Buy-NoBuy - Mooney M20C Engine Corrosion? Engine: Lycoming O-360-AD1, Firewall Forward

[BaldEagle]

On 10/4/2018 at 11:32 AM, gsxrpilot said:

For my comfort level... or to be in this game... YMMV... Airplane ownership, not for the faint of heart or light of wallet.

• 1 AMU - waking around money (hip pocket)
• 10% of purchase price for first annual (checking)
• 10 AMU - emergency maintenance fund (savings)
• Be able to access the cost of an engine anytime from day 1 forward. (Credit card, home equity, Uncle Vinny, etc)
• And in the worst case, walk away from the entire thing without suffering financial ruin. (discovery of a corroded spar, as an example)

This is really good advice.  It wasn't until I purchased my third airplane that I came up with a similar list.  Sales taxes, ferry costs, etc. in addition to above though.  I read somewhere that 95% of GA airplane owners can't afford to own an airplane.  Or to put it another way: many people can afford to buy an airplane but often grossly underestimate the cost of owning and operating it.

[Vagus]

2 hours ago, BaldEagle said:

This is really good advice.  It wasn't until I purchased my third airplane that I came up with a similar list.  Sales taxes, ferry costs, etc. in addition to above though.  I read somewhere that 95% of GA airplane owners can't afford to own an airplane.  Or to put it another way: many people can afford to buy an airplane but often grossly underestimate the cost of owning and operating it.

@everyone and @gsxrpilot Thank you for the advice. I decided not to go forward with the purchase. These were some amazing tips and I appreciate everyone help. I'll make a goal to purchase an airplane being flown 30 hrs+ a year, STEC 30, Kings, Garmin 430+, and ADSB out/in for 60k (mid engine time). Someday I will find this gem. Once I do, I'll use the knowelege and help I gain here to buy my airplane. Until then, I might just join a club that fits or just rent.

Last thing, @gsxrpilot what did you mean by AMU? Also I am free Saturday if you are in the FW area hopefully we can fly sometime.

Again, thank you everyone.

[gsxrpilot]

@everyone and [mention=11970]gsxrpilot[/mention] Thank you for the advice. I decided not to go forward with the purchase. These were some amazing tips and I appreciate everyone help. I'll make a goal to purchase an airplane being flown 30 hrs+ a year, STEC 30, Kings, Garmin 430+, and ADSB out/in for 60k (mid engine time). Someday I will find this gem. Once I do, I'll use the knowelege and help I gain here to buy my airplane. Until then, I might just join a club that fits or just rent.
Last thing, [mention=11970]gsxrpilot[/mention] what did you mean by AMU? Also I am free Saturday if you are in the FW area hopefully we can fly sometime.
Again, thank you everyone.

AMU is Aviation Monetary Unit and is equivalent to $1000.

[SantosDumont]

On 10/4/2018 at 11:32 AM, gsxrpilot said:

For my comfort level... or to be in this game... YMMV... Airplane ownership, not for the faint of heart or light of wallet.

• 1 AMU - waking around money (hip pocket)

I tell people that if you can’t pull $100 out of your wallet right now, light it on fire, and not care... then you are not ready for airplane ownership. 

[Shadrach]

On 10/4/2018 at 9:09 AM, mooniac15u said:

I keep hearing people suggesting pulling a cylinder to inspect the cam during a PPI.  Has anyone actually encounter a seller who would allow the buyer's mechanic to remove a cylinder during a PPI?

If the engine has a history of sitting dormant for several periods in the last decade, As a buyer I would absolutely ask. If I was a seller, I would gladly allow it under the same circumstances. In either case it should be a contingency of a purchase agreement. 

[bradp]

I got the advice when I bought the plane that you might as well throw money into a hole in the ground cause that’s what aircraft ownership is like.  

[Yetti]

It's weird.  for the pre J models you are buying something that is more valuable parted out.   If you need an new engine, it will be the value of the whole plane.  If you want to go all glass, it will be the value of whole plane.   Depending maintenance per year could run 10% of the value of the plane.  You can get pretty close to a J performance for half the price. At the end of the day launching off into the sky is priceless.

Edited October 7, 2018 by Yetti

[Hank]

42 minutes ago, Yetti said:

 At the end of the day launching off into the sky is priceless.

