Money Changes Everything - Experimental Savings

[WDD]

Do experimentally have the same lifespan? A 3O year old experimental as corrosion free as a 30 year old Skyhawk ?

 

[kyleb]

Experimentals are generally babied by their owners. They are almost always hangared, whereas that C-172 has been parked outside on the flight school’s ramp.

 

[wanttaja]

Do experimentally have the same lifespan? A 3O year old experimental as corrosion free as a 30 year old Skyhawk ?

My homebuilt is 40 years old with near-zero corrosion. Mind you, it's made of wood......

Ron Wanttaja

 

[donjohnston]

Do experimentally have the same lifespan? A 3O year old experimental as corrosion free as a 30 year old Skyhawk ?

Mine is only 5 years old but has spent it's entire life within 40 miles of the Gulf of Mexico. Not a bit of rust on the airframe so far. Of course it's all fiberglass so that might have something to do with it.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

My brothers 1980ish T-18 had some corrosion on the belly skin from the battery - just like a 172.

 

[WDD]

What prompted my question was reading a section on the Van Air Force web site on whether or not to prime the parts. One argument was “how long do you really need your plane to last”. So I buy an RV9 A that is 15 years old is it going to be worth anything in 15 years if I want to sell it? I can buy a 50 year old 1970 Cherokee and it will be good for 15 years.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

One argument was “how long do you really need your plane to last”.

So don't buy from that guy. Buy from a guy who primed.
Quality does vary from builder to builder - so you can't really generalize.
I bought a 12 year old homebuilt and have owned it for 10 years. Overall, it's probably in a little better shape now than when I bought it. I don't see it collapsing in a pile of corrosion in the near future.

 

[WDD]

Didn’t know if it was a thing that legacy planes from an assembly line was always primed, etc where as most experimentals were commonly un protected.

To be honest I was really surprised that a person would make that argument let alone make it a sticky on their forum.

 

[kyleb]

Didn’t know if it was a thing that legacy planes from an assembly line was always primed, etc where as most experimentals were commonly un protected.

Most older factory aircraft were not primed and they are fine after 50 years unless they were based on the coast.

 

[MacFly]

@Drew S - if you want EXP side by side and no acro you're looking for RV-9. I looked hard at Mustang II's... interesting flap design, but I went with Vans because sometimes the market leader is the leader for reason.

I struggled with certificated planes vs "something else". I didn't want to build a plane, partly because I don't have the time, and partly because I want to fly my own plane NOW, not 2-4 years from now. I don't need room for four passengers nor do I need much useful load, but I want to go long distances, and I want to go high and fast. I have a PPL and Class 3 medical so I saw LSA as less than pointless for me. No doubt that I could buy a certificated "something" for reasonably cheap, but for years I've been flying 20-40 year-old tired airplanes and see them continually cropping up with expensive issues that their great age has contributed to. I started looking at already-built Experimentals and the harder I looked, the more the idea appealed to me. The planes were more expensive, but the price difference was far less than I would expect to buy a 5-10 year old airplane vs one that is 40 years old. The eight-year old RV-9A that I recently bought for a lot less than $100K has a 320 HP factory-new fuel-injected Lycoming engine with 400 hours, constant-speed prop with 120 hours, a fully IFR-capable glass panel with autopilot, ADS-B in and out, and many other gee-whiz doodads that would be prohibitively expensive on a certificated airplane. It even has a smoke system. The leather upholstery is pristine. I haven't rented a Cessna or Piper in a long, long time that didnt have torn and stained carpeting and upholstery, or a cracked/warped glare shield. IFR glass panel in a certificated airplane..? Get out your checkbook and take a deep breath.

I guess I'll see over the next few years whether or not that was a good plan, but for me, I couldn't perceive much of a down side. And this RV-9A is more fun to fly, not to mention fast, than I could ever have imagined after decades of Cessnas and Pipers.

 

[WDD]

An RV 9A with a 320 HP engine? Yikes. That’s twice the normal 160. Must be a beast!

 

[MacFly]

An RV 9A with a 320 HP engine? Yikes. That’s twice the normal 160. Must be a beast!

Heh heh...obviously I mistyped - must have been in Mike Patey-wannabe mode. Maybe just wishful thinking. The engine is a factory original Lycoming IO-320 with only the usual 160 HP.

 

[WDD]

The more I think about it - the more I like the idea of building. And by that I mean buy a used flying RV9A and “build” an updated panel and a nice interior.

