Engine with Complex History

[Mike Granby]

Long story:

I'm looking at purchasing a 1974 PA-32-300 advertised as having a
engine with 600 hours on it since new. After reviewing the engine logs
and doing some digging online, I find that the engine was exported by
Lycoming to Poland, where it was fitted to a PZL-104M. It stayed there
for about three years, accumulating 20 hours in its first year and
exactly one hour per year thereafter. The aircraft then moved to
England were it was re-registered on the CAA registry. Something
happened to the plane, and it was withdrawn from service about a year
after moving to the UK. The engine found its way back to the USA were
it was torn-down and inspected by someone whose name I can't read as
per the Lycoming prop strike instructions, shortly after which it was
fitted to the PA-32. The log book is CAA issue, with the first entries
re its life in Poland being merely dates and hours, follwed by a note
that they were copied from the Polish logs.

Short question:

Would this complex engine history put you off buying this plane?

[tony roberts]

In article >,
(Mike Granby) wrote:

Hi Mike
It wouldn't necessarily put me off buying the plane.
It would give me a majot haggling point.
All asuming that prebuy inspection/logs check out OK.

Tony


--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE



> Long story:
>
> I'm looking at purchasing a 1974 PA-32-300 advertised as having a
> engine with 600 hours on it since new. After reviewing the engine logs
> and doing some digging online, I find that the engine was exported by
> Lycoming to Poland, where it was fitted to a PZL-104M. It stayed there
> for about three years, accumulating 20 hours in its first year and
> exactly one hour per year thereafter. The aircraft then moved to
> England were it was re-registered on the CAA registry. Something
> happened to the plane, and it was withdrawn from service about a year
> after moving to the UK. The engine found its way back to the USA were
> it was torn-down and inspected by someone whose name I can't read as
> per the Lycoming prop strike instructions, shortly after which it was
> fitted to the PA-32. The log book is CAA issue, with the first entries
> re its life in Poland being merely dates and hours, follwed by a note
> that they were copied from the Polish logs.
>
> Short question:
>
> Would this complex engine history put you off buying this plane?

[G.R. Patterson III]

Mike Granby wrote:
>
> Would this complex engine history put you off buying this plane?

No. Based on what you posted, it appears that most of the hours were put on the
engine after the prop strike inspection. IMO, it's been running long enough since
then to consider it to be a reliable engine.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[Jim Weir]

The rest of your story doesn't particularly bother me, but as somebody else
pointed out, such a checkered history makes a major haggling point.

This part bothers me. Somebody inspected the engine per prop strike
instructions, yet you have no idea who it was or such as that? The rules say
that any inspection made must not only have the signature, BUT THE POWERPLANT
CERTIFICATE NUMBER of the person performing the inspection (or the agency
number, if it was done that way). No certificate, no inspection, and I'd point
that out to the seller in no uncertain terms. If they shine it on, then I'd
take up the matter with the local FSDO.

If you've got the certificate number, then a lot of the aviation search engines
(landings, etc.) will let you look up the name and address of the inspector.

Jim



(Mike Granby)
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

The engine found its way back to the USA were
->it was torn-down and inspected by someone whose name I can't read as
->per the Lycoming prop strike instructions, shortly after which it was
->fitted to the PA-32.
Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Mike Granby]

Jim Weir > wrote:

> This part bothers me. Somebody inspected the engine per
> prop strike instructions, yet you have no idea who it was
> or such as that?

I couldn't read the name in the log book. The seller has now produced
paperwork showing that the work was done by St Louis Engine, who in
turn sent most of the parts out to a local company, Quality Testing
Service, and sent the crank and camshaft to Aircraft Specialties in
Tulsa. Both of these companies are FAA Repair Stations. I've also seen
QTS' documentation, which states that they magnaxfluxed all the parts
they inspected. I haven't seen anything from Aircraft Specialties yet,
but I'm sure it's there somewhere. (A lot of this is being done by
email with the seller scanning stuff and sending it, but soon I'll be
visiting to see things in person.)

> The rules say that any inspection made must not only have
> the signature, BUT THE POWERPLANT CERTIFICATE NUMBER of the
> person performing the inspection (or the agency number, if
> it was done that way).

The A&P number was there. Sorry for not mentioning it.

> If you've got the certificate number, then a lot of the
> aviation search engines (landings, etc.) will let you
> look up the name and address of the inspector.

Doh! I should have thought of that.

Thanks for your help, Jim!