Bill and all,
I agree.  I went to an event a few months ago and my "Coupe" was the center of 
attraction.  The old Pipers and Cesnas, RV's and other new LSAs are in my mind 
boring. That said, I just spent 4-months on a 1946 Taylorcraft, am restoring a 
PA 20 and would like to build a Zenith 750  I love "em all--but my 
fully-restored Ercoupe with a zero-time engine is the best!  Hey, I think I 
will go fly! John N2138H


--- On Mon, 6/14/10, Bill BIGGS <[email protected]> wrote:

From: Bill BIGGS <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [ercoupe-tech] $ 52,000 Ercoupe??
To: "ercoupe tech" <[email protected]>
Date: Monday, June 14, 2010, 7:05 AM







 



  


    
      
      
      


Jerry and all,

 

It all comes down to "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". For your 
commercial use a new LSA is the way to go. For many of us, as this forum 
proves, more than half the fun is tinkering.

 

I wholeheartedly agree, if you like to tinker the Ercoupe is for you. If you 
just want to fly and not be bothered a new plane is probably better. (or an 
Ercoupe with an A&P on retainer)

 

Bill
 


To: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com
From: JEichenberger@ ehlawyers. com
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 07:37:40 -0400
Subject: RE: [ercoupe-tech] $ 52,000 Ercoupe??

  



 
I'll take a different tack on the question of full-blown restorations.
 
I've been through it twice - back 20 years ago with a Comanche and about 4 
years ago with a Champ.
 
I've learned my lesson and won't do it again.
 
No matter how thoroughly you may think an airplane has been restored, the final 
product is still not a new airplane.  It still takes the constant maint. one 
would expect of a used machine 60 years old.
 
Owning an FBO with a flight school has taught me a valuable lesson - new is 
always better.  When you have a restoration that you're actually trying to use 
as an everyday airplane, thinks still break with the same frequency you'd 
expect from components and parts that are 60 years old.
 
If one can afford it, there is no substitute for new.  Consider than with a new 
airplane, you ought to get about 1,000 hours of flight before anything major 
needs to be replaced, fixed in a major way, or overhauled.  That 1,000 hours 
should be just routine oil changes, tires and brakes, and very little else.
 
We have a new Tecnam Eaglet in our training/rental fleet - it currently has 
about 200 trouble free hours on it.  And, it's about 20% faster than any of the 
classic airplanes that are LSA eligible, and that makes a huge difference when 
flying into a 20 knot wind on a trip.
 
Of course, new gets you the latest avionics and other equipment.
 
As an old dog who threw bones at Rotax engines for years, operating this 
airplane has completely changed my mind.  The Rotax is a great engine, and is 
so simple to operate and maintain with its altitude compensating carbs that 
have no mixture control, electronic ignition, etc., etc.
 
A couple of weeks ago I personally took the airplane on a 3 hour trip.  It 
burned 4.56 gph while cruising at 110 Knots, or in excess of 125 mph.  No 
classic will do that.  Rate of climb with one person is often around 1400 fpm, 
and about 1,000 fpm with two aboard and full fuel.  No classic with do that 
either.
 
Before I'd ever put $50K in a classic restoration again, I'd get a partner or 
two, and have each put the same money in a new airplane with all of the bells 
and whistles, and enjoy years of trouble free flying.
 
Just my opinion, but one that comes from experience.
 
Jerry E.

-----Original Message-----
From: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:ercoupe- t...@yahoogroups .com]On 
Behalf Of heave...@wt. net
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 7:09 PM
To: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com
Subject: [ercoupe-tech] $ 52,000 Ercoupe??

  



 
http://cgi.ebay. com/ebaymotors/ 1946-Ercoupe- Light-Sport- /280518508821? 
cmd=ViewItem&pt=Motors_Aircraft&hash=item415034c115
 
A $ 52,000 Ercoupe ???!!!
 
Eliacim
 
 





                                          
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with 
Hotmail.  Get busy.


    
     

    
    


 



  






      

Reply via email to