Buy/build a new Experimental or an get an old GA and refurbish it?

H

Hector Parra

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Feb 20, 2022
Messages
184
Location
Montréal, Canada
Display Name
Display name:
Hector Parra
Hi folks. With today's prices for new (and old!) GA planes, looks like the experimental/home built/LSA market is looking attractive.

Yes, I know that I'm comparing apples to pineapples, but both will fly you places. I also know that some LSA/ELSA have price tags of 200K-300K and more (brand new) but also some are below 100K.

So what are your thoughts on this? Where will you put your money if you were to start in aviation all over again? Will you buy old GA and upgrade or buy/build new-ish Experimental?
 
Last edited:
I have an experimental that I bought, because now I want to fly.
I fly the hell out of it.
When I retire, I’ll build an RV-10, because I want to build.
 
Type certificated aircraft - you are paying someone to do the work or sign off on your work unless you are an A&P. Plus lots of issues with parts. Don't do this to save money.
Build - if that's what you want to do, do it. Don't do it to save money.
Buy a newish Experimental - That's fine. As you note a "factory new" LSA/ELSA costs a lot. The price on purd near new E-AB can vary from not much more than the price of a kit to factory prices depending on "Brand".

When I started all over in aviation a few years ago, I bought an older, not "Name Brand" already flying E-AB (that falls into the LSA window) for less than I would have paid for either the kit or the engine. Yea, it turned out to be a bit more on the fixer-upper than I had intended, but it does fly me places.
 
Adam Weiss said:
I have an experimental that I bought, because now I want to fly.
I fly the hell out of it.
When I retire, I’ll build an RV-10, because I want to build.
Click to expand...
I want to build that one too. Just waiting to save more money and for my kids -aka cheap labor- to grow a little more.
 
The cheapest way is to buy one already built or restored. You don’t save money doing either. Well, maybe the way the market is now you might save a little. But it ain’t gonna be cheap
 
something like 15 years ago I wrestled with this same question. At that time I decided to go the certificated refurbish route. I was starting to get my plans together and rolling to build a little shop in my back yard and I was looking for a project...focused on a cessna 170 (or 180) at that time.
My neighbor was a retired A&P IA and I was hoping/planning to work under his tutelage as much as possible.
Benefits included a certified plane so no worries with any of experimental cert issues
the time could go towards a potential A&P of my own....
and I was interested in in that type
and not that I have any aspirations of show quality stuff, I thought that I might take my time and do a really nice and super clean near perfect rebuild, starting by taking it down to the smallest parts that I reasonably could.

Then a run of bad luck got in the way...and life

Now days, I've been daydreaming about the same question
and the idea of homebuilding is becoming much more attractive to me....specifically a kit to make things faster, easier....
More flexibility with and cheaper things like avionics, probably get a lot more for my money, potentially getting my own repair auth., possibly better/fresher designs and features.... these are some of the reasons I have been leaning that way now...
 
kyleb said:
What is your intended mission? It all starts with a realistic answer to that question.
Click to expand...
Low and slow mainly (VFR and solo fly in most cases). More like a weekend warrior who likes to visit new places and get back home the same day. I know that no matter how slow I fly, I'll get there faster than by car.
 
I don't ever see myself owning another factory built airplane and having to deal with an A&P for all maintenance, TSO'd parts, etc. Right now I'm on my third experimental (all bought used), and all cost less than a quarter of the $100K number you mentioned. I do all my own maintenance and if I want to, I can modify it to my heart's content.
 
I went certified GA and modified but that is the expensive path. Building will get you in the game a heck of a lot cheaper but you are trading flying time for build time. Experimental avionics go for about half of what you would pay for certified avionics and maintenance is a heck of a lot cheaper as well.
 
Dana said:
I don't ever see myself owning another factory built airplane and having to deal with an A&P for all maintenance, TSO'd parts, etc. Right now I'm on my third experimental (all bought used), and all cost less than a quarter of the $100K number you mentioned. I do all my own maintenance and if I want to, I can modify it to my heart's content.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the insights. Any experimental model/brand in particular that you have sticked with or the 3 were different planes?
 
