Ercoupe Opinions

[Doofus P. Leadbottom]

I've got somewhat of a liking for Ercoupes and its derivitives. They seem
to be inexpensive to purchase, and somewhat cheap to fly and maintain. For
a fairly new pilot, who just want to fly for the fun of it, are they a good
bet?

[N93332]

"Doofus P. Leadbottom" > wrote in message
. 18...
> I've got somewhat of a liking for Ercoupes and its derivitives. They seem
> to be inexpensive to purchase, and somewhat cheap to fly and maintain. For
> a fairly new pilot, who just want to fly for the fun of it, are they a
> good
> bet?

Yes!

[Jay Honeck]

> I've got somewhat of a liking for Ercoupes and its derivitives. They seem
> to be inexpensive to purchase, and somewhat cheap to fly and maintain. For
> a fairly new pilot, who just want to fly for the fun of it, are they a good
> bet?

I think Ercoupes are very, very cool. They are the most affordable
"classic" airplane out there, and will only appreciate in value. And,
hey, there just aren't too many planes you can fly nowadays with your
arm hanging on the window-sill!

That said, they've had some issues with corrosion (what older plane
hasn't?), some issues with maintaining the older engines, and they
really aren't very good cross-country machines. (Well, unless you're
not in a hurry. And they're still way faster than driving.)

The only other real drawback is weight limitations. You aren't going
to be able to carry two big people, nor will you be able to carry much
in the way of luggage.

Still, I'd take one over a Cessna 152 any day!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bob Fry]

Hey, Jay and I agree on something!

I've owned an Alon Aircoupe model (one of the later ones, only 40
years old) for three years. If you want a 2-seater vintage aircraft
the Coupes are one of the better choices, in my opinion. Why?

- They fly faster than most other 2-seater vintage airplanes, 95-115
mph cruise on 85-100 hp.

- Decent climb rate, 400-700 fpm depending on engine, load and density
altitude.

- Very pleasant manuevering characteristics, not touchy nor ponderous.
Some models with the limited elevator travel won't stall at all,
others have very benign stalls. I can fly at 40-45 mph indicated very
easily without stalling.

- Fantastic visibility. Canopy open on warm days if you like.

- Art-deco look always get positive comments at airports. You're not
lost in the crowd in this airplane.

- The 415C models, the majority of the different variations, are LSA
class (other Coupe models aren't).

- Most Coupes don't have rudder pedals, but if you want them, they're
easy for your mechanic to add (though most Coupers would recommend you
don't add them).

Jay had mentioned potential downsides. There is a lot of neglected
junk out there so be careful when you look.

See these websites for more info:

http://www.flash.net/~dmprosvc/dave/purchase.htm
http://www.ercoupe.com/
http://www.ercoupe.org/
http://www.ercoupe.net/
http://www.aircoupe.com/
http://www.ercoupers.com/
http://www.escribe.com/aviation/coupers-tech/index.html
http://www.escribe.com/aviation/coupers/index.html

Post a message to the last site listed above to see about getting a
ride in an Ercoupe near you.

And for a description of an amazing cross-country in an Ercoupe, see

http://www.jimsladesairlines.com/rothenberg.html
http://www.jimsladesairlines.com/rothenberg2.html

>>>>> "JH" == Jay Honeck > writes:

>> I've got somewhat of a liking for Ercoupes and its
>> derivitives. They seem to be inexpensive to purchase, and
>> somewhat cheap to fly and maintain. For a fairly new pilot, who
>> just want to fly for the fun of it, are they a good bet?

JH> I think Ercoupes are very, very cool. They are the most
JH> affordable "classic" airplane out there, and will only
JH> appreciate in value. And, hey, there just aren't too many
JH> planes you can fly nowadays with your arm hanging on the
JH> window-sill!

JH> That said, they've had some issues with corrosion (what older
JH> plane hasn't?), some issues with maintaining the older
JH> engines, and they really aren't very good cross-country
JH> machines. (Well, unless you're not in a hurry. And they're
JH> still way faster than driving.)

JH> The only other real drawback is weight limitations. You
JH> aren't going to be able to carry two big people, nor will you
JH> be able to carry much in the way of luggage.

JH> Still, I'd take one over a Cessna 152 any day!

[Darrel Toepfer]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> Still, I'd take one over a Cessna 152 any day!

You must be thinking 150, 152 is a much better crosscountry capable
machine than an Ecoup. An extra 10/15/25hp out front makes a big
difference over the Coup offerings and a C150/100...

[Montblack]

("Doofus P. Leadbottom" wrote)
> I've got somewhat of a liking for Ercoupes and its derivitives. They seem
> to be inexpensive to purchase, and somewhat cheap to fly and maintain. For
> a fairly new pilot, who just want to fly for the fun of it, are they a
> good
> bet?


