corefile wrote:what I would put in the contract is that the seller is responsible for fixing any AIRWORTHY issue that is uncovered in the pre-buy inspection - if they decline they pay for the pre-buy inspection.

Be prepared for a lot of rejections. A lot of people will laugh at being asked to be at risk of paying a stranger's expensive mechanic to do a pre-buy. If you pay for a pre-buy inspection, you are doing it for YOU, to uncover problems either not known or undisclosed. It is YOUR money at risk, not a seller's in general.

It is a free country, though, and you can try putting whatever you like into a contract.

Most of the planes I've looked at or owned over the years were "as-is", period, both the great and the not so great. The last time I bought a plane for a lot of money, I had a few percent of the total cost of the plane into inspections and miles on my car and a couple of airline tickets and hotel rooms to check out several before I actually got one.

Thanks for all the feedback. I am going to treat the pre-buy/annual just as I would treat an inspection on a house I am interested in. If there are some valid airworthiness issues, I will expect the owner to either remedy the issue or offer a concession in the purchase price. I am prepared to walk away from the plane and eat the cost of the pre-buy if the owner is unwilling to negotiate.

Trim Tab wrote:

corefile wrote:what I would put in the contract is that the seller is responsible for fixing any AIRWORTHY issue that is uncovered in the pre-buy inspection - if they decline they pay for the pre-buy inspection.

Be prepared for a lot of rejections. A lot of people will laugh at being asked to be at risk of paying a stranger's expensive mechanic to do a pre-buy. If you pay for a pre-buy inspection, you are doing it for YOU, to uncover problems either not known or undisclosed. It is YOUR money at risk, not a seller's in general.
.

Hogwash.. there is a general expectation that you are buying a plane that is airworthy, or that the seller has disclosed any issue's that effect the airworthiness of the plane. A lot of people would laugh at a seller not willing to stand behind the quality of their plane. Maybe I was lucky but both sellers I did pre-buys on when looking had no issue with that clause. And since its in the AOPA contract I'm thinking its not that odd. I would walk if a seller declined.

Some IA's are like some building inspectors. I worked in commercial building construction my whole life, I have actually been on a job that the building inspector refused to sign off on because he didn't like the quality of the painter's work. When asked just what part of the uniform building code it didn't comply with, he had to admit that it was not his problem and had to sign it off. I've seen IA's do the same sort of thing-- balk at signing off an airplane because they personally didn't like something about it, even though it was not something that made the airplane unairworthy.
There's perfect, and then there's good enough-- even though good enough is just that, some IA's want perfect even when it isn't required. A situation like this "seller fixes everything" clause is a perfect chance for someone like that to really go to town.

I done dozens of prebuys including some of people here on this forum . I find rejects of 3-5 percent of aircraft submitted of all manners. I only do the inspection for the customer and answer to who pays for service.

182 STOL driver wrote:I done dozens of prebuys including some of people here on this forum . I find rejects of 3-5 percent of aircraft submitted of all manners. I only do the inspection report for the customer and answer to who pays for service.

I only reject a aircraft for airworthness / safety issues . I don't get involved in price unless that I'm being paid for a appraisal too. If there s
Something between seller and buyer I'll give them a estimate on cost - some times that can be used as bargaining point to get the deal done.
182s are pretty standard day and half + expenses . Lots of aircraft to chose from - but get a good prebuy before you lay your money on the table .

Just a few months ago I was involved in a lawsuit over a 182, which I've described here and elsewhere. From that and the experience of having bought and sold several airplanes over the last 4 decades, including a 182 and a TR182, here are some thoughts to consider:
1. 182s are not rare airplanes--there are lots of them. That makes it easier to negotiate and to walk away. It also means look close to home; there's no need to go across country very far for a good airplane.
2. 182s have certain predictable damage, mostly to the nose gear and firewall. If such damage has been professionally and properly repaired, it's not a good reason to reject an airplane. But refer to No. 1.
3. Some damage costs more to repair than an airplane is worth. Don't even consider buying a 182 that has airframe damage which hasn't yet been repaired, especially nose gear/firewall and gear boxes.
4. Earlier model 182s (pre-1970) have more fragile nose gear/firewalls than later ones.
5. Not every repair appears in log books, so have a knowledgeable person (your IA) research the FAA and NTSB reports for accidents.
6. Just because an IA signed off on a repair doesn't mean that it was done properly; have your own IA examine the repairs.
7. It's a lot less expensive to get one already equipped the way you want it than to add stuff later, especially avionics.
8. Regardless of the number of hours on an engine, there's no guarantee it will go to TBO or even 50 more hours, and engines are expensive. Have enough reserve $$ in case yours bellies up prematurely.

There are probably more thoughts I might come up with. 182s are great airplanes, though. But having that 4WD as your backup is good planning.

Oh, and don't be satisfied with a cursory one hour checkout, even if that's all an insurer requires. 182s are not fat 172s. They are most definitely a different airplane. Any good checkout will cover the usual stuff of airwork and different kinds of landings, but it will also include both light load and some full load flying, because like all airplanes, it becomes a different animal when fully loaded with an aft CG.

Cary

Cary wrote:Just a few months ago I was involved in a lawsuit over a 182, which I've described here and elsewhere. From that and the experience of having bought and sold several airplanes over the last 4 decades, including a 182 and a TR182, here are some thoughts to consider:
1. 182s are not rare airplanes--there are lots of them. That makes it easier to negotiate and to walk away. It also means look close to home; there's no need to go across country very far for a good airplane.
2. 182s have certain predictable damage, mostly to the nose gear and firewall. If such damage has been professionally and properly repaired, it's not a good reason to reject an airplane. But refer to No. 1.
3. Some damage costs more to repair than an airplane is worth. Don't even consider buying a 182 that has airframe damage which hasn't yet been repaired, especially nose gear/firewall and gear boxes.
4. Earlier model 182s (pre-1970) have more fragile nose gear/firewalls than later ones.
5. Not every repair appears in log books, so have a knowledgeable person (your IA) research the FAA and NTSB reports for accidents.
6. Just because an IA signed off on a repair doesn't mean that it was done properly; have your own IA examine the repairs.
7. It's a lot less expensive to get one already equipped the way you want it than to add stuff later, especially avionics.
8. Regardless of the number of hours on an engine, there's no guarantee it will go to TBO or even 50 more hours, and engines are expensive. Have enough reserve $$ in case yours bellies up prematurely.

There are probably more thoughts I might come up with. 182s are great airplanes, though. But having that 4WD as your backup is good planning.

Oh, and don't be satisfied with a cursory one hour checkout, even if that's all an insurer requires. 182s are not fat 172s. They are most definitely a different airplane. Any good checkout will cover the usual stuff of airwork and different kinds of landings, but it will also include both light load and some full load flying, because like all airplanes, it becomes a different animal when fully loaded with an aft CG.

Cary

Well put ^^^ I wish I'd had that kind of advice when I was a starry eyed buyer. Boy did I get a shellacking.

Cary wrote:don't be satisfied with a cursory one hour checkout, even if that's all an insurer requires. 182s are not fat 172s. They are most definitely a different airplane. Any good checkout will cover the usual stuff of airwork and different kinds of landings, but it will also include both light load and some full load flying, because like all airplanes, it becomes a different animal when fully loaded with an aft CG.Cary

I always thought the 182 flew like a heavier 172. The slow flight characteristics when heavy and aft are far better than many aircraft at any load, and some models all but refuse to misbehave at all when light or forward. Most of my time was spent learning specific engine management needs and speeds/procedures as with any new plane. It is easily one of the easiest, surprise-free transitions to a high performance plane out there. If an hour isn't sufficient, then two hours probably will be plenty to be on your way to learning to fly it very capably.

lesuther wrote:..... Most of my time was spent learning specific engine management needs and speeds/procedures as with any new plane. ....

Having never owned anything with a c/s prop and more than 150hp, there definitely was / is a learning curve going on. Getting her slowed down to pattern / maneuvering speed is more involved than with my previous airplanes, esp since the difference between cruise speed and pattern speed is greater. My checkout pilot didn't really even touch on that part of it, since most of our flying was in the pattern. He also flew it more like a heavy airplane, whereas I'm now starting to fly it with a combination of heavy and light techniques. I think it's like learning to fly a taildragger or anything else different from what you're used to-- the checkout gets you familiar with the airplane and shows you some useful techniques. Then it's up to you to follow through and get comfortable with it using the techniques you were shown-- and others you weren't. Some people learn one way to fly their airplane and ever progress to different techniques- even though those different techniques might be more applicable to what they're ding with the airplane. Don't be afraid to try something different, there's usually more than one right way to do anything.

This was probably the hardest transition for me as well Hotrod. Especially getting it slowed down to flap extension speed. My C150 abd Citabria GCBC cruised slightly faster then flap extension speed, so pulling the throttle back slightly was all it took. The C180 takes a bit more, but I'm getting used to it. Overall I find it very docile on the ground and quite an easy transition.
David

I'll through my hat in with Hotrod and A1, the hardest part of making the transition from the Citabria I got my PPL in and the 182 I bought is my energy management transitioning from cruise to getting setup for entering the pattern. Its something I'm still working on...

My checkout flights were done leaving the prop at low rpm (cruise) setting until turning final, and then just pushing it in all the way. I find that pulling the throttle back as I'm on the 45, and dialing the prop in bit by bit as I slow down, lets the flatter prop pitch help slow me down. Kind of like downshifting as you're slowing down in a car. I'm usually seeing about 15" MP and about 2400 rpm (knob all the way in) when downwind abeam at about 100 mph (flap speed). The flaps help me slow down even more, so I'm usually doing 80 or so on base, slowing down to about 70 on final and seeing maybe 13" -- trimming the nose up constantly through out the process..