Hector Parra said:
Low and slow mainly (VFR and solo fly in most cases). More like a weekend warrior who likes to visit new places and get back home the same day. I know that no matter how slow I fly, I'll get there faster than by car.
Click to expand...

Tomahawk, C-140, Grumman AA1-whatever?

Are all answers to this question. After that, you get into non-RV homebuilts that don’t carry the RV premium.
 
You mentioned kids in your first post…keep in mind that if you are busy raising a family and still working that pesky full time job, a complete build from start to flying will be a few years at minimum.

If you have nothing else to do and no one to take care of, and a few friends that like to hang out in the hangar and help you shoot rivets, then a build can be done in a few months.

For me, I bought a very cheap certified that I can at least fly until I can acquire a hangar and build the airplane that I really want. If I had it to do over, I wouldn’t have bought the certified and would have bought a used E/AB
 
aterry1067 said:
You mentioned kids in your first post…keep in mind that if you are busy raising a family and still working that pesky full time job, a complete build from start to flying will be a few years at minimum.

If you have nothing else to do and no one to take care of, and a few friends that like to hang out in the hangar and help you shoot rivets, then a build can be done in a few months.

For me, I bought a very cheap certified that I can at least fly until I can acquire a hangar and build the airplane that I really want. If I had it to do over, I wouldn’t have bought the certified and would have bought a used E/AB
Click to expand...
Thanks for the advice. Yup, building is certainly not an option at this point of my life. But is something I'll consider in the distant future
 
If you have no need to use the aircraft in a commercial role, experimentals are hard to beat.

I have owned a variety of certified aircraft over the decades... a Champ, Citabria's, Scouts, 185s, a Viking, a C310... Most recently, I had a Grumman Tiger that I enjoyed a lot ('77 with orig. paint and shotgun avionics), then I moved to a high altitude airport and really needed more "hot and high" performance. Service ceiling on the 180hp Tiger was ~14,000, which is a pretty normal cruising altitude in many of the mountain passes I was using. The Vans RV9A I fly now has a service ceiling almost 10,000 ft. higher, with only 160hp, cruises at 155kts instead of 132kts, is 5 years old instead of 45, with 200 hrs on the engine instead of 1300, burns less fuel, climbs *way* better, new paint, newer electronics, lovely build quality, etc. For $15k more than I sold the Grumman for.

The RV only has 2 seats, but at my home base (well above 7000msl) the Grumman was essentially a 2 seat aircraft. I normally hire my maintenance done, so the maint. costs have been pretty comparable between the Grumman and RV, but I'm sure parts will be much less expensive on the Vans than the Grumman as time goes on. I'm instrument rated and intend to upgrade my RV's panel soon; that will be much less expensive than it would have been in the Grumman. Experimental avionics, with a new airframe and wiring to work with...

I also would love to build an RV10... but not confident in my persistence to see 4-yr construction project through. :)

Bottom line- I can highly recommend owning/flying E/AB aircraft. If you can find one that meets your mission requirements. It is important to find someone familiar with the E/AB you are looking at to judge build quality, etc. The process is arguably a bit more complicated than buying a Cessna or Piper but well worth it. Vans is pretty much the gold standard for kit quality and resale value, assuming they make an aircraft that works for you.
 
Hector Parra said:
I know that no matter how slow I fly, I'll get there faster than by car.
Click to expand...

This is not always true. By the time you drive to the airport, preflight the plane, taxi, etc...then fly low and slow, it is often quicker to drive. I remember flying from Los Angeles to Lake Tahoe in a rented 172 when I was young. I had to wait for the marine layer to break up & then there was a headwind. My friends that dropped us off at the airport and drove got to Lake Tahoe before we did. I now live in the country with 75 mph speed limits everywhere. It is almost always faster to drive. When I want to have fun, the plane comes out, but not for speed.
 
Last edited:
Hector Parra said:
So what are your thoughts on this? Where will you put your money if you were to start in aviation all over again? Will you buy old GA and upgrade or buy/build new-ish Experimental?
Click to expand...

Oh, EAB every day of the week and twice on Sunday, and I say that with 13 years and 3 fac-built airplanes owned to date. I regret not having had the confidence to go EAB from day one, since it was all a bit new to me at the time (live and learn, aka life). Had my mission stayed 2-seater when I sold the Warrior (airplane #2), 100% I would have gone RV-(x)a back in 2012; they were going for a song too back then. Coulda shoulda woulda.