No. they're crap. Now go away ...and quit trying to drive up the price of my
favorite little airplane.

$15K (flying *and* annualed) if you get lucky ...just a little.

$16-$20K for many - watch out, some of these are dogs with much work needed.

$21-$25K asking on a bunch more of them - this is where much value can be
realized, IMHO. Some of these have $15K worth of effort poured into them
over the past 5 years.

Anything over that price is probably a 1960's Alon or the Mooney version
(twin Ercoupe tail or straight Mooney tail) ...some of those are listed at
$35K and up. There are some 1946 Ercoupes going for big money too, but
they're really, really cherry ...or their owners are nuts.

http://www.ercoupe.org/Coupe_models_table.htm

The 415C and 415 CD's are the two models available to Sport Pilot hopefuls
because of the 1,320 lb LSP restriction. If one of those planes has had a
mod installed over the years, it might have pushed the GW up to 1,400 lbs -
now it's out of LSP contention.

The LSP 16hr/120 hour maintenance program option does not apply to Ercoupes
because it is a previously certified airplane outside of the new LSP
umbrella - according to the EAA guru of all things Sport Pilot. Annuals
still need to be handled the way one would handle an annual for their
Warrior or C-152/172.


Montblack

[Dave Stadt]

"Doofus P. Leadbottom" > wrote in message
. 18...
> I've got somewhat of a liking for Ercoupes and its derivitives. They seem
> to be inexpensive to purchase, and somewhat cheap to fly and maintain. For
> a fairly new pilot, who just want to fly for the fun of it, are they a
good
> bet?

For sure great little airplanes just beware the recent center section AD.

[N93332]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> No. they're crap. Now go away ...and quit trying to drive up the price of
> my favorite little airplane.

I agree with what Montblack, Jay and Bob have already said about the
Ercoupe. I bought my 415-C 3.5 years ago while I was living in southern
Texas. I had a pre-inspection done and a checkout for insurance then flew it
from Iowa to Texas. I flew it locally a couple times a month while in Texas
for about 6 months then I moved back to Iowa and flew it more often. About 6
months after that, I moved to Minnesota and the closest hangar available was
30 miles away and I didn't get a chance to fly as much as I wanted. I
finally got the plane moved to a hangar near where I was living and would
try to fly at least weekly during the summer. I have moved again and the
plane is again 30+ miles away so I'm not flying as much as I want, again.

When I bought mine 3+ years ago, most flyable Ercoupes were in the $10-15k
range. My annual inspections and maintenance have been reasonable, 'usually'
about $300 each year. The majors were replacing the battery, tires, sliding
windows, cargo bag, cracked rudder rib, removed the old 90-channel Nav/Com
and installed a MicroAir com radio, Trimble GPS, and a directional gyro.
Altogether, if I were to sell it for the $15-20k range that they're going
for now, I'd still make a fairly good profit.

I'm debating whether to sell mine or find local partners that want to share
the expenses. I have also considered getting the Sport Pilot CFI added to my
PPL so I could do some training in it.

As far as the OP was asking about an Ercoupe, yes, it's great for that
mission. If you're interested in using one for Sport Pilot purposes, get the
415-C (or C/D?). If you don't fail your medical, you can still fly it...

-Greg B.

[xyzzy]

Montblack wrote:

> ("Doofus P. Leadbottom" wrote)
>
>> I've got somewhat of a liking for Ercoupes and its derivitives. They seem
>> to be inexpensive to purchase, and somewhat cheap to fly and maintain.
>> For
>> a fairly new pilot, who just want to fly for the fun of it, are they a
>> good
>> bet?
>
>
>
> No. they're crap. Now go away ...and quit trying to drive up the price
> of my favorite little airplane.

The asking prices have really jumped lately. Now it seems like mid-20s
is the low-end price for a decent one :( Don't know if people are
actually getting that price though.

[Dan]

"xyzzy" > wrote in message
...

>
> The asking prices have really jumped lately. Now it seems like mid-20s is
> the low-end price for a decent one :( Don't know if people are actually
> getting that price though.
>

There is such a huge difference in asking price vs real price that it's
almost worth ignoring the asking price. I'd love to see a way to post sold
vs asking prices for people so their expectations are within reason.

[[email protected]]

I flew a later-model Alon with the twin rudders, and in
comparing it to the two 150s we had at the time, that Ercoupe
outperformed the 150 every way possible except in useful load. It had
90 hp, 10 less than the 150, grossed 150 lbs less, and would take off
shorter, climb 50% better, cruise 20 mph faster. Noisy and
uncomfortable, though, and though it had rudder pedals, they did little
besides steer the thing on the ground. Slips were insignificant. It
would sink badly if you let the speed get too low on final, but most
short-winged airplanes are like that. The Ercoupe was stall-proof, but
many were broken when they got too slow and pancaked in.

Dan

[xyzzy]

Doofus P. Leadbottom wrote:

> I've got somewhat of a liking for Ercoupes and its derivitives. They seem
> to be inexpensive to purchase, and somewhat cheap to fly and maintain. For
> a fairly new pilot, who just want to fly for the fun of it, are they a good
> bet?

I had been fascinated with these for a long time and eventually I found
a kind owner who took let me fly in his, with him in the right seat. It
was a 415CD with the 90HP engine installed. No rudder pedals. It was a
blast for buzzing around the pattern but it did have its drawbacks. The
rudderless design meant a few quirks. For example taking off and landing
with a left crosswind was, ummm, interesting. The plane wants to
weathervane into the wind, plus despite a design that was supposed to
eliminate it, it has a left turning tendency so you have to steer right
when the crosswind is left, which raises the upwind wing which can be
disconcerting on takeoff and landing roll though I think you would get
used to it. Right after liftoff or right before touchdown you can find
yourself banking pretty steeply right to stay straight down the runway
in a left crosswind. Yikes. In a right crosswind the left-turning
tendency seemed to counteract the weathervaning tendency so it was much
more comfortable.

Also flying in the bumps was kind of sloppy because if you raise a wing
that turbulence has lowered, you also yaw that way, so you do a lot of
wallowing. I've heard flying in turbulence in one of these described as
"shepherding it in the correct general direction".

On the plus side, the plane is uber cool, you never worry about spins,
and there's nothing like flying around on a warm day with the top open.
For me at 6'2" with a headset it would not be comfortable at all with
the top closed, but the one I flew had a 152 seat installed that the
owner said was taller than normal (he is a shorter guy). 'coupes have
limited capability, but an honest look at my logbook shows that it's
plenty of plane for probably 80% of the flying I actually do that isn't
instrument training. I'm working on my instrument now so I'm getting
used to planes with more capability but if I had the money I would
consider buying one for use as a nice-day knockabout.

[Paul Anton]

I just sold my 0-200 equipped 415D for 19,500. It sold 3 days after I posted
an ad in the Ercoupe Owners Club news letter.
It was in excellent condition, however as a "D" model it was NOT Sport Pilot
qualified.
There was no quibble on the price which makes me think I sold it too low.

My only reason for selling was the need for more useful load.

I just wrote a check for a PA22-150.

Cheers:

Paul
EX NC2273H

"
>
> There is such a huge difference in asking price vs real price that it's
> almost worth ignoring the asking price. I'd love to see a way to post sold
> vs asking prices for people so their expectations are within reason.
>

[xyzzy]

Paul Anton wrote:

> I just sold my 0-200 equipped 415D for 19,500. It sold 3 days after I posted
> an ad in the Ercoupe Owners Club news letter.
> It was in excellent condition, however as a "D" model it was NOT Sport Pilot
> qualified.

Ironically, it probably would have been worth more if it could carry less.

[xyzzy]

Btw, what does the O-200 do to the useful load of a 415D anyway?

Paul Anton wrote:

> I just sold my 0-200 equipped 415D for 19,500. It sold 3 days after I posted
> an ad in the Ercoupe Owners Club news letter.
> It was in excellent condition, however as a "D" model it was NOT Sport Pilot
> qualified.
> There was no quibble on the price which makes me think I sold it too low.
>
> My only reason for selling was the need for more useful load.
>
> I just wrote a check for a PA22-150.
>
> Cheers:
>
> Paul
> EX NC2273H
>
> "
>
>>There is such a huge difference in asking price vs real price that it's
>>almost worth ignoring the asking price. I'd love to see a way to post sold
>>vs asking prices for people so their expectations are within reason.
>>
>
>
>


--
"You can support the troops but not the president"
--Representative Tom Delay (R-TX), during the Kosovo war.

[Dave Stadt]

"xyzzy" > wrote in message
...
> Btw, what does the O-200 do to the useful load of a 415D anyway?

The O-200 is within a pound or two of the C-85.

[xyzzy]

Dave Stadt wrote:
> "xyzzy" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Btw, what does the O-200 do to the useful load of a 415D anyway?
>
>
> The O-200 is within a pound or two of the C-85.
>
>
>

Ok, but does the 0-200 STC increase the gross weight of the plane?

[Tri-Pacer]

>>
>>>Btw, what does the O-200 do to the useful load of a 415D anyway?
>>
>>
>> The O-200 is within a pound or two of the C-85.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Ok, but does the 0-200 STC increase the gross weight of the plane?

No not in itself. However in order to install an 0-200, the plane must be
converted to, or be a "D" model which has 1400# gross weight rather than the
1260 of the "C" or "C-D"
Coupes.

Paul
N1431A