Amen, brother!

[mooniac15u]

On 10/5/2018 at 10:23 PM, Shadrach said:

If the engine has a history of sitting dormant for several periods in the last decade, As a buyer I would absolutely ask. If I was a seller, I would gladly allow it under the same circumstances. In either case it should be a contingency of a purchase agreement. 

So you haven't actually done it as either seller or buyer.

[carusoam]

1) offer to pay the asking price... with the PPi to include engine inspection... detail everything in a written document...

2) parametric gambling with a payout of 25amu based on hidden rust at 200 hours... in two years...

i think somebody would take the other side of that bet at the cost of 25amu... and put the dough in a safe CD and wait the two years....

3) do you want to fly or gamble...?

4) if fly is your answer, find a plane with no extensive down time in its recent history...

5) if gamble is your answer, buy this plane with no ppi, and negotiate the lowest price possible...

6) Follow Ken’s purchasing experience... Buy nice planes from known owners. Fewer surprises this way...

7) any way you look at the hours in this spreadsheet... it says corrosion risk May be an issue...

8) it doesn’t say Will be an issue...

9) it doesn’t say it is run out...

10) they could be evenly distributed hours by a knowledgeable owner a half hour at a time...

11) is it horrible an owner does this to an engine...? Yes and no... Some owners are doing the best they can with what they have... health, money, time... limited resources....

12) Find a plane with better known conditions and buy it...

13) or take the risk... it requires having a plan B if the gamble doesn’t work out...

14) or sit on the side lines...

15) always compare to other planes in the market.  Select the lower risk over the higher risk..,

What other choices do you have?

Best regards,

-a-

[Shadrach]

On 10/8/2018 at 8:52 AM, mooniac15u said:

So you haven't actually done it as either seller or buyer.

I’ve never had a need to do it as a buyer or seller. I do have knowledge of it being done as a contingency of purchase of engines or aircraft that are well within time TBO but with long periods of inactivity. One situation involved a used engine that had been removed, stored and offered for sale. Another situation involved an estate aircraft that was inactive for several years before and after the owner’s passing. I’ve learned of at least one other since reading this thread, but then so have you.

It’s a simple equation. Inactivity presents additional risk. That risk is going to be mitigated one way or the other (unless the buyer is ignorant). The engine is either priced as run-out or it’s thoroughly inspected giving the buyer some extra level of comfort and the seller a higher though still discounted sales price. 

For what it’s worth, neither of the engines I mentioned above had cam corrosion at the time of inspection. 

I’ll amend my previous post to say that if I was a seller of an engine that had been inactive for years, the buyer wouldn't have to ask as I would have already initiated the inspection. 

Edited October 10, 2018 by Shadrach

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

I’ve never had need to do it as a buyer or seller. I do have knowledge of it being done as a contingency of purchase of engines or aircraft that are well within time TBO but with long periods of inactivity. One situation involved a used engine that had been removed, stored and offered for sale. Another situation involved an estate aircraft that was inactive for several years before and after the owner’s passing. I’ve learned of at least one other since reading this thread, but then so have you.

It’s a simple equation. Inactivity presents additional risk. That risk is going to be mitigated one or the other (unless the buyer is an ignorant). The engine is either priced as runout or it’s thoroughly inspected giving the buyer some extra level of comfort and the seller a higher though still discounted sales price. 

For what it’s worth, neither of the engines I mentioned above had cam corrosion at the time of inspection. 

I’ll amend my previous post to say that if I was a seller af an engine that had sat inactive for years, the buyer wouldn’t have to ask as I would have already initiated the inspection. 

I had a customer with an inactive airplane over many years.  When he finally came to the decision to sell,  I suggested that he do the internal inspection at home where he had control.  He allowed us to pull one cylinder during the annual, there was some corrosion.   The engine was removed and repaired under his terms and with him in control.  The plane then went on the market and was sold with a known good engine.

Clarence

[Shadrach]

33 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

I had a customer with an inactive airplane over many years.  When he finally came to the decision to sell,  I suggested that he do the internal inspection at home where he had control.  He allowed us to pull one cylinder during the annual, there was some corrosion.   The engine was removed and repaired under his terms and with him in control.  The plane then went on the market and was sold with a known good engine.

