Would you have been just as happy to buy a 1963 model? Could have saved
even more money. I just think that we all have an emotional level of how
far back we want to go. I am certainly willing to admit that it is not
always rational. I would rather have a low time, mint condition 63 than a
well worn 83, but if I were looking to buy I would not really be looking at
the ads on '63 models.

Would I possibly be over looking a better plane - yes. Do I think that
many, if not most plane buyers are like me - yes. I could be wrong, but I
do know that we don't exactly have a representative sample of average plane
buyers here. If we did, controller, trade a plane, and aso would be out of
business




"Blanche" wrote in message
...
Again, it gets back to condition of the aircraft and your flight
preferences. I have a 1969 cherokee and had no problems buying
an "older" aircraft. compared to corresponding 90's archers,
mine has a service ceiling 2000-3000 higher (very important
out here in the mountains), a bit more load (not as important)
and considerably cheaper than the $150-250K price tag!

Know what? All archers and warriors and cherokees fly pretty
much the same. Other than moving to a completely different style
of aircraft (e.g. husky, cirrus, cubi, pitts) it really doesn't
make that much difference to me.

I was willing to buy a '69 with no corrosion (ok, some damage but
that was back in the 70s). Upkeep is going to be just about the
same - hangar, fuel, insurance, annuals, etc. But what I saved
buying the older aircraft certainly covers 5-10 years of those
upkeep expenses!