Preferred Oil Analysis Lab

[RoundTwo]

10 hours ago, T. Peterson said:

If I had begun building a relationship with one company and they gave me no reason to be dissatisfied I would not leave them to save 5 dollars.

The difference is $20, not $5. AvPro is $15 each, $30 for two. Blackstone is $35 each.

[DXB]

13 hours ago, GeeBee said:

Every year I have a blood test and every time, everything is normal. Think I will stop doing it and save some money. 

A very pertinent analogy - much of my seething disdain for routine use of oil analysis in our planes derives from professional knowledge of the history of screening tests for cancer - most of which have done more harm than good by triggering risk-laden invasive testing and sometimes major cancer surgeries on tumors that posed little or no risk. When you do a randomized prospective trial trying to prove benefit of any screening tool in medicine, the answer is usually the same - no net benefit, sometimes harm. The analogy of routine oil analysis in our planes was striking to me when I first started sending it 9 years ago as a new owner and trying to interpret the results in any useful way on top of all the other monitoring I remain diligent about. If one did a prospective trial with oil analysis, I bet the answer would be identical - the odds are heavily stacked against it helping us.

BTW, truly useful cancer screening tests can presently be counted on one hand after tons of effort, so the bar for a new one is appropriately high. We all remember the way PSA testing results were applied in the 90's and 00's - it led to impotence and incontinence in a lot of guys from prostatectomies for tumors that would have never caused them a real problem.  Those guys wish they never had the test (which is now used in a more nuanced way but still has issues). 

[exM20K]

11 hours ago, MikeOH said:

So, when you sell, what are you going to say to a buyer when they ask if you have been doing oil analyses?

1) Lie and say, "NO"

2) Say, "Yes, but you can't see the history"

It’s regrettable that you are so personally triggered by my comment about privacy that you question my honesty.  Perhaps you’re projecting, but what do I know?

I have bought and sold somewhere between 100-150 airplanes since 2008, so I’m pretty sure I know what I’m doing. If someone would pass on an airplane because of no oil analysis history or because of a long ago comment or reading (none of which are normalized, btw), then they are unserious, and that is fine. I will sell to someone else.

Your reading comprehension skills are poor.  What I share with a potential buyer, other than what is legally required, is at my discretion…as it should be, and as it is in most commercial interactions. “At my discretion” doesn’t mean “No,” and it doesn’t mean “Yes.”

I never attacked, insulted, or impugned the integrity of someone who saw value in oil analysis and felt compelled to share the data with a buyer.  I don’t see the value and question the reflex to share.  You do you; I’ll do me.

-dan

[MikeOH]

2 minutes ago, exM20K said:

It’s regrettable that you are so personally triggered by my comment about privacy that you question my honesty.  Perhaps you’re projecting, but what do I know?

I have bought and sold somewhere between 100-150 airplanes since 2008, so I’m pretty sure I know what I’m doing. If someone would pass on an airplane because of no oil analysis history or because of a long ago comment or reading (none of which are normalized, btw), then they are unserious, and that is fine. I will sell to someone else.

Your reading comprehension skills are poor.  What I share with a potential buyer, other than what is legally required, is at my discretion…as it should be, and as it is in most commercial interactions. “At my discretion” doesn’t mean “No,” and it doesn’t mean “Yes.”

I never attacked, insulted, or impugned the integrity of someone who saw value in oil analysis and felt compelled to share the data with a buyer.  I don’t see the value and question the reflex to share.  You do you; I’ll do me.

-dan

YOWZER!!

First off, my apologies that you took my comment as a personal attack on your integrity.

I was merely bringing up the rather logical consequence of missing data if a buyer was to ask; certainly what you want to share is your business.

My pointing out that a buyer might find value in that data even if you do not shouldn’t be surprising. Nor should his possible negative reaction; his interpretations of said data does not make him an unserious buyer as you claim. Just one that isn’t interested in your airplane.

Personally, I don’t perform oil analyses but recognize that may turn off some future buyers. That doesn’t mean they are not serious.

As you say, you do you. But no offense was meant.