Even that will be hard. A used RV9 that is in need of a a CS prop, a new panel, and interior fittings will cost $100k or so. Then add on the cost for the new panel, etc.

 

[MacFly]

The more I think about it - the more I like the idea of building. And by that I mean buy a used flying RV9A and “build” an updated panel and a nice interior.

Even that will be hard. A used RV9 that is in need of a a CS prop, a new panel, and interior fittings will cost $100k or so. Then add on the cost for the new panel, etc.

I posted a "want-to-buy" on the Van's Airforce forums. I had more than a few people respond with RV-9A's that weren't "officially" for sale, ranging between $60,000 and $120,000.

Do note that unless you're the original 51% builder with the repairman certificate, you are still locked in to an A&P signing off on major changes and annual condition inspections.

 

[kyleb]

Do note that unless you're the original 51% builder with the repairman certificate, you are still locked in to an A&P signing off on major changes and annual condition inspections.

Yep. But you can do everything else yourself. You can even do any repairs or maintenance associated with the condition inspection and only have the A&P or IA do the actual inspection.

 

[MacFly]

Yep. But you can do everything else yourself. You can even do any repairs or maintenance associated with the condition inspection and only have the A&P or IA do the actual inspection.

Yes. To me, as a reasonably competent amateur auto mechanic, that was a very attractive aspect of Experimental aircraft and one of the main reasons that maintenance costs are so cheap. You do need to have an A&P that's OK with that, but I found that access to those mechanics was as far away as your nearest EAA chapter. And many FBOs have A&P's that will work "off the books" in their spare time helping Experimental owners work on their planes, rather than the shop rates that certificated airplane owners have to pay.

 

[Dana]

I posted a "want-to-buy" on the Van's Airforce forums. I had more than a few people respond with RV-9A's that weren't "officially" for sale, ranging between $60,000 and $120,000.

Do note that unless you're the original 51% builder with the repairman certificate, you are still locked in to an A&P signing off on major changes and annual condition inspections.

Incorrect. Yes, you need an A&P for the condition inspection, but not for major change, you just have to notify the FSDO and put it back in phase 1 test for 5 hours.

 

[MacFly]

Incorrect. Yes, you need an A&P for the condition inspection, but not for major change, you just have to notify the FSDO and put it back in phase 1 test for 5 hours.

OK, yeah. Sorry...I’m new at this Experimental stuff.

 

[Stan Cooper]

My '63 C172D had no internal corrosion protection. My understanding is that Cessna applied zinc chromate to the inside of the airframes of 172s being built as amphibians or seaplanes back then, but not to airframes being built as land airplanes. The amphibs and seaplanes also had external oil coolers on the O-300s. Cessna had no idea 57 year old 172s would still be flying.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

So I buy an RV9 A that is 15 years old is it going to be worth anything in 15 years if I want to sell it?

Experimentals were all but non-existent 50 years ago. They were extremely rare 30 years ago and have been becoming more common since then. Still, its possible to find 20+ year old RV's for sale. The difference in asking price for them isn't significantly different than the asking price for examples that are 10-15 years newer. There is probably more of a difference in asking price for a 1965 172 vs a 1975 172 than you'll find in a 1995 RV6 vs a 2005 RV6.

I can buy a 50 year old 1970 Cherokee and it will be good for 15 years.

You wanna bet your investment on that? The FAA is looking hard at imposing a pretty ominous wing spar AD on PA28's right now that could have a definite impact on resale prices if it comes to pass. AD's don't exist on the experimental side.

 

[steingar]

Not drinking the cool-aide. There is no experimental that will do what my Mooney will do for Mooney money. And unless I build it I still have to pay someone to inspect it yearly. Yeah, I can use part from NAPA, but my parts expenses haven’t even made a dent in the extra money I’d have to pay for the experimental that can do what the Mooney can do.

 

[kyleb]

Not drinking the cool-aide. There is no experimental that will do what my Mooney will do for Mooney money. And unless I build it I still have to pay someone to inspect it yearly. Yeah, I can use part from NAPA, but my parts expenses haven’t even made a dent in the extra money I’d have to pay for the experimental that can do what the Mooney can do.

I think you could scare passengers for far less in an experimental. What's the hold-up? ;-)

 

[Daleandee]

Most important to me with experimental is that when you're building your own plane you know what you're doing and what quality product is being installed. So many aircraft are over 40years old and you may not know exactly what was done until you start to rip into it. Even with a good pre purchase inspection.

