Hangar queen vs.high(er) time?

[carusoam]

Instrumentation and autopilots of the early Os were top of the line kind of stuff.  Power tail trim is my favorite.

The Eagles started out as going light as possible.  Some owners have done a nice job of adding back a lot of the weight over time.

Fancy sound barrier materials match the nice leather yokes, the 100+ gallons of fuel is pretty nice too.....  oooh, supreme! 

There isn't much that can't be added or changed later.

After 20 years a lot of stuff needs to be updated.  WAAS, ADSB, 406ELT...

Best regards,

-a-

Edited April 26, 2017 by carusoam

[kevinw]

I like the typically higher UL the Eagles have but for me to consider one would require the 310hp upgrade and more importantly an attitude based autopilot. Unless I'm mistaken most Eagles have the S-Tec 30 and that would be a deal breaker for me for that kind of money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MooneyMitch]

Oh yes..........and most certainly not wishing to start a firestorm with this information................but, my 2400+ hour IO-550G was mostly flown at LOP............yikes!

[gsengle]

Oh yes..........and most certainly not wishing to start a firestorm with this information................but, my 2400+ hour IO-550G was mostly flown at LOP............yikes!

Ditto my 2000hr one


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rpcc]

The lower time Eagle - if it's the same one I looked at a while back had a fuel tank leak but also had the 3blade prop upgrade and engine upgrade to 280hp.

[Simon]

27 minutes ago, rpcc said:

The lower time Eagle - if it's the same one I looked at a while back had a fuel tank leak but also had the 3blade prop upgrade and engine upgrade to 280hp.

Could be that same one.  Minneapolis area?

[rpcc]

Yes sir.

[Simon]

Just now, rpcc said:

Yes sir.

Thanks for speaking up!

Not a deal breaker - at the right price.

Did you have an inspection? Or just your own eyeballs?

-s

 

[rpcc]

Just a log review and discussions.  It seemed like a great plane.  I was really 50-50 if the low time was good or bad - which is back to your original question.   When I looked at it, it had not been flown in a while, so I figured an OH was coming out of my wallet sooner than later.  It sounds like the plane as been operated recently so that is probably good news for you.  

[jetdriven]

On 4/25/2017 at 4:08 PM, gsengle said:

The 15k is all due to engine time difference, figure $20 an hour for overhaul. Which means you're getting zero extra cost for lower time airframe. Which makes me lean toward the lower time one as the better deal, assuming well maintained and engine strong....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The engine isn't worth 15k more.  It's not worth any more than the other one, really. 

[carusoam]

Upgrading to 280hp would be good.  The original Eagle set up is a pain in short fields.

There was a time when the 280hp was top of the line power.

Then the 310hp STC became available.

There is a significant difference in T/O and climb performance with the 310hp over the 280hp.

Its a lot of dough to spend to get 10% more power later.  When the opportunity shows up, take it! 

Fly it before committing. Use a waas source with cloudahoy To measure T/O performance.  

Best regards,

-a-

[gsengle]

The engine isn't worth 15k more.  It's not worth any more than the other one, really. 

You're right given the age it's not worth that much more...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Simon]

3 hours ago, gsengle said:

 

You're right given the age it's not worth that much more...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Thanks for all your comments guys.

[aviatoreb]

Assuming they both check out the same in brebuy - if you did a prebuy in both - then the low time engine worries me given its history of sitting for several years and then still relatively low use for the recent years.  I would consider the higher time airplane more valuable and even be willing to put more money on the table for it as more likely to go to TBO than the low time engine which I consider more likely to need an overhaul sooner.  So since the low time airplane costs more, then even more so I would lean to the "high time" airplane.

I put high time in quotes since 1300 hours is still essentially a new airplane in a world where 10,000 hrs is mid time for an airframe if it is well maintained.  Go meet a 100,000 or 200,000 hr DC3.  But seriously, many of us are flying around in 5,000-6,000 hr airplanes that look and feel new because they are well maintained.

[Simon]

38 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

I put high time in quotes since 1300 hours is still essentially a new airplane in a world where 10,000 hrs is mid time for an airframe if it is well maintained.  Go meet a 100,000 or 200,000 hr DC3.  But seriously, many of us are flying around in 5,000-6,000 hr airplanes that look and feel new because they are well maintained.

In the world of buying and selling vintage cars there's a saying.  "Buy the owner, not the car".

I think that translates perfectly for planes too.

[gsengle]

In the world of buying and selling vintage cars there's a saying.  "Buy the owner, not the car".
I think that translates perfectly for planes too.

Best yet you get the owner to take you up for a test flight and you observe how they treat the plane.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy95W]

11 hours ago, gsengle said:

 

Best yet you get the owner to take you up for a test flight and you observe how they treat the plane.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

And when they fly it, in addition to observing how they treat it, you'll have the chance to check all the instruments and avionics without being distracted by flying.

