Ercoupe Opinions

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.

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.

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

"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.

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.