A great friend of mine just began an avionics upgrade that he estimated will cost him north of 20 large in his certified aircraft. What was the most scary part was when all was opened up, the panel was totally removed, and the old and tired wiring, connectors, broken standoffs, downright scary stuff that is hidden way behind the panel was revealed. Yep, the stuff that no one ever sees until something goes wrong and there is a reason to rip into it.

My flight instructor years ago went to buy what appeared to be a pristine C-150 ... until they looked hard under the panel. A fire was waiting to happen. There are some excellent A&P mechanics in the aviation world and there are others. Unless you have built your plane (experimental) or take a major part in the inspection, service, & repairs of the plane you are flying (certified) there is no way you can be sure of what you have. Remember ... TANSTAAFL

 

[MacFly]

Drew, I agree with you on all parts,. Most important to me with experimental is that when you're building your own plane you know what you're doing and what quality product is being installed. So many aircraft are over 40years old and you may not know exactly what was done until you start to rip into it. Even with a good pre purchase inspection.

It's a good point, but some folks want the convenience and quality of an Experimental without the MAJOR 2-4 year commitment of building it. Fortunately, there's no shortage of experienced people out there who can vet the airplane's construction quality if someone else built it. It's very true though...you buy a 40-year old airplane...you may know how it was built but you have no clue what it's been through since then. You DO know that it's 40 years old, however....

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Not drinking the cool-aide. There is no experimental that will do what my Mooney will do for Mooney money. And unless I build it I still have to pay someone to inspect it yearly. Yeah, I can use part from NAPA, but my parts expenses haven’t even made a dent in the extra money I’d have to pay for the experimental that can do what the Mooney can do.

Let me start this out by saying a boatload of the non-paid hours in my logbook are in a 60's era Mooney so I'm true fan. That being said, lets get on to my response.

You are absolutely correct, if we're looking at performance numbers only. But for lots of people, airplane ownership goes beyond just performance numbers.

Your 60's era Mooney will out perform lots of other 60's era airplanes as well as lots of lots of 70's era and 80's era and 2010's era airplanes. But your 60's era airplane likely does not have a 2020s's era panel or interior in it. And that's not to say your 60's era Mooney couldn't have a 2020's ere panel and/or interior in it. But if it did, the asking price for it would most definitely not be in line with the majority of other Mooneys of the same vintage that are on the market.

Which is a long winded way of saying performance counts for a lot, but it ain't everything. If you're still flying an airplane with an engine that has a vacuum pump attached to it, you're flying a dinosaur. If you're still flying an airplane that requires you to slide a bezel and/or do some math in order to determine your true airspeed, you're flying a dinosaur. If you're still flying an airplane that does not show you the actual winds aloft where you are right now without you having to do any math or even push a button, you're flying a dinosaur.

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with flying dinosaurs. Pretty much 100% of my flying has been in dinosaurs. But its not really fair to compare the ownership experience of a 1970 Ford LTD vs a 2013 Ford Fusion. So its not really fair to compare the ownership experience of a '67 M20C to the ownership experience of a '13 RV7.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

So don't buy from that guy. Buy from a guy who primed.
Quality does vary from builder to builder - so you can't really generalize.
I bought a 12 year old homebuilt and have owned it for 10 years. Overall, it's probably in a little better shape now than when I bought it. I don't see it collapsing in a pile of corrosion in the near future.

A lot of builders go crazy with primer; I decided not to do so. I went the QuikBuild route, and the prebuilt basic fuselage and wings are treated with a wash primer. On top of that, all the ribs, skins, formers, etc. are Alclad aluminum...the alloy has a surface layer of pure aluminum that oxidizes very slightly as a form of protection.

Also, it's hangared, in a Southern California climate, so I estimate the useful life of the airframe to be roughly 250 years.

 

[skier]

Not drinking the cool-aide. There is no experimental that will do what my Mooney will do for Mooney money. And unless I build it I still have to pay someone to inspect it yearly. Yeah, I can use part from NAPA, but my parts expenses haven’t even made a dent in the extra money I’d have to pay for the experimental that can do what the Mooney can do.

Velocity or RV-10 depending on the age of your Mooney and your mission.

 

[steingar]

Velocity or RV-10 depending on the age of your Mooney and your mission.

Velocities and RV-10's easily cost $100,000 more than my poor old Mooney M20c. They do go a bit faster, I'll admit that. But I said Mooney money, not new Mooney money. My Mooney Ranger is easily the best bang for the buck in GA. You cannot go faster or farther carrying more burning less gas for the cost of acquisition and maintenance.

 

[Dana]

Velocities and RV-10's easily cost $100,000 more than my poor old Mooney M20c. They do go a bit faster, I'll admit that. But I said Mooney money, not new Mooney money. My Mooney Ranger is easily the best bang for the buck in GA. You cannot go faster or farther carrying more burning less gas for the cost of acquisition and maintenance.

But on the Mooney, you have to pay an A&P for anything beyond preventive maintenance. EXP, you only have to pay an A&P for the annual.

Not drinking the cool-aide. There is no experimental that will do what my Mooney will do for Mooney money.

All in what you want. There is no non-exp plane that will do what any of the experimentals I've owned will do for ANY price.

 

[German guy]

[...] Some LSA manufacturers really work well with owners. Some stink at it. My Sportcruiser is a beatiful plane that I love to fly, but the factory stinks at any owner support. Letter of Authorization? It ain't happening for owners of the plane. So I agree that E-LSA or E-AB is a great way to go, a great way to save money, and install not only less expensive avionics, but much BETTER upgrades. [...]

You can convert your Sportcruiser or any other S-LSA into an E-LSA. I understand that this only requires some paperwork and a few hundred $$$. No downsides, other than that (I believe) you couldn't use it for instruction anymore. A simple weekend repairman course would even allow you to do your own conditions inspections on it.
I actually completed such a training just a few weeks ago and there was a guy who had his CTLS converted to E-LSA. The conversion would allow him to modify it like any experimental, including making it IFR capable.

 

[steingar]

But on the Mooney, you have to pay an A&P for anything beyond preventive maintenance. EXP, you only have to pay an A&P for the annual.

It would take decades of maintenance to make up the difference between my Mooney and the experimentals cited. And you call wrenching on the airplane free. My consulting fees are far more than any mechanic charges.

 

[rtk11]

You can convert your Sportcruiser or any other S-LSA into an E-LSA. I understand that this only requires some paperwork and a few hundred $$$. No downsides, other than that (I believe) you couldn't use it for instruction anymore.

LOL - I did this last year to effectively tell the factory to "pound sand." Since that time, I've made some significant upgrades to my Sportcruiser, including changing the Garmin 496 to an Aera 660, installing a GDL-82 connected to a hard mounted GDL-39 3D, upgraded to the TruTrak Vizion autopilot (from Digiflight II), installed the auto-level-flight button as well as added a control-wheel-steering (CWS) and autopilot connect/disconnect switch to the yoke, and added an outside air temperature sensor to the Dynon D120. All of this would not be approved by the manufacturer.

If you have no plans to instruct or use your plane as a lease vehicle for instruction, E-LSA is a fine way to go.

I am waiting for the next LSRM class locally, but yes... that will allow me to do my own annual inspections.

 

[ryoder]

I have owned a Mooney and a 162 and there are pros and cons to both. Love the one you’re with.

 

[Adam Weiss]

Didn't mention: looking to stay LSA to avoid medical. Neither wife or I have issues, but you never know

If you can get a medical now, do it.
Then get Basic Med and never look back.
No need to limit yourself to LSA prematurely.

 

[Adam Weiss]

It would take decades of maintenance to make up the difference between my Mooney and the experimentals cited. And you call wrenching on the airplane free. My consulting fees are far more than any mechanic charges.

@steingar I love your passion for your Mooney!
I’m just as passionate about my -9A.
We’ve had a few discussions on other threads about these two planes.
For me, after looking long and hard at the M20E, for a similar acquisition price, I got a machine that trues at 155kts on 8gph, fixed gear, low stall speed, low insurance, and experimental avionics prices.
I think I would have been really happy with a Mooney.
But I’m thrilled with my RV.

 

[German guy]

[...] For me, after looking long and hard at the M20E, for a similar acquisition price, I got a machine that trues at 155kts on 8gph, fixed gear, low stall speed, low insurance, and experimental avionics prices.
I think I would have been really happy with a Mooney.
But I’m thrilled with my RV.

I think that unless somebody needs the space of a 4-seater, a RV6/7/9 is a overall a MUCH better choice than a vintage Mooney, for not much more money.
Note, that I am saying this as somebody who owns and loves his Mooney M20E.

