-off purchase) so in the hypothetical case of a mint-condition one, plus inflation, what do you get for 2018?
@mooneydriver
I had 3 neighbours with SR22s in my hangar. One owner gave up, so now it‘s 2.
The owners are really proud of the performance they have available and what the airplane can do – IF it flies.
All 3 planes have in common that all of a sudden they would disappear for months (up to 6 actually) for some unexpected maintenance problems (corrosion is only one of them).
Ok, one owner was a bit unfortunate when the maintenance provider danged a wingtip against the hangar door while moving the plane.
But what would be a minor and quick repair for a Cessna developed into a nightmare for the Cirrus owner since the main spar got seriously cracked in the area of the wing spar tunnel.
The C172 is a very nice and forgiving aircraft, which many know from their training. So, demand is high and available machines are comparably few. Rising prices under such conditions was called ‘market’ in the old days ;-). Especially the C172SP is highly asked for, as it does not have the glass cockpit tied to the TC. If you don’t want G1000, with all the quirks of being hard married to Garmin, but like to get your cockpit to your linking with modern avionics, the old steam gauge aircraft are a far better choice.
Yes, there will come a time where older SR will hold similar value, i.e. when the current crowd of Aquila & Co trained enter the buyers market. We have to see what will be left of GA once that happens.
My experience of trying to give some 200k+ to the UK Cirrus dealer for an SR20 in 2002 was similar to the above (“you don’t need a DME; a GPS is much better, and I have a real customer over there I would rather talk to” kind of attitude) so I went to Socata and never regretted it.
However I suspect a C172 for $250k is one of these and we see large numbers of such examples. You get the same in the housing market, in nice areas 
What exactly is the problem with the KAP140 in these airplanes? Apart from the fact that they lack the FD system of the KFC150 or 200, it appears they have quite some functionality in the version I see used in that airplane.
I agree, the G1000 non WAAS is a big gotcha for those who think Glass=modern. Generally I consider the G1000 a big liability for owners as you are totally dependent on Garmin and their outrageous pricing for some stuff with the G1000 in your airplane. Unfortunately quite a lot of new airplanes today are only delivered with the G1000 and have no option for other systems.
As for the early Cirri, I reckon most of these quality issues should have been addressed in the last 15 years? I can not really imagine that a 2004 plane which got delivered as the one described in the quote still fly with all these deficiencies? Nevertheless, this also shows that there were massive problems in the early days and behaviour of sales staff which showed just what market power they had in those days. I hope they have changed that by now.