You're not really buying an airplane, you're buying ALLOWANCES. That has been my biggest takeaway in 13 years of mixed bag multiple aircraft ownership. I'm not a builder either, never will be, and I still endorse the eab or e-LSA route. In fairness to S-LSA, I do appreciate the fact that, for a factory built option, it does provides some allowance (LSRM) to dig/cut into the walled garden of the signatory-captive aka fac-built purgatory. That's a bit refreshing. Alas, LSA categories aren't my lane in terms of performance, but for those who are medically capped from operating legacy EAB, they're a great option. Cheers!
 
Hector Parra said:
Thanks for the insights. Any experimental model/brand in particular that you have sticked with or the 3 were different planes?
Click to expand...

They were all biplanes, but all different: A Fisher FP404 that's almost an ultralight, then a Starduster, and the Hatz I'm flying now. A few ultralights before that after the Taylorcraft that was my first plane. The Hatz is the first two seater since the T-Craft.
 
Looking through Barnstormers etc it seems like if you go for a less popular experimental (i.e. not an RV or a Kitfox), you can get a lot of plane for your money. Planes seem to go for less than they would cost to build. You can get a Sonex on Barnstormers for $20K-$30K and although they're not that fast (faster than a 172, slower than a 182), they're damn cheap and you can do aerobatics in 'em. Ugly as sin, but apparently great fun to fly. Although most of them are tailwheels, the ground handling is supposedly very gentle.
 
CaptainXap said:
Looking through Barnstormers etc it seems like if you go for a less popular experimental (i.e. not an RV or a Kitfox), you can get a lot of plane for your money.
Click to expand...
T-18, Tailwind, etc...
On the LSA side, Avid Flyers come to mind.
 
Get a used RV 12. Lots have been built, lots of support, great slower short trips fun vfr plane.
 
Last edited:
FormerHangie said:
How many seats do you need? If it's more than two, there will not be many E-AB's that meet your needs.
Click to expand...
Only two. For Certified I was looking at C152, a Citabria and a J3. For experimentals/LSA: The Bushcat, Aerotrek and now the Sonex. All the rest (Kitfox, Carbon Cubs, etc) are way above my paygrade.
 
What is your price target for buying?
 
WDD said:
What is your price target for buying?
Click to expand...
80-100K ready to fly. For Experimental, a new factory built Bushcat is around 90K. For Certified, a lot can be bought for that. That's why I was asking if buying/building a new-ish experimental or an old certified and refurbish.
 
Find the airplane you want and buy it. Restoring and building will cost you more to end up with an equal plane. That’s aircraft econ 101. If you love building? Build, but don’t confuse that with flying, because the flying part will likely take a few years.
 
Trying to cheap out in aviation is al loser's game. Figure out whether you want to fly or build. If you want to build, build. If you want to fly, buy a flying airplane. If you're an A&P you might consider a restoration, an older airframe can be restored for less than an experimental can be constructed. Otherwise it isn't worth it unless you're really chummy with an A&P. I know some folks who did it. I know a guy who restored a Mooney this way.

Decide what you want, and head that way. It's the only thing that really makes sense.
 
Hector Parra said:
an old certified and refurbish.
Click to expand...
How are you defining "refurbish"? Most aircraft are not worth the effort under the common definition unless discussing a vintage classic aircraft like a Stearman, etc. But even those are more a labor of love than an investment with potential ROI.
 
Hector Parra said:
80-100K ready to fly. For Experimental, a new factory built Bushcat is around 90K. For Certified, a lot can be bought for that. That's why I was asking if buying/building a new-ish experimental or an old certified and refurbish.
Click to expand...
Pay $100k for something like an RV 12 and have a newer plane with less maintenance costs and down time. Pay less for an older certified plane and pay more for maintenance. Over generalization, sure.

BTW - what certified “a lot can be bought for that” are you looking at?
 