[T. Peterson]

3 hours ago, RoundTwo said:

The difference is $20, not $5. AvPro is $15 each, $30 for two. Blackstone is $35 each.

I’m sorry, I misunderstood.

[RoundTwo]

2 minutes ago, T. Peterson said:

I’m sorry, I misunderstood.

So, would you switch to save $20 per oil change?

[T. Peterson]

On 4/4/2023 at 6:12 AM, Shadrach said:

I am a heretic as well. After over a decade of analysis, it sort of became an exercise in maintenance navel gazing. The results were typically consistent with any anomalies being minor.  As much as the idea of becoming an amateur tribologist appeals to me, I came to the conclusion that most any issue warranting a maintenance intervention would likely be obvious upstream of oil analysis.

I appreciate your heresy though I will remain orthodox! 
When I bought my Mooney a year ago I just thought oil analysis was a normal part of airplane ownership. I thought everyone did it and never dreamed it could be controversial, but neither did I know Mooneyspace very well either.

Now having read the insightful comments of many of you, I will remain orthodox. However, the heretics have also provided very meaningful inputs:

1) Their warning against becoming over dependent on oil analysis is well taken. No substitute for opening the oil filter.

2) Don’t go chasing numbers and over reacting to any given analysis. I almost had to laugh as I read that one because it described me to a “T”. I got what I thought was a damning analysis and immediately sent it to Don Maxwell worried if I should even fly the plane. He put my mind to rest with a very good explanation suggesting we just take a look at the next analysis before jumping to conclusions. Whew!

So while I will continue in orthodoxy I have the utmost respect and confidence in my heretical brethren!

 

[T. Peterson]

37 minutes ago, RoundTwo said:

So, would you switch to save $20 per oil change?

I am quite pleased with Blackstone so I will stay with them. But I find absolutely no fault with you or anyone else who would choose otherwise.

[Pinecone]

On 4/4/2023 at 12:19 PM, M20Doc said:

According to Continental tech support, to be meaningful the oil sample period should be as close to the same hours in service every time.

Blackstone takes that into account.

If you go longer (miles on a car) and numbers of up, they do some normalizing

[MikeOH]

5 hours ago, DXB said:

A very pertinent analogy - much of my seething disdain for routine use of oil analysis in our planes derives from professional knowledge of the history of screening tests for cancer - most of which have done more harm than good by triggering risk-laden invasive testing and sometimes major cancer surgeries on tumors that posed little or no risk. When you do a randomized prospective trial trying to prove benefit of any screening tool in medicine, the answer is usually the same - no net benefit, sometimes harm. The analogy of routine oil analysis in our planes was striking to me when I first started sending it 9 years ago as a new owner and trying to interpret the results in any useful way on top of all the other monitoring I remain diligent about. If one did a prospective trial with oil analysis, I bet the answer would be identical - the odds are heavily stacked against it helping us.

BTW, truly useful cancer screening tests can presently be counted on one hand after tons of effort, so the bar for a new one is appropriately high. We all remember the way PSA testing results were applied in the 90's and 00's - it led to impotence and incontinence in a lot of guys from prostatectomies for tumors that would have never caused them a real problem.  Those guys wish they never had the test (which is now used in a more nuanced way but still has issues). 

That is a great post.

That reasoning is precisely why I do not perform oil analysis.

[EricJ]

2 hours ago, T. Peterson said:

2) Don’t go chasing numbers and over reacting to any given analysis. I almost had to laugh as I read that one because it described me to a “T”. I got what I thought was a damning analysis and immediately sent it to Don Maxwell worried if I should even fly the plane. He put my mind to rest with a very good explanation suggesting we just take a look at the next analysis before jumping to conclusions. Whew!

Even when cutting open a filter and examining it with a magnet, even if there's a LOT of metal there, the instructions from Lycoming are to keep flying it and monitor it.    My oil analysis showed increasing metals, then my filter started getting a lot of metal.  A LOT.  So I asked the local Lycoming rep and I asked the local engine shop that had done the tear-down and IRAN on my engine just before I bought it.   Both said the same as the Lycoming instructions:  keep an eye on it and keep flying it.

