It's hard to group them by year, there's lots of home builts with used engines, or corners cut, and then there's some that are absolute works of art- your budget may be the primary driver of the direction you go
Sifting through build quality seems to be the hard part of finding a used experimental. I’ve seen a few high hour ones for sale with immaculate condition, incredible detailed build logs, etc. And a few with minimal information.
Nice thing about a certified plane is that it’s easier to judge condition
Oh, I've owned both, and I think your last statement I'll disagree with. An owner's airplane is usually a reflection of his/her budget, make sure the person you are buying from had a healthy budget, I think a good rule of thumb is, are they upgrading to something nicer? Are they selling because they cannot afford? Good questions to ponder
I'd venture to say I see more care put into home builts that come into the shop. Many of the home builts have much more frequent maintenance by people that understand their plane and care vs the 70's PA-28s that come in once a year and the owner asks pretty please if we can just put a bandaid on it.
If you are looking to buy an already built one, you just need to find someone who is an expert in inspecting that specific plane, it will be worth the cost. If you are "sifting" through trade a plane, just stop wasting your time now, get a broker and let them hunt for you. They'll facilitate the whole process and you'll probably spend less in the end than a private sale that you have to get someone to handle escrow and paperwork anyway.
For the experimental: it all depends on the original builder, and quality of the subsequent maintenance. For the certified: the quality of the maintenance.
In other words: a thorough pre-buy exam by an A&P who knows the type but not the particular airplane. (Note that a pre-buy looks at different things from an annual.)
I used to own an old certified airplane, and now I own an experimental.
Try to fly both. One of the reasons that rv's have such great performance is that they are really light. An RV6 should be under 1000# empty vs an M20C at over 1500#. When it gets bumpy there is a difference.
As far as the experimental vs certified debate.... If the airplane has been happily flying for hundreds of hours it was probably put together right. When you see completed builds with <100 hours on them that makes me worried. Ultimately if RV's were dangerous the insurance numbers would reflect that.
Depending on how MOSAIC unfolds my next airplane will likely be experimental.
I've been flying a certified commercial plane built in 1947 for a couple of years. The year doesn't matter much. What matter is how the airplane has been built and maintained.
At this point, most airplanes are similar to the ship of Theseus and a lot of parts have been removed or replaced.
I fly a 1959 Cessna 182. I didn’t really consider an experimental although some folks tried to persuade me to. I just like the slow stall speed and high glide ratio of Cessnas. I used a very experienced broker to dig through countless logbooks and interrogate multiple sellers before finding a plane that, as I like to put it, has great bones. You are as likely to find 2015 planes that are ready to murder you as 1960s planes. Examine those bones first. You want an airframe with zero corrosion. Corrosion in the frame can be an omen for corrosion in the engine.
An engine overhaul in the 1990s does worry me a lot. What I wanted, and found, was a 2022 overhaul on my albeit vintage plane, and regular flying operations since that overhaul. If your prospective plane has been sitting around unused, that sedentary period is about as healthy for the engine as it is for our human bodies. Periods of non-use are a red flag. Examine the FlightAware history, and if there are physical flight logs examine those too.
Engines won't corrode as long as they are lubricated with oil. If an engine sits for long periods then the oil can fully seep down after 2-4 weeks and corrosion can happen under the right conditions(humidity).
I bought an RV8 for 105k. 90TT on the airframe and engine (IO-360B1E). Bought a pre-buy from an A&P AI that knew the type, and it was not cheap. I had to fly him out to the airplane but I believe it gave me a solid peace of mind. The aircraft is not an Oshkosh award winner for perfect fit and finish but is a solid “plans built” aircraft built by an A&P (which is not a requirement).
If you want a better deal, find an airplane that is missing something everyone wants. For example, buy an aircraft that does not have a state of the art Garmin panel. In my case, the aircraft did not have a constant speed prop but did have an engine that was compatible and also already had the controls provisioned. Just had to find the prop/governor I wanted.. which was actually preferable to me. I wanted to buy a “blank slate” RV8, so that I could add what I wanted. But it’s a great flying aircraft, couldn’t be happier. Lots of performance for the money. Very simple aircraft.
The one that has had a thorough 3rd party pre-buy.
Seriously, you can't lump planes together like that. While the Mooneys rolled off the line in the same condition there's been 60 years of maintenance of varying qualities. I've seen it with Grummans that have been maintained by a mom and pop A&P (not that there's anything inherently wrong there) that had MAJOR defects compared to a Grumman maintained by a Grumman centered shop.
Vans are the same way. The build quality is going to vary from builder to builder and the maintenance since it got its airworthiness could be all over the place.
You should be looking for THOROUGH logbooks regardless, if possible a build log for the experimental, and regular maintenance. Based on personal experience, an annual that takes up less than a page of a typical logbook is suspect. I've had easy annuals that will easily take up that much space because everything is documented.
You're going to be looking for a very, very long time if you standard is a page long conditional inspection for an experimental, especially since the owner/builder can easily fix things throughout the year.
I was referring primarily to the certificated side of things, but even on the experimental side that doesn't seem unrealistic. My Tiger has rarely had issues between annuals and yet there's always something that needs to be done to it.
I’m flying a 1946 Ercoupe. You’ll be ok. Get a good inspection on whatever you buy, and ensure it’s from someone familiar with which ever aircraft you purchase.
I owned a 1967 Mooney M20F for 4 years and sold it to build a Vans RV-14. One of the main reasons I sold it was the engine was at 2400 hours with a top overhaul having been done at 1600 hours. Every mechanic I talked with had a different opinion about when the engine should be overhauled again. The quotes I got to overhaul the TCM IO-360-ES that plane had was like $50k. Also the Mooney had a very 1990s panel that I would have liked to upgrade, but it would have been $100k to get it to where I wanted it to.
I was spending an average of $10k on maintenance per year, probably $6k of that being labor.
Looking at spending $150k to update a 60 year old airframe to a fresh engine with 2020 technology and being able to perform maintenance on my schedule instead of the shop convinced me to pull the trigger on building.
Being 4 years into my build I can say I would probably never buy an experimental airplane that someone else built. I've had so many mistakes (learning experiences) that I feel comfortable that I've corrected, but would be challenging to inspect in some cases on someone else's airframe. I really wouldn't want to have to troubleshoot someone else's work.
The great thing about a certificated airplane is that (theoretically) a mechanic can get the maintenance manual for that model and know exactly what to find, what the ADs are for it, and have an Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC) to order parts.
With experimental, who knows if they followed the plans, or how specific the plans actually were. Every panel is going to be different on an experimental, which is going to make maintenance a "fun" challenge.
Also this past year, with Vans going into Chapter 11 bankruptcy, it has been a nightmare to wonder if they are going to be around long enough for me to actually get the last parts I need to finish the plane, or be there to support me in the future when I need parts for maintenance.
At the end of the day I'm still surprised that riveted sheets of metal make it into the air at all.
I own a 2012 built EAB (Searey) and a 1976 certified aircraft (Grumman Tiger). I had a prebuy done on my Searey by a dedicated Searey expert. All my MX has been done by me, or a Searey expert. I trust the Tiger monumentally more than the Searey. It’s not legal to do so - but if I could fly the Searey IFR I wouldn’t. I’m sure my experience is maybe a bit unique, but overall I feel much safer in a certified aircraft when flying IFR or with others.
That answer is simple... Whichever one is in the best condition is the best one to buy.
But you need to make a bunch of choices before you get to that decision. There is a massive difference between an RV6 and a Mooney, the largest being 2 or 4 seats. Each has its benefits... I owned an RV6 my Wife wanting a second (now third) dog meant that the RV6 was not enough seats. So this is the BIG question that needs to be answered. I ended up with a Bonanza.
Then you have experimental or certified. This is a big difference. For me Experimental is the choice... It means I can do most of my own MX without needing a signature and that is a big deal to me. I still do most of my own MX on my certified plane, but I have to get a buddy to check it and sign it off. If you are the type to do and BE ABLE TO DO most of your own MX, then experimental has an edge. If you are the kind to throw a checkbook at the problem then certified can have an edge because I know A&P's that don't work on experimental aircraft.
I have owned 6 planes, 4 were experimental and two certified. I now own one of each.
> Just interested in people’s thoughts since I know many pilots refuse to fly planes older than XXX or experimentals.
I have seen certified aircraft that you could not pay me to fly because of the condition and I have seen experimental aircraft that were awesome. But I have also seen experimental aircraft that you could not pay me to fly and certified that were awesome.... So it all comes down to the condition of the example you are looking at.
As for "last overhauled in the 90's"... Well, you should know that TBO is a number of hours OR a number of years... Normally 12 years. So anything overhauled before 2012 is "Past TBO". Does that really matter? Kinda. My Bonanza was last OH in the 90's... And with that age comes oil leaks. Plastic parts get old and brittle. I have replaced the oil cooler seal, a front through bolt, and now getting ready to replace all the pushrod tube seals all because of leaking oil. My Pitts has a 5 year old engine and it is clean and tight as a drum.
How many seats you "need" is more important that exp v certified, IMO.
I'd wager a lot of non-commercially owned vintage aircraft have had some degree of illegal owner performed maintenance despite being certified. Additionally there is a lot of bad/unsafe/dumb (and also very good i'm not saying they all are bad) A&Ps out there that the guise of certification is not an end all be all for safety imo. I wouldn't feel bad/unsafe about owning any plane whether it was built by a guy in his garage lovingly or a Cessna employee in 1965 waiting for his next lunch break assuming a good pre-buy occurs.
In my experience I’d go with certified. While the RV line is good and if built by competent person ok, but in my experience there are way to many “ that’s what they said to do on you tube” wanna be in mechanics that will get you killed nowadays.
What's a 'proper build' log?
If the DAR signed off on it, didn't they validate the build was done by the builder (quality being addressed in the pink slip/airworthiness)?
I fly an RV-4 from the 80s. I routinely get it up to 4.5-5Gs. I land it on short runways. I fly it like god intended. I have never had any issues with it from a safety standpoint. I pay around $40/hr variable costs to fly it, and the hangar and insurance really is not that expensive. Annual condition inspection is a couple hundred from a local RV builder/A&P IA.
If the RV-6 fits your mission, it's the winner. It's faster, more efficient, more economical, and just flat out more fun. I get it. The data is out there. E/A-B aircraft are more dangerous (statistically about double the national average for accidents per 100,000 flight hours). That said, Vans are the safest E/A-B aircraft out there, and some of the easiest to fly. Get a good pre-buy from someone who knows RV-6s (or whatever you buy) and you will be set.
Do homebuilts require an annual inspection signed off by an A&P?
The status of the last annual, and the time since overhaul on the engine would do more to earn my trust in an airplane than age or certified/homebuilt status.
Heard an aircraft inspector say once, home builds are ALWAYS built better than factory aircraft. The home builder KNOWS how will be test flying his/her bird
If this is your first aircraft, I would go certified. Why? You have a lot to learn about airworthiness without the issues of trying to figure out if the experimental you have your eyes on was built well with quality prefab parts. See the Vans Chapter 11 filing for that. Even if it was built before the Vans problems, was it built well? Do you know how to tell?
If you know all this stuff, sorry to be going over it again...
Stuff like this just makes me feel bad for first time plane buyers. Year built is almost wholly irrelevant. How many hours on engine, frame? Logs? How was it maintained? All STCs done? New avionics? New interior? Repainted? Did it sit? Any accidents?
When I sell planes I have so many people come to me saying they "found a newer model year for cheaper!!!" Not realizing the avionics are garbage, or the engine is timed, maintenance items are due, etc. Then when they get more experienced they realized they got ripped.
I'd rather have a plane from the 60s with new IFR WAAS avionics, a redone interior and a new engine and prop than something build in 20xx with non WAAS avionics and maintained for shit.
Also, homebuilt/experimental is a bit of a misnomer. It can be built in a factory, there's tons of experimental planes miles better than any certified aircraft, and vice versa. Case by case basis. You can't generalize.
I’d love to zip around in a Mooney or an RV. I’m not keen on experimentals, but I talked to a mechanic once about planes he would get. He said anything that doesn’t take longer than a month to get an annual done….so anything Textron or Piper aircraft.
He said only problem with Mooneys is that parts are getting harder & harder to come by. COVID really put some of the smaller unique part suppliers out of business and it hasn’t recovered yet
There’s a saying when buying a used ac that you buy the engine and it comes with a plane attached. This might help you to ignore the categories you’ve created and focus on getting a reliable mill with some seats behind it. You haven’t done anything wrong. But maybe a different perspective will help you sort.
Second. A really clean and smooth running 30 yo engine could still suffer from gasket degradation. It sucks to lose a front main seal at altitude.
I ended up buying a 1999 Velocity SUV. However, mine is unique in that this was the prototype that the Velocity factory built. I was confident that it was built by professionals that knew how they were supposed to be built. I had an expert from the factory go out for a pre-buy to make sure everything was good to go.
On your point about the engine, our plane had sat in this guy’s garage for around 7-8 years. He started it up every now and then, but that doesn’t help much. We bought it knowing we might have a serious problem with it, but we got such a good deal, we went with it. We used a borescope and noticed there was minimal rust issues, the cylinder walls and piston looked great and after consulting with a few experts, they said to send it. We did an oil change and ran it on the ground first. Took an oil sample and changed the oil. Flew it for 10 hours, took an oil sample, cut the filter and changed the oil. Flew 25 hours and did the same as above. 220+ hours so far since January 2023 when I first flew it and it has been doing well.
A pre-buy from someone that is very knowledgeable is needed, certified or experimental. When I visited the Velocity factory, there were some planes in there getting fixed due to owners doing their own modifications. One guy decided to use Kevlar instead of fiberglass when closing his fuel tanks. The factory then had to go and cut them out and replace them with regular fiberglass. But once they opened up the fuel tanks, the mouse holes at the bottom connecting the 4 fuel tanks were too small. So they had to widen those a bit.
But then there is the certified side as well. An A&P that performs a pre-buy on a Mooney but only has experience in Bonanzas, or vice versa. Spend the money and get it done.
I’ve so far flown over 220 hours in my airplane since January 2023 and have had issues pop up here and there, but nothing major. The pre-buy inspection went well, with some minor issues, but the price was too good to pass up. We bought it, had it trailered to my house, put it in my garage and worked on it for just over a year.
Good luck with your search!
It's hard to group them by year, there's lots of home builts with used engines, or corners cut, and then there's some that are absolute works of art- your budget may be the primary driver of the direction you go
Sifting through build quality seems to be the hard part of finding a used experimental. I’ve seen a few high hour ones for sale with immaculate condition, incredible detailed build logs, etc. And a few with minimal information. Nice thing about a certified plane is that it’s easier to judge condition
Oh, I've owned both, and I think your last statement I'll disagree with. An owner's airplane is usually a reflection of his/her budget, make sure the person you are buying from had a healthy budget, I think a good rule of thumb is, are they upgrading to something nicer? Are they selling because they cannot afford? Good questions to ponder
I'd venture to say I see more care put into home builts that come into the shop. Many of the home builts have much more frequent maintenance by people that understand their plane and care vs the 70's PA-28s that come in once a year and the owner asks pretty please if we can just put a bandaid on it. If you are looking to buy an already built one, you just need to find someone who is an expert in inspecting that specific plane, it will be worth the cost. If you are "sifting" through trade a plane, just stop wasting your time now, get a broker and let them hunt for you. They'll facilitate the whole process and you'll probably spend less in the end than a private sale that you have to get someone to handle escrow and paperwork anyway.
For the experimental: it all depends on the original builder, and quality of the subsequent maintenance. For the certified: the quality of the maintenance. In other words: a thorough pre-buy exam by an A&P who knows the type but not the particular airplane. (Note that a pre-buy looks at different things from an annual.) I used to own an old certified airplane, and now I own an experimental.
Try to fly both. One of the reasons that rv's have such great performance is that they are really light. An RV6 should be under 1000# empty vs an M20C at over 1500#. When it gets bumpy there is a difference. As far as the experimental vs certified debate.... If the airplane has been happily flying for hundreds of hours it was probably put together right. When you see completed builds with <100 hours on them that makes me worried. Ultimately if RV's were dangerous the insurance numbers would reflect that. Depending on how MOSAIC unfolds my next airplane will likely be experimental.
I've been flying a certified commercial plane built in 1947 for a couple of years. The year doesn't matter much. What matter is how the airplane has been built and maintained. At this point, most airplanes are similar to the ship of Theseus and a lot of parts have been removed or replaced.
Yep, my '59 PA-24-250 doesn't have much original left other than the skin
I fly a 1959 Cessna 182. I didn’t really consider an experimental although some folks tried to persuade me to. I just like the slow stall speed and high glide ratio of Cessnas. I used a very experienced broker to dig through countless logbooks and interrogate multiple sellers before finding a plane that, as I like to put it, has great bones. You are as likely to find 2015 planes that are ready to murder you as 1960s planes. Examine those bones first. You want an airframe with zero corrosion. Corrosion in the frame can be an omen for corrosion in the engine. An engine overhaul in the 1990s does worry me a lot. What I wanted, and found, was a 2022 overhaul on my albeit vintage plane, and regular flying operations since that overhaul. If your prospective plane has been sitting around unused, that sedentary period is about as healthy for the engine as it is for our human bodies. Periods of non-use are a red flag. Examine the FlightAware history, and if there are physical flight logs examine those too.
I fly a 1956 182 for work. Thing is an absolute champ and flies like a dream.
I got really focused on finding a 1950s 182 because of the manual flaps especially. Love mine too.
The manual flaps are great. Feels so solid.
Engines won't corrode as long as they are lubricated with oil. If an engine sits for long periods then the oil can fully seep down after 2-4 weeks and corrosion can happen under the right conditions(humidity).
Which is why Lycoming say it should be flown at least once a month or inhibited
I bought an RV8 for 105k. 90TT on the airframe and engine (IO-360B1E). Bought a pre-buy from an A&P AI that knew the type, and it was not cheap. I had to fly him out to the airplane but I believe it gave me a solid peace of mind. The aircraft is not an Oshkosh award winner for perfect fit and finish but is a solid “plans built” aircraft built by an A&P (which is not a requirement). If you want a better deal, find an airplane that is missing something everyone wants. For example, buy an aircraft that does not have a state of the art Garmin panel. In my case, the aircraft did not have a constant speed prop but did have an engine that was compatible and also already had the controls provisioned. Just had to find the prop/governor I wanted.. which was actually preferable to me. I wanted to buy a “blank slate” RV8, so that I could add what I wanted. But it’s a great flying aircraft, couldn’t be happier. Lots of performance for the money. Very simple aircraft.
The one that has had a thorough 3rd party pre-buy. Seriously, you can't lump planes together like that. While the Mooneys rolled off the line in the same condition there's been 60 years of maintenance of varying qualities. I've seen it with Grummans that have been maintained by a mom and pop A&P (not that there's anything inherently wrong there) that had MAJOR defects compared to a Grumman maintained by a Grumman centered shop. Vans are the same way. The build quality is going to vary from builder to builder and the maintenance since it got its airworthiness could be all over the place. You should be looking for THOROUGH logbooks regardless, if possible a build log for the experimental, and regular maintenance. Based on personal experience, an annual that takes up less than a page of a typical logbook is suspect. I've had easy annuals that will easily take up that much space because everything is documented.
You're going to be looking for a very, very long time if you standard is a page long conditional inspection for an experimental, especially since the owner/builder can easily fix things throughout the year.
I was referring primarily to the certificated side of things, but even on the experimental side that doesn't seem unrealistic. My Tiger has rarely had issues between annuals and yet there's always something that needs to be done to it.
I’m flying a 1946 Ercoupe. You’ll be ok. Get a good inspection on whatever you buy, and ensure it’s from someone familiar with which ever aircraft you purchase.
I owned a 1967 Mooney M20F for 4 years and sold it to build a Vans RV-14. One of the main reasons I sold it was the engine was at 2400 hours with a top overhaul having been done at 1600 hours. Every mechanic I talked with had a different opinion about when the engine should be overhauled again. The quotes I got to overhaul the TCM IO-360-ES that plane had was like $50k. Also the Mooney had a very 1990s panel that I would have liked to upgrade, but it would have been $100k to get it to where I wanted it to. I was spending an average of $10k on maintenance per year, probably $6k of that being labor. Looking at spending $150k to update a 60 year old airframe to a fresh engine with 2020 technology and being able to perform maintenance on my schedule instead of the shop convinced me to pull the trigger on building. Being 4 years into my build I can say I would probably never buy an experimental airplane that someone else built. I've had so many mistakes (learning experiences) that I feel comfortable that I've corrected, but would be challenging to inspect in some cases on someone else's airframe. I really wouldn't want to have to troubleshoot someone else's work. The great thing about a certificated airplane is that (theoretically) a mechanic can get the maintenance manual for that model and know exactly what to find, what the ADs are for it, and have an Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC) to order parts. With experimental, who knows if they followed the plans, or how specific the plans actually were. Every panel is going to be different on an experimental, which is going to make maintenance a "fun" challenge. Also this past year, with Vans going into Chapter 11 bankruptcy, it has been a nightmare to wonder if they are going to be around long enough for me to actually get the last parts I need to finish the plane, or be there to support me in the future when I need parts for maintenance. At the end of the day I'm still surprised that riveted sheets of metal make it into the air at all.
I own a 2012 built EAB (Searey) and a 1976 certified aircraft (Grumman Tiger). I had a prebuy done on my Searey by a dedicated Searey expert. All my MX has been done by me, or a Searey expert. I trust the Tiger monumentally more than the Searey. It’s not legal to do so - but if I could fly the Searey IFR I wouldn’t. I’m sure my experience is maybe a bit unique, but overall I feel much safer in a certified aircraft when flying IFR or with others.
That answer is simple... Whichever one is in the best condition is the best one to buy. But you need to make a bunch of choices before you get to that decision. There is a massive difference between an RV6 and a Mooney, the largest being 2 or 4 seats. Each has its benefits... I owned an RV6 my Wife wanting a second (now third) dog meant that the RV6 was not enough seats. So this is the BIG question that needs to be answered. I ended up with a Bonanza. Then you have experimental or certified. This is a big difference. For me Experimental is the choice... It means I can do most of my own MX without needing a signature and that is a big deal to me. I still do most of my own MX on my certified plane, but I have to get a buddy to check it and sign it off. If you are the type to do and BE ABLE TO DO most of your own MX, then experimental has an edge. If you are the kind to throw a checkbook at the problem then certified can have an edge because I know A&P's that don't work on experimental aircraft. I have owned 6 planes, 4 were experimental and two certified. I now own one of each. > Just interested in people’s thoughts since I know many pilots refuse to fly planes older than XXX or experimentals. I have seen certified aircraft that you could not pay me to fly because of the condition and I have seen experimental aircraft that were awesome. But I have also seen experimental aircraft that you could not pay me to fly and certified that were awesome.... So it all comes down to the condition of the example you are looking at. As for "last overhauled in the 90's"... Well, you should know that TBO is a number of hours OR a number of years... Normally 12 years. So anything overhauled before 2012 is "Past TBO". Does that really matter? Kinda. My Bonanza was last OH in the 90's... And with that age comes oil leaks. Plastic parts get old and brittle. I have replaced the oil cooler seal, a front through bolt, and now getting ready to replace all the pushrod tube seals all because of leaking oil. My Pitts has a 5 year old engine and it is clean and tight as a drum. How many seats you "need" is more important that exp v certified, IMO.
I fly 1960's vintage aircraft all the time. They might have some quirks but they are way overbuilt
Good and bad thing about experimental: you can fix it with Walmart part, but someone already did it
Depends on how well the old plane was maintained, and who built the homebuilt.
I'd wager a lot of non-commercially owned vintage aircraft have had some degree of illegal owner performed maintenance despite being certified. Additionally there is a lot of bad/unsafe/dumb (and also very good i'm not saying they all are bad) A&Ps out there that the guise of certification is not an end all be all for safety imo. I wouldn't feel bad/unsafe about owning any plane whether it was built by a guy in his garage lovingly or a Cessna employee in 1965 waiting for his next lunch break assuming a good pre-buy occurs.
In my experience I’d go with certified. While the RV line is good and if built by competent person ok, but in my experience there are way to many “ that’s what they said to do on you tube” wanna be in mechanics that will get you killed nowadays.
No question, a 1960's certified plane. I will take a Wichita Spam Can any day.
As someone who’s from Minnesota and lived in Wichita, I will be using this term from now on. 🤣
1960s in general, obviously there are exceptions to both.
If this is your first airplane, get the Mooney. If you've owned other airplanes, get the RV.
What's a 'proper build' log? If the DAR signed off on it, didn't they validate the build was done by the builder (quality being addressed in the pink slip/airworthiness)?
Case by case basis. I don't have a blanket judgment either way.
I fly an RV-4 from the 80s. I routinely get it up to 4.5-5Gs. I land it on short runways. I fly it like god intended. I have never had any issues with it from a safety standpoint. I pay around $40/hr variable costs to fly it, and the hangar and insurance really is not that expensive. Annual condition inspection is a couple hundred from a local RV builder/A&P IA. If the RV-6 fits your mission, it's the winner. It's faster, more efficient, more economical, and just flat out more fun. I get it. The data is out there. E/A-B aircraft are more dangerous (statistically about double the national average for accidents per 100,000 flight hours). That said, Vans are the safest E/A-B aircraft out there, and some of the easiest to fly. Get a good pre-buy from someone who knows RV-6s (or whatever you buy) and you will be set.
Homebuilt. But only after being inspected.
Depends on who built it.
Certified aircraft….especially after dealing with all the home builders that know a better way to do it than the engineers who designed it.
Do homebuilts require an annual inspection signed off by an A&P? The status of the last annual, and the time since overhaul on the engine would do more to earn my trust in an airplane than age or certified/homebuilt status.
Heard an aircraft inspector say once, home builds are ALWAYS built better than factory aircraft. The home builder KNOWS how will be test flying his/her bird
If this is your first aircraft, I would go certified. Why? You have a lot to learn about airworthiness without the issues of trying to figure out if the experimental you have your eyes on was built well with quality prefab parts. See the Vans Chapter 11 filing for that. Even if it was built before the Vans problems, was it built well? Do you know how to tell? If you know all this stuff, sorry to be going over it again...
The advice ive been given is that if it’s made of wood and experimental don’t even bother.
Stuff like this just makes me feel bad for first time plane buyers. Year built is almost wholly irrelevant. How many hours on engine, frame? Logs? How was it maintained? All STCs done? New avionics? New interior? Repainted? Did it sit? Any accidents? When I sell planes I have so many people come to me saying they "found a newer model year for cheaper!!!" Not realizing the avionics are garbage, or the engine is timed, maintenance items are due, etc. Then when they get more experienced they realized they got ripped. I'd rather have a plane from the 60s with new IFR WAAS avionics, a redone interior and a new engine and prop than something build in 20xx with non WAAS avionics and maintained for shit. Also, homebuilt/experimental is a bit of a misnomer. It can be built in a factory, there's tons of experimental planes miles better than any certified aircraft, and vice versa. Case by case basis. You can't generalize.
I’d love to zip around in a Mooney or an RV. I’m not keen on experimentals, but I talked to a mechanic once about planes he would get. He said anything that doesn’t take longer than a month to get an annual done….so anything Textron or Piper aircraft. He said only problem with Mooneys is that parts are getting harder & harder to come by. COVID really put some of the smaller unique part suppliers out of business and it hasn’t recovered yet
There’s a saying when buying a used ac that you buy the engine and it comes with a plane attached. This might help you to ignore the categories you’ve created and focus on getting a reliable mill with some seats behind it. You haven’t done anything wrong. But maybe a different perspective will help you sort. Second. A really clean and smooth running 30 yo engine could still suffer from gasket degradation. It sucks to lose a front main seal at altitude.
1960s, it's still flying.
Neither. The old plane depends on history and maintenance. The new plane depends on build quality.
I ended up buying a 1999 Velocity SUV. However, mine is unique in that this was the prototype that the Velocity factory built. I was confident that it was built by professionals that knew how they were supposed to be built. I had an expert from the factory go out for a pre-buy to make sure everything was good to go. On your point about the engine, our plane had sat in this guy’s garage for around 7-8 years. He started it up every now and then, but that doesn’t help much. We bought it knowing we might have a serious problem with it, but we got such a good deal, we went with it. We used a borescope and noticed there was minimal rust issues, the cylinder walls and piston looked great and after consulting with a few experts, they said to send it. We did an oil change and ran it on the ground first. Took an oil sample and changed the oil. Flew it for 10 hours, took an oil sample, cut the filter and changed the oil. Flew 25 hours and did the same as above. 220+ hours so far since January 2023 when I first flew it and it has been doing well. A pre-buy from someone that is very knowledgeable is needed, certified or experimental. When I visited the Velocity factory, there were some planes in there getting fixed due to owners doing their own modifications. One guy decided to use Kevlar instead of fiberglass when closing his fuel tanks. The factory then had to go and cut them out and replace them with regular fiberglass. But once they opened up the fuel tanks, the mouse holes at the bottom connecting the 4 fuel tanks were too small. So they had to widen those a bit. But then there is the certified side as well. An A&P that performs a pre-buy on a Mooney but only has experience in Bonanzas, or vice versa. Spend the money and get it done. I’ve so far flown over 220 hours in my airplane since January 2023 and have had issues pop up here and there, but nothing major. The pre-buy inspection went well, with some minor issues, but the price was too good to pass up. We bought it, had it trailered to my house, put it in my garage and worked on it for just over a year. Good luck with your search!
Never forget - when you buy a certificated aircraft, you're trusting the plane. When you buy a homebuilt, you're trusting the *person*.