Hangar queen vs.high(er) time?

[Simon]

My Mooney search has narrowed down to two virtually identical eagles.  They both have original avionics, both of the same year

and even from the same area in the Mid West.

The only discernible difference is the total time flown.  One is under 500 hrs and the other just over 1,300 hrs.  The 500 hour plane

is about 10% greater in asking price ($15k)

I know there are advantages and disadvantages to either scenario and of course both have the IO-550 engine - which has had it's own

share of drama recently and is an entirely separate conversation.

This may not be a big deal, but the 1,300 hour engine just had a new #3 cylinder installed.  I understand the old one had very minor cracking.

A pre-buy would be preformed on either choice.

Interested in people's experiences of very low time plane vs. a plane that's been flown regularly.

-s

 

 

[Raptor05121]

What plane and year are you looking at? A 1980s model or 2006 model? 500 hrs versus 1,300hrs is a huge difference for both.

Post a link to both if they are online.

For me, I have no problem with time. My plane is close to 6,000 hours and I learned to fly in a 152 that had close to 20,000 hours.

[N6758N]

He's looking at Eagles. All things else aside, I would go with the one that is flown the most regularly and has a good maintenance history (one that has been maintained by a reputable source) Has the 500hr bird ever had an engine O/H? Eagles aren't nearly as old as some of the airplanes on this site so you might be lucky even if the engine has never been apart.

[Simon]

1 minute ago, N6758N said:

He's looking at Eagles. All things else aside, I would go with the one that is flown the most regularly and has a good maintenance history (one that has been maintained by a reputable source) Has the 500hr bird ever had an engine O/H? Eagles aren't nearly as old as some of the airplanes on this site so you might be lucky even if the engine has never been apart.

Neither has had the engine apart, with the exception of the #3 cyl on the 1,300 hr plane.

Both have received excellent maintenance.  Really the only difference is the time flown.

They even look identical.  I guess all eagles have the same paint job (or lack off).

[kevinw]

What would be important to me is how often the low hour Eagle was flown. 500 hours over say 16 years is 31 hours/year. So the question is this; was the plane flown somewhat regularly? Once per month perhaps...or did it sit for two years or more with no activity? Look it up on flightaware and also ask if he has any flight logs.

[Simon]

2 minutes ago, kevinw said:

What would be important to me is how often the low hour Eagle was flown. 500 hours over say 16 years is 31 hours/year. So the question is this; was the plane flown somewhat regularly? Once per month perhaps...or did it sit for two years or more with no activity? Look it up on flightaware and also ask if he has any flight logs.

Pretty regular, then only 5 hours between 2009 and 2012, then regular again until now.

[kevinw]

Just now, Simon said:

Pretty regular, then only 5 hours between 2009 and 2012, then regular again until now.

Hmmm. Being flown regularly between 2012 and now would make me feel better about it. Hopefully some of the mechanics here will chime in and be able to advise you on this one. Good luck with your purchase. 

[Simon]

1 minute ago, kevinw said:

Hmmm. Being flown regularly between 2012 and now would make me feel better about it. Hopefully some of the mechanics here will chime in and be able to advise you on this one. Good luck with your purchase. 

Thanks!

20-30 hours a year is barely regular I know...but it's better than nothing.

[gsengle]

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

[Ftlausa]

Is either plane on an oil analysis program?  That can tell you something about the health of the engines.  The 1300 hour engine may well need a top overhaul soon.  The cracked cylinder could be a harbinger of more cylinder issues to come.  On the other hand, the 500 hour engine might have corrosion issues, and be close to needing a major overhaul.  Pick your poison, and also realize that you are going to get opinions either way.   

[MooneyMitch]

My experience.  An engine/plane that is flown a lot on a regular basis if a far better bet, than one that sits mostly.  There are of course, variables to this.

 

Example, I purchased my Ovation with nearly 1800 hours on the engine.  The plane had been flown that 1800 hours over a 7 year period.   Good, consistent flying.  The engine burned a quart in 16 hours and had excellent compression when purchased. 