So, yeah, every tool has to be used appropriately.   Oil analysis is useful, but it's not going to jump up and tell you exactly when to change a cylinder or an engine, it's just a tool to help you understand what's going on, especially in the context of other data inputs you can glean.   Not everybody is going to find it useful.

 

2 hours ago, T. Peterson said:

So while I will continue in orthodoxy I have the utmost respect and confidence in my heretical brethren!

If somebody is not getting utility out of a tool, they should either learn how to use it effectively or stop using it.  That doesn't mean others aren't going to get good use out of that tool.  Not everybody uses the same tools to get the same jobs done.

I've gotten good use out of oil analysis, but understanding its utility and limitations is important.   I'll continue to pay Blackstone for their input because it has helped in the past and I continue to find it useful.   I don't lean on it heavily for anything, it's just another source of information and tool in the toolbox.

The guy that finally properly diagnosed and changed out my fuel servo early in my aircraft ownership eschewed most computerized technology, used paper invoices/bills/etc., and said engine monitors were bad; "You're better off not knowing."    I don't agree with him on that topic, but he's one of the better mechanics I've run across and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend him to others.

[GeeBee]

10 hours ago, DXB said:

A very pertinent analogy - much of my seething disdain for routine use of oil analysis in our planes derives from professional knowledge of the history of screening tests for cancer - most of which have done more harm than good by triggering risk-laden invasive testing and sometimes major cancer surgeries on tumors that posed little or no risk. When you do a randomized prospective trial trying to prove benefit of any screening tool in medicine, the answer is usually the same - no net benefit, sometimes harm. The analogy of routine oil analysis in our planes was striking to me when I first started sending it 9 years ago as a new owner and trying to interpret the results in any useful way on top of all the other monitoring I remain diligent about. If one did a prospective trial with oil analysis, I bet the answer would be identical - the odds are heavily stacked against it helping us.

BTW, truly useful cancer screening tests can presently be counted on one hand after tons of effort, so the bar for a new one is appropriately high. We all remember the way PSA testing results were applied in the 90's and 00's - it led to impotence and incontinence in a lot of guys from prostatectomies for tumors that would have never caused them a real problem.  Those guys wish they never had the test (which is now used in a more nuanced way but still has issues). 

Nuance way. That is why you are there. Otherwise we could just do blood tests, have robot pop the tumor and it's over. Same with oil analysis. Mine is the same every time, but like my blood test, a change represents something good, or something bad. Just as in CRM we multi-source so too should we with our engine. Oil Analysis is not the be all, nor is engine trend data, nor is borescope. Taken all together however we get a "nuanced picture". When it come to my engine or my health I want all the data and sources I can get because that is effective resource management.

Basically what I am saying is you're trying to analyze the value of something on its own. Few diagnostic tools have value solely on their own and to talk about the value of something isolated from all the other tools is IMHO not good resource management.

 

[Shadrach]

On 4/4/2023 at 1:25 PM, Greg Ellis said:

Sorry...I read my responses and they were vague and probably could have been worded better.  I did not want to high jack the original poster's thread.  But this is the story....

I had an engine failure in New Mexico a few years ago.  I was able to land at Clovis fortunately.  They pulled the oil filter and it was chock full of metal.  I will never forget the image of how much metal there was in the oil visible to the naked eye.  Prior to this flight I had changed my oil and it looked fine visibly, and I did an oil sample and sent it to Blackstone.  It did not come back prior to the flight but if it had I never would have taken the flight.  Where copper is normally 4, 5, 6 or so, mine showed 400!!!!  The engine ran fine up until the point in the flight where the oil temp began to rise and the oil pressure began to fall dramatically.  The plane had a cylinder overhauled and I speculate although I cannot prove it, that the cylinder was not torqued on properly and the engine ate one or more bearings.  Blackstone Labs told me that is where the copper comes from in an engine.  But if I had waited for the analysis to come back, the outcome to the engine would not have been different but I would not have risked my life and my wife's life unknowingly.

Story number 2.  I flew up to Kansas City from Texas.  I had done an oil analysis prior to the flight.  One drawback to Blackstone is that they seem to take a long time to get you your results.  I was sitting in a restaurant in Kansas City and got a call from Blackstone which is never good when they call you.  They advised me not to fly the airplane.  I had a shop on the field take off the oil filter and it was a mess.  This was on the engine that replaced the one in the previous story.  It had about 450 hours on it and was flying great.  No issues with temps or pressures or anything else.  This took me totally by surprise.  So we contacted the shop (a very well-known engine builder) that sold me this engine and they asked to have it back to be torn down and inspected.  So, while my wife and I drove home, the shop in Kansas removed my engine and sent it back to the engine shop.  I got a call from the engine shop with a laundry list of problems with the engine.  They were laying the blame at my feet for a 450 hour engine going south.  I contacted multiple A&P's for advice.  They told me that this was not my problem and were almost unanimous in what the issue was that could cause the lengthy list of problems.  So, back and forth with the engine shop I go until I get to the owner of the shop.  He and I had a pleasant conversation over the phone and he basically told me I was on the hook for $14,000 and the cost was rising as they got further into it.  I explained to him in detail how I fly the airplane and that this should not have happened.  Well, I would say long story short but it has already dragged on long enough.  I get a call a few weeks later saying they will cover all of the bill and I just have to pay for shipping.  The point of this lengthy story is that if it wasn't for that analysis from Blackstone Labs, I would have flown a sick airplane from Kansas back to Fort Worth and who knows what might have happened during that flight home.  Like I said, the engine was running great with absolutely no issues that I could discern if it wasn't for the analysis.

So, the oil analysis on both of these episodes either could have saved me a lot of trouble or did save me a lot of potential trouble.  I will reiterate that the airplane was flying great on both episodes with no indication of a problem or concern leading up to the moment I had the issues.  All temperatures and pressures were fine up until the moment of failure in the first episode and there was no indication of an issue at all leading up to the issues in the second episode.

 

 

Hopefully you have some maintenance karma in the bank for a while. I have 56 years of written maintenance history in addition to the tribal stories that still come up at family gatherings. We’ve had one serious failure in 56 years and 3500hrs of flying. A snapped exhaust valve, which caused an unscheduled deadstick landing into an unknown airport. Perhaps I am due for an issue but between my engine monitor and thorough engine inspection at annual, I’m comfortable.

[Will.iam]

On 4/5/2023 at 11:11 AM, T. Peterson said:

I am quite pleased with Blackstone so I will stay with them. But I find absolutely no fault with you or anyone else who would choose otherwise.

Also good to have a base line to compare to later reports as it’s not the quantities as much as the change in quantities that matter more. 

[PT20J]

Just get one of these for the glare shield -- better that oil analysis, Camguard, and borescope combined.

[wombat]

If buying a plane with a high-time or even mid-time engine I need the oil analysis reports if they are having oil analysis done.

I understand @exM20K's unhappiness at what appears to be a company I do business with (Blackstone) sharing customer data with other customers without asking for permission.  If Blackstone has this on their web page as part of the terms of service...Well, bad on me for not reading it thoroughly enough.  If they don't have it there, bad on them.   And if I were to suffer any loss due to their policy that was not published, I would probably seek compensation.   A loss due to selling a plane with an engine where I had an oil report that said something like.. Oh, I don't know... "...a jump like this probably shows trouble...(lots of other text omitted talking about how bad things are) Caution!"  that they then sent to someone else without asking for permission first, and then I lost the sale....    Anyway, it doesn't really bother me too much because I will always be forthright about the condition of anything I sell.  If they have a checkbox for "Share your data with others?" I would check it.  But I think @exM20K is being reasonable if he says he is bothered by this enough to find a different vendor and wants to tell all of us about his decision.  That's a fine way to behave.  Not my way, but my way isn't for everybody.

Don't want to focus on the relatively rare negative situations here, but...if the seller has oil analysis data and fails to provide it I will assume they are hiding something bad and will not buy that plane. If they provide it only after asking I'll kind of roll my eyes because they should have provided that earlier with the logbooks.