 

[steingar]

@steingar I love your passion for your Mooney!
I’m just as passionate about my -9A.

My Mooney is my forever airplane, and I"m glad you jonez on your RV. Lotsa folks do.

We’ve had a few discussions on other threads about these two planes.
For me, after looking long and hard at the M20E, for a similar acquisition price, I got a machine that trues at 155kts on 8gph, fixed gear, low stall speed, low insurance, and experimental avionics prices.

And here's where we part company. Prices on RV9s are tens of thousands more than just about any Chaparral. The only ones I've seen sell for RV money had new engines and glass panels. For a run of the mill E your paying price is thousands less than any RV except perhaps a really old one with primitive avionics. Moreover, the asking price of a Ranger far less yet again. The only difference is a few ponies, the C is perhaps ten knots slower in cruise. Difference in average trip times is just a few minutes. Different in price is ten to twenty thousand. Lots to buy avgas.

I think I would have been really happy with a Mooney.
But I’m thrilled with my RV.

Glad to hear it, but had you gone Mooney you'd have way more money left over for avgas. And the difference in price would pay for a lot of bad annuals. Heck, RV's have squawks too. You can repair them, it's true. But you time, and I hope your as good with a wrench as you think you are.

 

[Adam Weiss]

My Mooney is my forever airplane, and I"m glad you jonez on your RV. Lotsa folks do.



And here's where we part company. Prices on RV9s are tens of thousands more than just about any Chaparral. The only ones I've seen sell for RV money had new engines and glass panels. For a run of the mill E your paying price is thousands less than any RV except perhaps a really old one with primitive avionics. Moreover, the asking price of a Ranger far less yet again. The only difference is a few ponies, the C is perhaps ten knots slower in cruise. Difference in average trip times is just a few minutes. Different in price is ten to twenty thousand. Lots to buy avgas.



Glad to hear it, but had you gone Mooney you'd have way more money left over for avgas. And the difference in price would pay for a lot of bad annuals. Heck, RV's have squawks too. You can repair them, it's true. But you time, and I hope your as good with a wrench as you think you are.

Let’s not be so quick to part ways.
My RV had 750 TT when I bought it.
GTN-650, 2-axis TruTrak, EDM 900, Dynon D10...almost all glass, IFR certified.
I paid $70k.
That’s comparable to a similarly equipped M20E.

 

[steingar]

Let’s not be so quick to part ways.
My RV had 750 TT when I bought it.
GTN-650, 2-axis TruTrak, EDM 900, Dynon D10...almost all glass, IFR certified.
I paid $70k.
That’s comparable to a similarly equipped M20E.

No, and all glass E will go for a lot more than that. But a Ranger with old fashioned avionics will go for a crapload less. If the glass is your big deal than yeah, the RV makes sense. If carrying capability or even a diminutive back seat are your deal, the Mooney wins hands down. And you don't have to step on the seats every time you get in.

 

[German guy]

[...]Prices on RV9s are tens of thousands more than just about any Chaparral. [...]

Yes, they are more. BUT:

• You don't have to deal with all the little crap associated with an ~50y/o airframe / engine / avionics / etc.
• You don't have to deal with all the little crap associated with a retractable gear aircraft
• If you want to upgrade your avionics / radio / whatever you go to Aircraft Spruce, order it and either put it in yourself or have your mechanic do it
• A vintage Mooney's typical 5,000 hour, ~50 y/o Mooney engine, that has already been overhauled several times, has an elevated risk of an unexpected engine overhaul due to some kind of fatigue failure. This risk is significantly lower with an RV, since most builders install brand new engines. Most still have less than 1,000 hrs on them.
• If you still have an unexpected engine problem (like we had a cracked crankcase), you don't have to have it repaired and overhauled for $34k + installation (like we did), instead you order a brand spankin' new, technically identical experimental engine for $29k and install it yourself, if you're competent to do so.
• Our 200hp M20E cruises at around 153 kts TAS at 9.8 gal / h. Our buddy's RV9A does the same on 7.5 gal. / h
• And so on and so forth

Particularly for somebody who enjoys working on aircraft, a proven, common experimental, like an RV, comes with much less frustration, unpleasant surprises and also saves a ton of money, compared to a vintage, complex aircraft. Plus, RVs are an absolute blast to fly!