Clarence

This is a great example!  Aviation can be a high risk business.  That risk is what motivates my desire for as much understanding of a transaction as possible regardless of which side of that transaction my interest lies.  I'd feel lousy if I paid for a low time engine that turned out to be a core due to corrosion.  I'd also feel lousy if I sold an engine and discovered that it quickly needed a tear down (or worse case, failed and caused harm) due to something that may have been present during the transaction. I'd much rather have as much transparency as possible rather than have someone think I sold them a lemon on purpose or by accident.

Byron's case is a good example also.  He knows that his cam failure came after his prebuy inspection. Byron's pre-purchase cylinder removal protected the previous owner's reputation (at least in this regard). Without the inspection, Byron may have passed on the plane but whomever the next owner was would likely have had the same failure.  Without the inspection, most would think the plan was sold with corrosion by the previous owner with or without knowledge. Saying know to the inspection tells me the seller does not want to know and doesn't want anyone else to either it's off his hands.

[mooniac15u]

3 hours ago, M20Doc said:

I had a customer with an inactive airplane over many years.  When he finally came to the decision to sell,  I suggested that he do the internal inspection at home where he had control.  He allowed us to pull one cylinder during the annual, there was some corrosion.   The engine was removed and repaired under his terms and with him in control.  The plane then went on the market and was sold with a known good engine.

Clarence

Having it done at home by a trusted mechanic is a completely different scenario.  There are absolutely times when inspecting the engine internals is appropriate.  Letting a buyer's mechanic pull a cylinder away from home is the setup for an opening post in a MooneySpace nightmare thread.

[Shadrach]

6 minutes ago, mooniac15u said:

Having it done at home by a trusted mechanic is a completely different scenario.  There are absolutely times when inspecting the engine internals is appropriate.  Letting a buyer's mechanic pull a cylinder away from home is the setup for an opening post in a MooneySpace nightmare thread.

Who advocated that?  Finding out your aircraft is airworthy at an airport that is not your base is not something I'd risk. I would not care whose credentialed MX professional pulled the cylinder as long as I was there to see the removal and the internals. Not a scenario that works everyone and that's fine.  I am really surprised at some of the purchases people make, also some of the sales...

[mooniac15u]

4 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Who advocated that?  Finding out your aircraft is airworthy at an airport that is not your base is not something I'd risk. I would not care whose credentialed MX professional pulled the cylinder as long as I was there to see the removal and the internals. Not a scenario that works everyone and that's fine.  I am really surprised at some of the purchases people make, also some of the sales...

Did you read my original question? 

On 10/4/2018 at 9:09 AM, mooniac15u said:

I keep hearing people suggesting pulling a cylinder to inspect the cam during a PPI.  Has anyone actually encounter a seller who would allow the buyer's mechanic to remove a cylinder during a PPI?

How often is a PPI done at the seller's airport by a mechanic known to the seller?

[Shadrach]

2 minutes ago, mooniac15u said:

Did you read my original question? 

How often is a PPI done at the seller's airport by a mechanic known to the seller?

Can you not conceive as to how a buyer and seller might come to an agreement with regard to conducting an inspection of the internals locally?  If it's part of the purchase, it's the first things thats done.  Would you complete 15hr inspection with panels removed and gear swing only to wait to the end of the inspection to verify the engine is not rotting from the inside?  The reasons for pulling a jug are rare, doing one on site is not a difficult endeavor nor overly time consuming. It can be risky if not properly reinstalled.   

There are other airworthiness issues that might creep up on a pre-buy that could leave an owner in a predicament. Airframe corrosion is a real issue and is found during prebuys both on and off field.  Trading old planes can be tricky business.  Having an old airframe/engine that has been inactive for sometime presents an additional risk. That risk will typically get mitigated via inspection or price; to what degree is part of the negotiation.

[mooniac15u]

Just now, Shadrach said:

Can you not conceive as to how a buyer and seller might come to an agreement with regard to conducting an inspection of the internals locally?  If it's part of the purchase, it's the first things thats done.  Would you complete 15hr inspection with panels removed and gear swing only to wait to the end of the inspection to verify the engine is not rotting from the inside?  The reasons for pulling a jug are rare, doing one on site is not a difficult endeavor nor overly time consuming. It can be risky if not properly reinstalled.   