If they lie about it and I find out about it before I've spent any money, I will not buy that plane.   That seller is dishonest and I'll never do business with them.  You shouldn't either.

If I find out about it after I have spent some money but before I have bought the plane I will require all of my money back including such things as travel expenses and prebuy costs.  If they refuse, I strongly suspect that the court system would back me up on this and compel them to pay based on their fraudulent statements about what information they have about the condition of the aircraft.

If they lie about it and I find out about it after I have purchased the aircraft, I would ask them to provide the reports (or more accurately, ask them to tell the oil analysis company to provide the reports, since that individual has proven themselves to be dishonest) and if they fail to do so, I would probably ask the courts to compel them to based on the assumption that refusing to do so is highly likely because they have committed fraud in failing to disclose this information. This would most likely come up only if an engine problem was discovered relatively shortly after the purchase that would probably have shown up in oil analysis... Such as, for example, extremely high chrome that went from in the 30's to 60's all the way up to 360 over 50 hours of flying... Totally random example.   

 

The same goes for engine monitor data.  If you have it, provide it.  If you fail to do so, I will assume you are hiding something.

Regardless, I'll be sharing my experience with that seller, good or bad.

 

There are records that the seller is required to transfer to the buyer when the aircraft is sold. According to 91.417.(b)(2)) , 91.417(a)(2) records must be transferred  No other records must be transferred, but if a seller didn't want to give me ALL the old maintenance records (even unofficial maintenance records like shop invoices) I would probably walk away or only offer to buy at an extremely steep discount.

 

Saying this as someone in the middle of two separate issues that are related to this:

• I'm in the middle of buying a plane and have been making decisions on when I might want to walk away instead of continuing.
• The oil analysis on my brand C aircraft is showing super-high chrome in the last 50 hours of flying.  High enough that Blackstone called me.  This is after 400 hours of flying this engine and getting oil analysis done the whole time at roughly 30 hour intervals.

[Pinecone]

I know Blackstone will transfer an N-number with the past results to a new owner. 

Does anyone know of them releasing info to someone else?

[RoundTwo]

15 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

I know Blackstone will transfer an N-number with the past results to a new owner. 

Does anyone know of them releasing info to someone else?

When I over-nighted a sample during my pre-buy, I got results from my sample and a recent previous sample. I did not ask for historical data, they just sent what they had.

[Pinecone]

I see, that is not a good thing.

[carusoam]

17 hours ago, wombat said:

If buying a plane with a high-time or even mid-time engine I need the oil analysis reports if they are having oil analysis done.

I understand @exM20K's unhappiness at what appears to be a company I do business with (Blackstone) sharing customer data with other customers without asking for permission.  If Blackstone has this on their web page as part of the terms of service...Well, bad on me for not reading it thoroughly enough.  If they don't have it there, bad on them.   And if I were to suffer any loss due to their policy that was not published, I would probably seek compensation.   A loss due to selling a plane with an engine where I had an oil report that said something like.. Oh, I don't know... "...a jump like this probably shows trouble...(lots of other text omitted talking about how bad things are) Caution!"  that they then sent to someone else without asking for permission first, and then I lost the sale....    Anyway, it doesn't really bother me too much because I will always be forthright about the condition of anything I sell.  If they have a checkbox for "Share your data with others?" I would check it.  But I think @exM20K is being reasonable if he says he is bothered by this enough to find a different vendor and wants to tell all of us about his decision.  That's a fine way to behave.  Not my way, but my way isn't for everybody.

Don't want to focus on the relatively rare negative situations here, but...if the seller has oil analysis data and fails to provide it I will assume they are hiding something bad and will not buy that plane. If they provide it only after asking I'll kind of roll my eyes because they should have provided that earlier with the logbooks.

If they lie about it and I find out about it before I've spent any money, I will not buy that plane.   That seller is dishonest and I'll never do business with them.  You shouldn't either.

If I find out about it after I have spent some money but before I have bought the plane I will require all of my money back including such things as travel expenses and prebuy costs.  If they refuse, I strongly suspect that the court system would back me up on this and compel them to pay based on their fraudulent statements about what information they have about the condition of the aircraft.