[231LV]

Having owned two Mooney's (a C and a K), I agree that opinions from all of us are just that...our opinions. My opinion, FWIW, is similar to a couple of others regarding "buy the owner, not the plane". If the owners both fly the planes LOP (I know, some still quiver and shake at the thought), the engines are being treated right and it's simply a matter of choosing the one you "feel best with"....maybe the lower cost one, maybe not....if one owner pounds the engine running at 50 ROP and the other runs it LOP, I would put my money with the plane run LOP. With either plane, you are likely to be spending some money over the next two or three years to get it where you want it. Enjoy the experience, not many of us get to purchase our own "magic carpets"!

[jaylw314]

All other things being equal, if you plane to resell the plane at some point, the higher-time aircraft would make more sense.  It has depreciated more already, and the fastest depreciation occurs early in time and flight-hours.

The 5 hours in 4 years is worrying.  I bought an M20J with a similar problem (new engine, then only flew 20 hours in 4 years).  Luckily it sat in New Mexico, so when they borescoped the cylinders, there was only minimal corrosion.  I just don't know how the camshaft and crankshaft held up, but at least the oil analyses look good.  I would definitely ask if they had borescoping and oil analyses documented.

[Cris]

As an owner of a very low time Eagle my experience is that I would do it again. At time of purchase in Feb 2011 the aircraft had 330 hrs TT with an Mattituck overhaul at 47 Hrs due to a prop strike. Contientals have far fewer corrosion issues than Lycomings due in part to cam placement. The Aircraft had spent half its life in Fl but inspection showed no evidence of corrosion any where. My thinking was that cylinders might need to be replaced but that the bottom end should be fine. Since purchase I have had very few maintenance issues and it has been maintained by a Mooney expert. One cylinder was iran'd last year due to a burned exhaust valve. I suspect that since their was no engine analyzer the previous operator may have run the CHT's to high. I did immediately add the analyzer and typically run lean of peak. Also the avionics were all low time and have been flawless. The S-Tec 30 is simple and more than adequate although I do have an S-Tec55x that I am thinking about installing. This Eagle came with the 280hp STC and I upgraded it to the 310HP with Midwest at a cost of 5K. It has a much better useful load than an Ovation 1123 lbs. and performance better than an Ovation 3 since it is a bit lighter. I also added a second color which was relatively inexpensive and now it is hard to tell it is not an Ovation since it had most of the Ovation options like leather seats. metallic stripes dual alternators, vacuum pumps etc. Currently it has 630 hrs and is a pleasure to own. At some point it will be sold but I will not be anywhere close to TBO which will make it easy to sell and I will not have taken the hit on the new engine depreciation that is typical. I'm way to old to get my money out of a new engine. Was I lucky? I don't think so. Just be sure you get a good Pre-Buy and be prepared to walk away. Just my thoughts on a low time purchase from someone who did so. Others have voiced excellent view on the opposite high time approach. In the end buy the best aircraft that you can afford. 

Edited May 2, 2017 by Cris

[Simon]

4 hours ago, Cris said:

As an owner of a very low time Eagle my experience is that I would do it again. At time of purchase in Feb 2011 the aircraft had 330 hrs TT with an Mattituck overhaul at 47 Hrs due to a prop strike. Contientals have far fewer corrosion issues than Lycomings due in part to cam placement. The Aircraft had spent half its life in Fl but inspection showed no evidence of corrosion any where. My thinking was that cylinders might need to be replaced but that the bottom end should be fine. Since purchase I have had very few maintenance issues and it has been maintained by a Mooney expert. One cylinder was iran'd last year due to a burned exhaust valve. I suspect that since their was no engine analyzer the previous operator may have run the CHT's to high. I did immediately add the analyzer and typically run lean of peak. Also the avionics were all low time and have been flawless. The S-Tec 30 is simple and more than adequate although I do have an S-Tec55x that I am thinking about installing. This Eagle came with the 280hp STC and I upgraded it to the 310HP with Midwest at a cost of 5K. It has a much better useful load than an Ovation 1123 lbs. and performance better than an Ovation 3 since it is a bit lighter. I also added a second color which was relatively inexpensive and now it is hard to tell it is not an Ovation since it had most of the Ovation options like leather seats. metallic stripes dual alternators, vacuum pumps etc. Currently it has 630 hrs and is a pleasure to own. At some point it will be sold but I will not be anywhere close to TBO which will make it easy to sell and I will not have taken the hit on the new engine depreciation that is typical. I'm way to old to get my money out of a new engine. Was I lucky? I don't think so. Just be sure you get a good Pre-Buy and be prepared to walk away. Just my thoughts on a low time purchase from someone who did so. Others have voiced excellent view on the opposite high time approach. In the end buy the best aircraft that you can afford. 

Thanks for the PIREP!