SonexBuilders.net

I think the B vs A model is probably the least of the problems with that broker. He may not realize the classic A model is really cool and that the B model is not better in the minds of us classic guys, just a little different (this is humor before any B guys attack me). Hard to believe there are no builder logs or anything, there must be a story hidden there and how can an A&P prove that the airplane is an amateur built effort without any records?

Bryan Cotton wrote:I think the B vs A model is probably the least of the problems with that broker. He may not realize the classic A model is really cool and that the B model is not better in the minds of us classic guys, just a little different (this is humor before any B guys attack me). Hard to believe there are no builder logs or anything, there must be a story hidden there and how can an A&P prove that the airplane is an amateur built effort without any records?

Thanks for the confirmation on the coolness of the A models over the B models (yes this is humor also).

From his site there is this answer to a question about the build:

Q: Does the plane come with any build logs/receipts for parts? posted by: ********* 12/9/2023 5:14 PM CT
A: No build logs or receipts. The builders were a group of friends, mostly engineers from Honeywell. They finished the build and never got an AP to sign off. Its ready for someone to get an ap involved and fly off its 40

He may not realize that it will take a DAR and not an A&P to sign it off for an A/W but what do I know?

So as you noted ... nothing to go on will make it difficult going forward unless you want to buy it for another of the listed suggestions:

An alternative use for this project could be parting out the build to sell off the parts, or use the engine to complete another project. This whole project can be purchased for a fraction of just the engine cost. The airframe could be repurposed as a centerpiece for a FBO, restaurant, man cave, or a property entrance. Project aircraft shows in like new condition.

Perhaps the bidding should start at $2000.99 (minimum 2k) ...

Dale
3.0 Corvair/Tailwheel

C'mon Dale...Don't start outbidding me before it even gets started.

:)

What's your guess on selling price? Come on everyone. Lets toss some numbers out there. I'm at $6500 but I think it could be lower. If I didn't just start into an RV-6 project I picked up, I would consider seriously bidding. Its a long way to haul it to AZ but could be a good deal.

For other viewers out there, I've done dozens of technical, pre-flighit, and first flight inspections. Group built airplanes tend to be pretty nice as everyone is always checking up on each other.

The FAA registry shows the serial number to be 1152 and a certificate was issued for it on 8-14-2012.

I have my doubts that more than 1000 Bs have been sold, and as I remember, they didn't come out till 2016.

Even though the FAA database shows a 'certificate' was issued, people shouldn't get that confused with an Airworthiness Certificate. Its only a registration. It still has to go thru an Airworthiness inspection.

Best I can tell, there wasn't an airworthiness cert issued, and you'd never get one without the N number on the plane. If anyone wants to see what the FAA has, you can send them $10 for a CD- https://aircraft.faa.gov/e.gov/ND/

If it can't be proven that this was amateur built, it could be a really nice lawn decoration. It's really hard to believe anyone would have build such a nice plane, including paint, and never got it inspected. Of course it's always possible the builder had some sort of issue that prevented him from completing the process. Hopefully someone can pick this up and get it flying legally.

Scott Todd wrote:C'mon Dale...Don't start outbidding me before it even gets started.

:)

What's your guess on selling price? Come on everyone. Lets toss some numbers out there. I'm at $6500 but I think it could be lower. If I didn't just start into an RV-6 project I picked up, I would consider seriously bidding. Its a long way to haul it to AZ but could be a good deal.

For other viewers out there, I've done dozens of technical, pre-flighit, and first flight inspections. Group built airplanes tend to be pretty nice as everyone is always checking up on each other.

It might be worth $6500.00 if you need the parts bad enough. I believe anyone buying such a project and planning to fly it would pull the engine and go through it. It is admitted that the plane has been sitting for awhile and no one knows the expertise (or lack) of the engine builder. My best guess is that it is somewhere between a 2008-2010 A model. Does it have the Aerovee 2.0 or 2.1? That is a very important question as the older cranks & hubs tended to have issues. The older ones also had the 10 amp dynamo but I'm preaching to the choir.

For me it's not worth much as even after going through all the work to get an AW certificate (I'm certain it could be done eventually) I still wouldn't be able to get the repairman's certificate so I'd need an A&P for condition inspections and many that I know aren't too keen on auto conversion engines.

So for parts I'm guessing that it will likely go in the 5K range. I think the broker knows this also as the minimum was set at 2K ...

Dale
3.0 Corvair/Tailwheel

Scott Todd wrote:Even though the FAA database shows a 'certificate' was issued, people shouldn't get that confused with an Airworthiness Certificate. Its only a registration. It still has to go thru an Airworthiness inspection.

My point was that paperwork had been issued long before the B model came out.

Area 51% wrote:

Scott Todd wrote:Even though the FAA database shows a 'certificate' was issued, people shouldn't get that confused with an Airworthiness Certificate. Its only a registration. It still has to go thru an Airworthiness inspection.

My point was that paperwork had been issued long before the B model came out.

Good catch! I do see that Sonex LLC has replied to the YT video to confirm that it is not a B model Sonex ...

Dale
3.0 Corvair/Tailwheel

[quote="daleandee"]

Does it have the Aerovee 2.0 or 2.1? That is a very important question as the older cranks & hubs tended to have issues. The older ones also had the 10 amp dynamo but I'm preaching to the quote]

Just a few points of clarification regarding the aerovee. The original 2.0 motor did not have issues with the crank/hub. There were only 2 failures of a crank before they came out with the 2.1 motor. One was due to the builder not supporting the crank correctly when pressing off the hub. The other was due to a prop strike whete the hub wasn't removed for inspection of the crank. The change in crank came about when they switched suppliers. It gave them an opportunity to use a custom crank that had enough material forward of the #4 bearing to eliminate the groove behind the press fit taper which was a weak spot but not failure prone. Regarding the alternator the 2.0 motor had the 20 amp alternator just like the 2.1 does. Only the very very early aerovess had the 10 amp. I believe they were just called aerovees and did not have the 2.0 or 2.1 designation.