If they lie about it and I find out about it after I have purchased the aircraft, I would ask them to provide the reports (or more accurately, ask them to tell the oil analysis company to provide the reports, since that individual has proven themselves to be dishonest) and if they fail to do so, I would probably ask the courts to compel them to based on the assumption that refusing to do so is highly likely because they have committed fraud in failing to disclose this information. This would most likely come up only if an engine problem was discovered relatively shortly after the purchase that would probably have shown up in oil analysis... Such as, for example, extremely high chrome that went from in the 30's to 60's all the way up to 360 over 50 hours of flying... Totally random example.   

 

The same goes for engine monitor data.  If you have it, provide it.  If you fail to do so, I will assume you are hiding something.

Regardless, I'll be sharing my experience with that seller, good or bad.

 

There are records that the seller is required to transfer to the buyer when the aircraft is sold. According to 91.417.(b)(2)) , 91.417(a)(2) records must be transferred  No other records must be transferred, but if a seller didn't want to give me ALL the old maintenance records (even unofficial maintenance records like shop invoices) I would probably walk away or only offer to buy at an extremely steep discount.

 

Saying this as someone in the middle of two separate issues that are related to this:

• I'm in the middle of buying a plane and have been making decisions on when I might want to walk away instead of continuing.
• The oil analysis on my brand C aircraft is showing super-high chrome in the last 50 hours of flying.  High enough that Blackstone called me.  This is after 400 hours of flying this engine and getting oil analysis done the whole time at roughly 30 hour intervals.

You may be looking for a special owner with a special plane…

Depending on the economy… the number of planes is somewhat limited…

I sense you are willing to pay extra for a plane that has all of what you need…

So much for discounting everything properly…

Best regards,

-a-

[wombat]

Hmm.   I think I didn't communicate clearly and I think I gave you the wrong idea.   I don't think I'm looking for a particularly special plane or requiring anything out of the ordinary from the seller.  It really comes down to the idea that if the seller has any information about the condition of the aircraft, I as the buyer want that information.   I expect the seller to be truthfully representing the aircraft and to be willing to prove it as long as the proof is not too hard to provide.  How willing would you be to buy an aircraft if the seller said "Yes, I have the entire logbook history but you can't have it." ?

There is no reasonable reason they would refuse to provide it unless there is something there that show that the aircraft is not worth as much as they are asking for it.  I consider oil analysis and engine monitor data the same way.  I'm going to be putting my life on the line with this thing, and I want to pay a reasonable price for the aircraft when I have complete knowledge of its condition.

[RoundTwo]

16 minutes ago, wombat said:

Hmm.   I think I didn't communicate clearly and I think I gave you the wrong idea.   I don't think I'm looking for a particularly special plane or requiring anything out of the ordinary from the seller.  It really comes down to the idea that if the seller has any information about the condition of the aircraft, I as the buyer want that information.   I expect the seller to be truthfully representing the aircraft and to be willing to prove it as long as the proof is not too hard to provide.  How willing would you be to buy an aircraft if the seller said "Yes, I have the entire logbook history but you can't have it." ?

There is no reasonable reason they would refuse to provide it unless there is something there that show that the aircraft is not worth as much as they are asking for it.  I consider oil analysis and engine monitor data the same way.  I'm going to be putting my life on the line with this thing, and I want to pay a reasonable price for the aircraft when I have complete knowledge of its condition.

In short, the owner isn’t obligated to say anything about the condition. It is up to the buyer to determine if the plane meets their criteria. There’s no difference between a seller that doesn’t know and a seller that doesn’t tell. There is no disclosure statement required like is usual with a home purchase. It’s a different story if a seller makes a concerted effort to hide something or prevent a buyer from finding out about something, but there is nothing that says a seller must divulge anything. It’s up to the buyer to form their purchase decision based on what information they have access to. 

[carusoam]

Wombat,

It is very challenging to understand everybody… until you get to know everyone…

 

when buying a plane… some things are normal to expect.  
 

Airframe, engine, and prop logs, by law, go with the plane…

Logs, by law, have to be maintained…

Flight logs, engine monitor data, and oil analysis are up to the user…

If he decides not to keep them, or share them… no big deal.

