From: greg@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory R. TRAVIS)
Subject: Re: (naive?) Buyer enters used plane market
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 02:57:55 GMT

In <1992Apr5.213208.28953@ncar.ucar.edu> rosinski@neit.cgd.ucar.edu (Jim Rosinski) writes:


>The time has come.  I'm tired of renting, and have decided to take the
>plunge to seriously consider outright purchase of a used 4 place,
>single engine, fixed gear airplane.

Great idea Jim!

>2) Cost.  < $30K.  Wish I could, but I cannot afford to spend more.

In this price range you will not be able to afford anything larger
than a 172 if you want decent equipment and a recent vintage.

>3) Fixed vs. retractable gear.  Forget retractables.  In addition to
>the higher initial cost, maintenance and insurance costs will likewise
>be higher.

Generally sound.

>4) Engine: Forget anything with the Continental O-300 or the Lycoming
>O-320 H2AD engine.  There's nothing "wrong" with the old Continentals
>per se.  They've just been out of production too long, (read: higher
>maintenance cost) and can have serious problems if fed too much 100LL
>avgas.  The H2AD was a lemon from day 1.  The last thing I need is an
>engine that decides to self-destruct over the Colorado mountains.  The
>Lycoming O-320 E series engine, on the other hand, has the reputation
>of being "the most bullet-proof engine around".

I'm sorry, Jim, but you are dead (excuse the term) wrong on this issue.

The Continental O-300 is a very good engine and parts availablity is not
terrible.  They just don't make the entire engine.  That's all.  With an
autogas STC you'll have no problem with lead fouling and you'll save a bundle
in fuel costs.

The -H2AD had three MAJOR problems in the late seventies:  Oil pump gears,
Magneto gears, and camshaft spalling.  The first two problems were taken
care of via an AD over a decade ago and the -H2AD has not had any problems
of that nature since.

As to the third problem, camshaft spalling, this can be brought up to
"Lycoming" specs via the T-Mod.  Lycoming specs means your camshaft will
eat itself and your tappets eventually, no matter what.  If you have an
-H2AD engine with the T-mod, run Aeroshell Oil, and use the Lycoming
additive you can expect longer valvetrain life than your neighbor with
a "stock" O-320 and Philips oil.  If you have the T-mod and do nothing else,
you can expect your engine to have about the same cam service history as any
other Lycoming engine.

The -H2AD's problems were, and are, seriously overhyped.  Remember, this
is a "new" engine; designed in the middle '70s.

I suggest you review your NTSB reports for instances of catastrophic
failure and/or sudden stoppage in -H2AD engines.  I suspect you'll be
relieved to find that it's not a factor with the -H2AD.  Camshaft spalling
is usually a gradual problem detected via oil filter analysis.,

>5) VFR vs. IFR.  I wouldn't rule out a minimally IFR-capable aircraft,
>but sure hate the idea of spending extra money on something I'm not
>going to use.  If I want to go for an instrument rating some time in
>the future, I can always buy the latest, greatest radios then.

It's always cheaper to buy IFR capability than to add it later.

>6) Airframe condition.  High time doesn't bother me so much.
>Corrosion does.  Is it reasonable to restrict consideration to only
>those aircraft with *zero* corrosion?

There are no aircraft with zero corrosion.  You want to make sure
that none of the spars have intergranular corrosion and
that filoform corrosion is not out of control.



You might want to consider a run-out 77-81 C-172.  You can then convince
the owner that their engine is crap and buy it at a serious discount; add
a 180HP engine ($20K) and you'll have a VERY nice aircraft.

greg
-- 
Gregory Reed Travis					D P S I
	
Data Parallel Systems Incorporated	greg@cica.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation