And if you ever find log books and documentation like this with everything 
perfect on a 60 year old airplane please have them bronzed and donated them to 
the Smithsonian.

Kevin1



--- In [email protected], "bigbrownpi...@..." <bigbrownpi...@...> 
wrote:
>
> I want to save you prospective Ercoupe buyers some of the pain that I've 
> experienced.  Ed Burkhead's pre-buy guide is a good starting point, but there 
> are some other potential "gotchas" out there that any new buyer should think 
> about.  I looked at two Ercoupes before I bought, found a good owner/seller, 
> did my "due diligence", had an independent A.I. inspect the airplane, etc.  
> Here are a couple of hard lessons learned--
> 
> Logbooks and 337's--  Garbage in/Garbage out.  Even when you have a complete 
> set of logbooks, they may not tell the whole story.  It's very easy to make a 
> brief write-up like "Replaced left main main spar with Univair assembly 
> 415-xxx, replaced left upper and lower wing skins, re-installed walkway 
> tread."  One would assume this addressed a corrosion issue. In my case, one 
> would be wrong.  Once we did the center section swap-out, it was obvious due 
> to the way the repairs were done and the amount of hardware replaced that 
> there was damage to that side of the airplane at one tine that had been 
> repaired.  Of course, there is no damage history on the airframe.  (By the 
> way, the seller did show me a previous 337 from 1953 where the belly skins 
> firewall-forward had been replaced and tell me he suspected damage back then. 
>  The rear spar replacement was from 1979, so it was another incident).  Also 
> make sure every piece of equipment that did not come from the factory is 
> documented somewhere-- logbook, 337, yellow tag, etc.  Any STC'ed parts 
> should also be accompanied by a 337.  The documentation standards may have 
> changed over the years, but you should look for something for every major 
> configuration change.  My point is, soemtimes logbooks can hide as much as 
> they disclose.  Don't just take them at face value.  Think like a detective 
> when you review them!
> 
> Engine history-- a low-time engine is no guarantee of a good engine, 
> especially if it only had 250 hours SMOH in 12 years.  When we removed the 
> cylinders, we found stuck and broken rings, burned valves, gouging on the 
> piston skirts, and pitting on the cylinder walls.  Realize that the 
> compressions on the pre-buy checked good, around 74/80 or higher.  This 
> engine had obviously spent more time sitting than flying, and the previous 
> owner did not fly it that much.  If an engine isn't flying around 50 hours a 
> year, it's probably sitting too much.  Also, look at the logs for how often 
> the cylinders are being replaced, and whether they are using "servicable" 
> pieces or rebuilt/overhauled.  Remember, "servicable" means "within 
> manufacturer's tolerances".  It doesn't tell you by how much-- it could be 
> within 0.001 of being out of tolerance!  
> 
> The main spar cap issue (again)-- I know we've beat the issue of holes in the 
> main spar cat to death.  But here's my advice, FWIW-- if the holes were not 
> put there by the factory, OR if they are not part of an approved installation 
> documented on a 337; RUN, don't walk away.  The main spar may be prefectly 
> safe for years of operation, but if the FAA ever decides to issue an AD, you 
> are probably screwed.
> 
> Realize you aren't getting perfect when you buy a 40-60 year-old airplane.  I 
> could not have found a better seller than the guy I bought from-- most of 
> these problems were lurking from years past, and he would have been dealing 
> with them eventually.  You can't check everything and there will always be 
> some surprises like mag problems.   But look beyond the obvious and ask "why" 
> questions before you buy.
> 
> In my case, I'm giving up on trying to put a band-aid on my engine issues and 
> I've ordered a C-85/O-200 rebuild from Don's Dream Machines.  It should be 
> ready about the same time we get all the sheet metal done.
> 
> Fly Safe,
> Dave
>


Reply via email to