 

As a buyer… I would like to see these things if able…

I also remember going to see an M20J once… the seller asked if I wanted to go for a ride…

I really didn’t want to know how he was flying his plane… I was just interested in a safe outcome… 

I wasn’t a serious buyer at the time yet… but I was in the same place with a nice M20J that was for sale, while getting started at looking… and he really handled the plane well…

Go ahead and ask for everything…

expect that things will get challenging when the nicest plane is missing a certain detail…

 

If engine monitor and flight data have a dollar value associated with them… they will get listed under avionics… in the for sale ad…

You are buying the plane, not the the seller…. If you accidentally annoy him… he doesn’t have to sell to you…. 

Some of the best planes are forever-planes… the person that sells them probably won’t be the PIC that knows where all that data went…

Buying pre-owned machinery is a blast… no two machines or sellers are alike…

Best regards,

-a-

[wombat]

@carusoam You say that the airframe, engine, and prop logs go with the plane by law. but that's not what the regs I found say.  That's what I was trying to say when I was bringing up 91.417.   It is very specific about what is required, and what is specifies is way less than "the logs".  Pasting the content below, or read it at the government's website here: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-91/subpart-E/section-91.417

It requires transfer to the new owner records containing the following information:

(i) The total time in service of the airframe, each engine, each propeller, and each rotor.

(ii) The current status of life-limited parts of each airframe, engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance.

(iii) The time since last overhaul of all items installed on the aircraft which are required to be overhauled on a specified time basis.

(iv) The current inspection status of the aircraft, including the time since the last inspection required by the inspection program under which the aircraft and its appliances are maintained.

(v) The current status of applicable airworthiness directives (AD) and safety directives including, for each, the method of compliance, the AD or safety directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety directive involves recurring action, the time and date when the next action is required.

(vi) Copies of the forms prescribed by § 43.9(d) of this chapter for each major alteration to the airframe and currently installed engines, rotors, propellers, and appliances.

Nowhere does it say you have to transfer anything else.  So for a Mooney that has no time limited or required overhaul parts (I can't think of any I would expect on a light GA airplane other than ELT battery)  I could hand over a napkin that says "Mooney N12345:  Airframe TTIS: 3123 Engine TTIS: 3123 Propeller TTIS: 3123, Annual inspection completed 1/2/2023, Transponder check completed 1/2/2023, Pitot/Static completed 1/2/2023, ELT battery installed 1/2/2023" then a copy of STC's and 337's, and an AD compliance report.   The buyer would be (understandably) upset with that, but it complies with the law.

@RoundTwoCorrect, there is no legal obligation for the owner to say anything about the condition.  But there are enough sellers out there that I can afford to pass on one like that.  And to me, there is a difference between an owner that doesn't know and an owner that knows but doesn't tell.  One is slightly ignorant, and the other is hiding something.  Would you want to buy a plane where you know there is something about the plane the owner is hiding from you?  I wouldn't.

 

In the case of the plane that I'm in the process of trying to buy, I told the seller that I wanted to go fly in the plane.  I wrote it into the offer letter.  If they didn't let me go fly in the plane, I would not be buying it.

   

Edited April 9, 2023 by wombat

[carusoam]

True true…

More of old tradition…

Where having complete logs is beneficial to everyone’s interest…

But very little is actually required if you buy a plane sans logs from a government auction… 

Missing logs… is a huge pain when an AD comes out… and your plane has no records to look up the gear in the center of your engine…

To comply would require opening things up to look at part numbers…

Of course build records are stored with the engine builder, if they are still around… and there are cases where you would still want to go inside to look…

Sooo… expect logs for…

- airframe

- engine

- prop

Missing logs often come with a hit to their value…

Also expect… some Mooneys haven’t received their first recording engine monitor yet… 

My M20C never got one… that was only 10 years ago…

The coolest engine monitors are the EIS from Big G… probably calculates out G forces in steep turns… and tons of other flight related data…

 

PP thoughts only, not an aircraft sales guy…

Best regards,

-a-