 

I ran that engine well over TBO…..nearly 2400 hours prior to overhaul.  The overall compression had fallen to the mid 50’s areas at overhaul decision time.  

 

Again, variables to all of this information.  Nothing is guaranteed. 

[Simon]

37 minutes ago, MooneyMitch said:

I purchased my Ovation with nearly 1800 hours on the engine

That's reassuring to know, and also now you have a fresh engine.

The reality of an engine with 1,300 hours is that it could easily have another 1,000 hours.

[KSMooniac]

Continental cylinders are notorious for their bad valve fit, and many typically need to be addressed in the 700-900 hour range. I'd look at borescope pics of the valves (easy during a compression test) to look for the deposit patterns. It could be the higher time engine has good valves to make it that far, or the lower time one might not. No way to know until looking!

If it were me, I'd decide my ownership horizon...if a long term keeper, I'd opt for the higher time bird, pay less, and plan to overhaul to my specs. If it would be an intermediate plane, then the lower time bird might allow you to fly and sell before overhaul is needed (unless the valves are bad!).

Just now to consider... (I bet there isn't a wrong choice here!)

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

[gsengle]

For what it's worth my 96 Ovation engine is going strong at 1980 hours with most of its original cylinders


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Simon]

6 minutes ago, gsengle said:

For what it's worth my 96 Ovation engine is going strong at 1980 hours with most of its original cylinders.

Sounds like music to me!

One question though.  What determines cylinder replacement?  Are they bore scoped at each annual?

[gsengle]

You absolutely must have a good engine analyzer. That's hopefully where you'll see an issue first.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Simon]

43 minutes ago, gsengle said:

You absolutely must have a good engine analyzer. That's hopefully where you'll see an issue first.

JPI offers an upgrade from the older EDM700 to the newer EDM730 for a reasonable cost.

[gsengle]

Yep, I took advantage and I'm very happy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[carusoam]

Based on the details given...

1) The IO550 can go beyond TBO.

2) Some people need new cylinders at the halfway point.  Some people do not.  Temperature control is key.

3) The number five cylinder is the usual one for running hot.  Some hangar elf invented a quarter sized hole to help with that.

4) I was following Mitch's guidance on going the distance with engine number one. Then life got in the way...

5) Having a nearly brand new O would be a good choice. Low time, low wear.  The IO550 has one maintenance issue to be aware of lately.  Look up the cam gear issue.

6) Fortunately, the location and materials of the cam doesn't seem to have corrosion issues like the IO360 might experience.

7) After all that...

the OP has left out the important details.

The Eagle comes in two varieties low power, long ground roll version... and high power, climb like crazy, Screamin' Eagle version.

Don't use quirky logic to buy the underpowered version... go right to the 310 hp Screamin' Eagle!  All the cool kids are doing it. 

8) An OH of the old, low power, engine can bring the engine up to the 310 hp standard.

Hope I didn't make a mess by spreading some technical detail...

Best regards,

-a-

 

Edited April 26, 2017 by carusoam

[Simon]

I'm all about doing what the cool kids do!

I understand the HP increase is the result of a new governor and a new propeller (usually 3 blade)?

 

 

[gsengle]

Just curious, are you also considering Ovations? Why Eagles?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Simon]

13 minutes ago, gsengle said:

Just curious, are you also considering Ovations? Why Eagles?
 

I like the simplicity of the Eagle.

[gsengle]

Ovation is just as simple no? Same engine controls, same lack of cowl flaps...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Simon]

1 hour ago, gsengle said:

Ovation is just as simple no? Same engine controls, same lack of cowl flaps...
 

Maybe it's just the Ovations I've seen for sale are more plane than I need.

Mind you ANY plane is more plane than I NEED.

Also there is a big cost difference for comparable condition Eagles vs. Ovations.

[gsengle]

I think the other general big difference is the early Ovations came with the king flight director / attitude based autopilot.... it's a really great autopilot in my experience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk