I'm looking at a 108-3, 15AC, and will consider a 20/22 for the right price. I've read quite a bit about the -3 on this site but the info seems dated.

To all you -3 owners out there, would you buy a 108-3 again given what you know now? Are the F220s ever going to go back into production (I'd like to "trade up" when the OH comes along)? I've received a lot of input from people who "know a guy" that owns a -3, and their opinions are generally negative...especially when they're trying to sell me a -2!

The top complaints seem to be (a) finding engine parts is a nearly impossible task and (b) the -3 in unmanagable in a crosswind.

Here's what I'm looking at:
-108-3 with low time F165 OH'd early/mid 2000's
-Fabric early/mid 1990's with what looks to be decent paint
-Hanagred
-All logs
-Ground loop in early/mid 1990's w/wing repair
-An interior I'd be satisfied with
-Prebuy to be completed by an IA very familiar with 108s.

I like the -3 because it can carry a load, has the big tanks, and seems stable enough for a low time t/w guy like myself (2800tt; 25t/w) to build some time in. It seems like a very stable, capable airplane.

I've never had a problem finding yellow tagged parts for my 165 Franklin. If I wanted factory new parts I'd have a factory new airplane

My friend had a Stinson 108-3 which he sold last year & likewise never had a problem getting parts. It sat in a "barn" for 12 years. He got a ferry license & got it to his hangar & spent 6 months going through all systems. Ended up with a 100% workable example, and never a lack of yellow tagged parts.

I'm the wrong guy to be answering this, because I'm so hopelessly biased it ain't funny. I LOVE my -3, and hope I never have to part with it. I too have the 165 and have had no parts trouble. Parts and reputable overhaulers can be found, although good crankshafts may take some searching.

The Franklin engine is a well engineered machine and completely overhaulable by knowledgeable mechanics, with replaceable cylinder liners, valve guides and seats. Tolerances are quite tight- with only 0.004" of wear allowable in the cylinder sleeve, and 0.020" (I think) undersize grinds allowed on the crank journal. this means the crank can only be ground once or twice. I would want to see that the last overhaul was performed by a reputable overhauler and that something less than 0.020 oversize bearings had been installed. I wouldn't trust an overhaul by someone without a good history.

Valve guides do wear and can stick, which can cause engine failure. Look for signs of exhaust valve blowby in the valve cover and side play in the valve stems- both are signs of worn guides. Early valve guides were cast iron then bronze, while valves were steel then steel with chrome flash on the stems. The better combination is the bronze / chrome flash, but even that combination can corrode and stick. New bronze guides and stainless valves are available if you want them.

Although most of the nondesirable crankcases have been retired, you want a "heavy case". Look at the part number in the casting- it should include a "9" for both crankcase halves. If the overhaul was 10 years ago, I'd want to see that the aircraft had been regularly flown, or at least properly stored.

As far as the airframe, there are remarkably few ADs, none of which are expensive. The MA4-5 carb has a few, as do the Bendix mags. The Stinson spars are duralumin, which can exhibit intergranular corrosion. Look closely for this. Also, like most steel tube taildraggers, the bottom of the tailpost is subject to corrosion.

The Goodyear puck brakes are generally frowned upon, and a Cleveland conversion is worth it's weight in gold.

In spite of the big tail, I have successfully landed my -3 in some ferocious crosswinds. It handles them fine, albeit sometimes with judicious applicatiion of brake. The difficulty often comes in taxiing away from a crosswind. I have sometimes resorted to a 270 degree "momentum building" turn into the wind to get to where I need to go, but have always made it. The Stinson is an amazingly easy airplane to land- I think I'd discount any concerns about crosswinds.

The Stinson enjoys excellent support. Univair owns the type certificate and can sell you just about any airframe part, brand new. The International Stinson Club provides excellent resources, and there is a very active Yahoo discssion group. This is definitely not an orphaned airplane- you can get answers to any question you have.

I like the -3 because it can carry a load, has the big tanks, and seems stable enough for a low time t/w guy like myself (2800tt; 25t/w) to build some time in. It seems like a very stable, capable airplane.

This assessment is dead on, and is exactly why I chose the -3.

That's all I can think of for now- feel free to ask questions here or PM me if I can help point you to some more knowledgeable folks.

Happy Stinsoning!

I own a -2 and have time in -3s as well. If I could do it again I would buy a -3 over a -2 for exactly the reasons you stated - the highest GW of the 108 line and the 50 gal fuel capacity. The Franklins are a known gamble, when they run well (to include feeding them a steady diet of legal/non-ethanol mogas) they are a dream. When they break you are at the mercy of a limited pool of parts and Franklin-savvy engine guys. The good news is that most parts are still readily available, the bad news is that cranks are not - so generally you're good until you face an overhaul, at which point you may have to cough up a good penny.

As far as upgrades go, with all due respect for those out there flying them (especially MM) I wouldn't go for an F220. There's no question that the performance is superb but you paint yourself into an ever tighter parts corner and it it's high compression so ineligible for the mogas STCs (this factor will fade as a concern if ethanol manages a complete takeover). I much prefer the Cont O-470 Super Stinson STC, the 470 may weigh a little more than the F220 but the performance is still excellent and parts and experienced maintainers are not a concern.

If you do go the Stinson route, regardless of the -# you will find it to be a capable and forgiving aircraft that will patiently let you learn the nuances of tailwheel flying that continue to satisfy as you grow into it.

Bill, you beat me to it!

Thanks a lot!

I've read that the cranks are hard to find. I'm OK with this. It's all part of owning a Stinson.

The engine was overhauled in '04/-300hrs ago after a propstrike/groundloop. Top was done on '09/-50hrs ago and 220 valves were installed. I'm operating on the assumption that it's a heavy case. The prebuy will determine...

I've made an offer that I think is fair, but what would you guys expect to spend for a decent, low SMOH -3? P+I is in decent shape with airtec fabric from '94 (hangared). Scott 3200 + Clevelands. Radios aren't anything special.

To be honest, I haven't been keeping up with prices too much lately. In the past, I used the valuation tool AOPA offers (Vref?) and found it to be pretty accurate. Should give you a good baseline though.

The 220 valves do not belong in a 165 though. I'm pretty sure they're sodium filled, which means they cool through the stem as opposed to cooling through the seats in the (much) lower compression 165. The result is that the cool stem collects combustion deposits and sticks, leading to the potential for engine failure I mentioned above. I believe one of the other posters on this thread has first hand experience with this phenomenon. I'd suggest contacting a few reputable engine builders to confirm this.

My first plane was a 108-3 with a 165 HC, what a great plane. I've flown a -2 and would go for the big tail any day and thats over those other planes you mentioned.
You can't mess up a landing in a Stinson, easiest tail dragger out there.
I've had three planes with Franklin engines, 165,180, and 220, loved every one of them. I never had enough problem with any of those engines to be able to say how hard it is to find parts.

The engine was overhauled in '04/-300hrs ago after a propstrike/groundloop. Top was done on '09/-50hrs ago and 220 valves were installed.

Your engine wasn't overhauled by a fella' in Nebraska, was it?

I think the Stinsons are arguably one of the best buys on the market these days. They've always been under valued, for some reason. Great airplanes.

That said, IF you can find a decent Aeronca 11AC Sedan, they will outperform almost anything in the class, even without flaps. Hard to find a good one, though, there just aren't that many around. Burl Rogers in ANC now owns the type certificate for the Sedan, and will basically provide any parts you might need. Parts availability has been an issue in past with these airplanes.

I'm always nervous about ANY engine that's been involved in a prop strike, unless you KNOW it was a "just barely brushed the ground" kind of deal. Those things can come back to bite you many many hours later.

MTV

before I bought my M5, I looked at a bunch of stinsons and reseached it for 3-4 months. Spent hours talking to a super knowlegable stinson guy that ran a stinson club, etc. had a -2 for years.

All the other stuff said here is right on - the -3 is the way to go. I spent quite a bit of time on the Franklin thing - again, what has been said is right on. From my research, the -165 was much more popular than the 220, so parts should be easier to find. I was looking for a float plane, so a 220 was the only engine I would settle for in a Stinson. Unfortunately, I couldn't find that combination in the end so I bought a M5-235.

good luck.

garth

As stated above, the Stinson is a true joy to fly and a great taildragger with tame characteristics.

I have flown a -2 with a Franklin 220 and a -3 with a 0-470 and both are wonderful birds to fly. The extra features of the -3 are nice and the classic looks of the -2 are nice, depends on personal preference I guess. I've never been limited in my -2 yet though (it's main purpose is a 2 person/gear hauler). And I will say that the -2/220 will offer a little more performance than a -3/470. Not too much, but it is noticeable.

In the end I have a -2, sit behind a Franklin 220, and couldn't be more happy. It always does what I ask and never complains.

Interesting thing about those 220 valves. Any idea why he would have topped with 220 parts?

mtv wrote:IF you can find a decent Aeronca 11AC Sedan

You meant 15AC, right?

I think they are a great looking bird. Came with a C-145 just like the original C170's.

Oops, yes-15AC Aeronca Sedan.

I've flown a couple on floats, both with stock engine and with a Lycoming 180, and they are very impressive performers, and great load haulers.

MTV

Come up to AZ50 for Stinson immersion----Bruce Barton's got both -2's and -3's flying .Buy him some gas and you'll see what the Stinson will do. Bring Cash or Gold Bars -he likes that----Checks or goofy trades don't impress them at the ranch. Cash talks.There are several 150-180 HP available at KBVU also.There is a 220 powered model 108-3 in southern NV . Carl Gerker has 2 in Southern Cal and 2 more there -once again bring CASH .

Bring Cash or Gold Bars

Checks or goofy trades don't impress them at the ranch. Cash talks.

once again bring CASH .

Interesting post. Most of the Stinson guys I know would be happy to share their Stinson love- for free. Must be different down there in Mexizona.

RDUStinson wrote:Interesting post. Most of the Stinson guys I know would be happy to share their Stinson love- for free. Must be different down there in Mexizona.

I think he's talking about purchasing terms. After multiple encounters with some of the eccentric (putting it kindly) individuals shopping for Stinsons these days I'd say that's a wise approach.

In reference to MTV's remark about Stinsons being historically undervalued I'm confident that's a function of the Franklin. Pull up a seat at the morning round table coffee session with some tribal elders (FBO coffee club) and ask about Stinsons/Franklins. I'll bet at least 75% will give some unfounded advice to run away from them - there are a lot of lingering misperceptions about them which translates to a suppressed market value. The good news is that means if you know what you're looking for you can get a very capable plane for a fair price. With the market the way it is right now you should be able to scoop up a vanilla example for a pretty modest price.

The downside of this is that because of their relatively low prices a lot of cheapskates have picked up Stinsons over the years and neglected/nickle & dimed them throughout their ownership. You need to have a keen eye for signs of that neglect so that you don't inherit headaches.

I owned a -3 with a 220 franklin for the better part of 4 years, flew on floats, wheels, and wheel ski's. They are a damn good plane and I would own another one in a heartbeat. The -3 will handle more crosswind than most people will feel comfortable flying in. My old Stinson is for sale again I heard and the price was a bargain I though. I can vouch for its performance and reliability. Russ