There are other airworthiness issues that might creep up on a pre-buy that could leave an owner in a predicament. Airframe corrosion is a real issue and is found during prebuys both on and off field.  Trading old planes can be tricky business.  Having an old airframe/engine that has been inactive for sometime presents an additional risk. That risk will typically get mitigated via inspection or price; to what degree is part of the negotiation.

I can conceive of a lot of things.  I was asking for actual experience.  Did you have an internal engine inspection done when you purchased your plane or not?

During a normal PPI there shouldn't be much disassembly beyond removing panels.  Most owners could reassemble that and fly their plane home.  A mechanic on a PPI has no legal basis for grounding an aircraft because they are not doing anything that requires them to sign off.  But they could certainly refuse to reassemble the engine and/or sign off on that work as airworthy.

People on MS assert a lot of things about what should or should not be done but actual purchases are transactions between humans.  Deals break down for much smaller reasons than this.  Most sellers I encountered would have passed on the deal and waited for another buyer if I had asked for an engine inspection.

[Shadrach]

20 hours ago, mooniac15u said:

I can conceive of a lot of things.  I was asking for actual experience.  Did you have an internal engine inspection done when you purchased your plane or not?

During a normal PPI there shouldn't be much disassembly beyond removing panels.  Most owners could reassemble that and fly their plane home.  A mechanic on a PPI has no legal basis for grounding an aircraft because they are not doing anything that requires them to sign off.  But they could certainly refuse to reassemble the engine and/or sign off on that work as airworthy.

People on MS assert a lot of things about what should or should not be done but actual purchases are transactions between humans.  Deals break down for much smaller reasons than this.  Most sellers I encountered would have passed on the deal and waited for another buyer if I had asked for an engine inspection. 

 

My personal aircraft has been in my family since 1968, when it was purchased from the dealer.  When I became a partner it was out of annual and had been sitting dormant for the better part of 36 months.  There was no utility in pulling the jug at that time, because my buy-in was already under market for even a basket case. I was happy to be involved in bringing it back to airworthy condition and I spent weeks going through the airframe.  

You've seen several examples from other members and I have listed two first hand examples. It's not like I'm the only one here who has mentioned it.  There are all kinds of buyers and sellers out there. Some transactions are easy, some are not.  I don't care that you're skeptical.  Your inquiries do not appear to be good natured attempts to learn more about how these transactions have taken place.  They appear more like an attempt to discredit my opinion because I didn't pull a cylinder when I bought into my plane.  There are many subjects in life that warrant contentious debate...this ain't one of them.

Best of luck in all future transactions!

Edited October 11, 2018 by Shadrach

[0TreeLemur]

On 10/6/2018 at 8:56 PM, Yetti said:

It's weird.  for the pre J models you are buying something that is more valuable parted out.   If you need an new engine, it will be the value of the whole plane.  If you want to go all glass, it will be the value of whole plane.   Depending maintenance per year could run 10% of the value of the plane.  You can get pretty close to a J performance for half the price. At the end of the day launching off into the sky is priceless.

Damn, @Yetti I want to have this cast on a bronze plaque and framed.  This and the above quote by @SantosDumont about flaming C-notes at will for fun.

<wipes tear from eye>

[0TreeLemur]

The other weird thing is this:  Owning an older Mooney is like playing musical chairs.   The music stops when something is found that will cost more to fix/overhaul/replace than the ship is worth parted out, unless your place some intangible value on it that somehow tips the balance.

[MinneMooney]

Does anyone know if storing an aircraft (that is not being run) year round in a heated hangar should lessen the likelihood of camshaft corrosion? I’m looking at an M20C that has been stored for 5 years. Cylinders were sprayed with a preservative oil mixture but not the camshaft. 

[carusoam]

Lessen The likelihood, yes...

Significantly enough, for that many years?

Who would have the data on that?

See if the engine was pickled?

Design/specify your PPI really well...

Best regards,

-a-

[MinneMooney]

The engine log only says that the cylinders were pickled. Upper plugs removed and the cylinders sprayed with mineral/preservative oil. 

[carusoam]

See what oil was used at the last oil change... that may be a hint. How many hours on that oil, just a few?

It sounds like somebody at least tried to prep for a long term storage...

Best regards,

-a-