Bell206 said:
How are you defining "refurbish"? Most aircraft are not worth the effort under the common definition unless discussing a vintage classic aircraft like a Stearman, etc. But even those are more a labor of love than an investment with potential ROI.
Click to expand...
Kind of like restoring an old car. From engine overhauls to take care of rust, paint, cushions and even upgrade panel, but not sure if I want to spend money on upgrading panels for a 50+ year old aircraft.
 
WDD said:
Pay $100k for something like an RV 12 and have a newer plane with less maintenance costs and down time. Pay less for an older certified plane and pay more for maintenance. Over generalization, sure.

BTW - what certified “a lot can be bought for that” are you looking at?
Click to expand...
The usual two seaters C150/52, J-3, but also some small 4 seaters like a Tri Pacer and a Stinson 108-2/3. And some - not so small- Cherokees and C172/182, although is getting harder to buy the latest these days for less than 100K (at least up here in Canada)
 
A decent 182 for $100k? Wow!
 
Hector Parra said:
Kind of like restoring an old car.
Click to expand...
From the maintenance side of things there is no comparison or value in refurbing an old aircraft vs an old car. In a perfect world, TC'd aircraft are required to be in a minimum working condition in order to be considered airworthy, whereas an old car is not. So if you decide to go the TC route, select an APIA that will maintain your new purchase and have him be involved with reviewing any potential aircraft. If all goes well you'll be able to start flying immediately and enjoy your purchase then over time systematically upgrade or "refurbish" minor areas until the aircraft is exactly how you want it. And if your APIA allows owner-assisted maintenance you'll save a few nickels in the mean time.
 
A complete kit for a kitfox or rans, or rv is more expensive than what I paid for my 180. Current prices on those same planes completed are also more than my 180 is worth, or at least very close. I suspect that IF the airplane market goes soft, the experimentals will take the biggest hit.

I know there are lots of people who buy old airplanes and have horror stories about parts cost, and maintenance cost. While it is true that some Cessna parts are ungodly expensive, to need those parts is pretty rare. Buying the cheapest of the model you want is probably NOT the best way to save money. I got lucky when I bought my 180, the owner had died and a friend was selling it for him, the ad was pretty poor and the airplane looked bad but was a diamond in the rough.

If you want to build an airplane, buy a kit. If you want to FLY an airplane, buy an airplane.
 
Bell206 said:
How are you defining "refurbish"? Most aircraft are not worth the effort under the common definition unless discussing a vintage classic aircraft like a Stearman, etc. But even those are more a labor of love than an investment with potential ROI.
Click to expand...
Didn't you read the part about cheating out being a loser's game? Yes, you can easily go upside down on the restoration of any vintage GA aircraft. What you wind up with is an airplane that looks, smells, and performs like new for the fraction of the price of a new airplane. Yes you'll spend a lot, but you'll spend a lot more on a new airframe.

If you try and sell it you'll see huge depreciation. Then again, I can't imagine the depreciation on a new airplane once it isn't new anymore.
 
Adam Weiss said:
I have an experimental that I bought, because now I want to fly.
I fly the hell out of it.
When I retire, I’ll build an RV-10, because I want to build.
Click to expand...

When you retire, you can get your AnP in two years through a tech school and keep flying. But, if you want to build, build.
Bell206 said:
From the maintenance side of things there is no comparison or value in refurbing an old aircraft vs an old car. In a perfect world, TC'd aircraft are required to be in a minimum working condition in order to be considered airworthy, whereas an old car is not. So if you decide to go the TC route, select an APIA that will maintain your new purchase and have him be involved with reviewing any potential aircraft. If all goes well you'll be able to start flying immediately and enjoy your purchase then over time systematically upgrade or "refurbish" minor areas until the aircraft is exactly how you want it. And if your APIA allows owner-assisted maintenance you'll save a few nickels in the mean time.
Click to expand...

this was the approach I have taken. Bought my Tiger in 2014. Had flown it for a while, and then started to make upgrades. Interior first, now engine monitor, then lifetime hoses, finally paint in the next year. As the mags come up on their 500 hr inspection, looking toward replacing one with the SureFly, G5’s when the AI or DG crump, etc etc. Always ways to spend money in aviation. In the meantime, I have an airplane that I can fly versus taking 2-3 years to build, even though I am retired.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top