Fair price for partially completed kit?

ArrowFlyer86

ArrowFlyer86

En-Route
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jul 17, 2019
Messages
3,285
Location
Around
Display Name
Flight
Link: Lancair Legacy Kit

It's kind of a pipe dream, but also could be a reality for the right price. It'd let me check two major boxes: getting my dream single-engine plane and getting some experience building (with some skilled assistance...). Thing is, they're asking $95k for it and I can't grasp how that makes sense (way too high IMHO).

At the end of the day I know the only price that matters is what I'm willing to pay, but I'm also not sure how to properly value the work that's already gone into it. I'm curious to poll the group, especially people with build experience -- what would you think is fair value?

Personally, I would think if someone has had this project going for nearly a quarter century (started the build in 2002) and only gotten it to this point -- they'd be willing to separate from it at nearly any price. But I might be mistaken :). Any thoughts welcome.
 
What i see with the van's kits is that they typically sell for about what they would cost from Van's. A bit of a discount if started, a bit of a premium if nearly completed (well). Looking briefly at other lanceair kits, that price doesn't seem terribly insane. Bear in mind that the rv14 kits will set you back about 75k with the fwf kit.

No clue how complete the kit you linked to is.... it'd probably be hard to tell unless you've built one. You'd have to find a guy who's experienced in composite airframes to tell you if it looks good.

Im allergic to fiberglass, so don't call me, and no, you can't have your prop back. :biggrin:
 
I would start by listing future expenses;
engine & engine mount & controls & sensors & hoses
avionics
paint
interior
I didn't see the landing gear in the description or photos
etc
etc
etc
Once you are done with this list of expenses, tally and compare to a flying Legacy price.
Any difference would have to make sense because you will have years of labor as well (during which you could have been flying the ready to go Legacy).
(I have no idea if this one is a fair price or not.)
Good luck!
 
Also; some tips:
www.kitplanes.com

Buying an Unfinished Project - KITPLANES

There are plenty of things to look out for before committing to an unknown collection of parts and pieces from another fellow builder.
www.kitplanes.com www.kitplanes.com

It's in California, I know a Lancair-knowledgeable person thataway who may be helpful at doing a prebuy.
He has told me of some insane stories about poor composite construction (peel-ply not being removed before bonding! etc)
I'd want any partially completed kit, (even a completed one) looked over by a person with intimate knowledge of the type.
 
Dav8or

Thread 'So... used 1/2 built kit, what happens?'

What happens when you buy somebody's partially built kit plane? When you finish it, are you recorded as the builder and have full privileges even though you did not complete 51%??

If so, the unfinished and seemingly unpopular "half builts" might represent one of GA's greatest values. Low cost, new plane, fast build time, and all the advantages of the E/AB plane. Sort of a fast build on steroids at half the cost.

I am ignorant on the particulars, so what is the truth?
 
To get the aircraft registered as E-AB over 50% of the points on a FAA task list must have been done for education or recreation. Has no correlation to 51% of the actual labor hours. And there are no restrictions on how the work is divided among some number of individuals.

To get the repairman certificate, the FAA talked about building "the major portion" and convince them that you have your **** together. But, as I understand it, they do not require that you built more than half.

Post MOSAIC you can do condition inspections if you take the appropriate class for a Light Sport Repairman certificate.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
Thing is, they're asking $95k for it and I can't grasp how that makes sense (way too high IMHO).
Click to expand...
But ... but... "This isn't just a kit. It's a launchpad for something exceptional"!!! And you just can't put a price on that, can you?!? :rolleyes:
ArrowFlyer86 said:
Personally, I would think if someone has had this project going for nearly a quarter century (started the build in 2002) and only gotten it to this point -- they'd be willing to separate from it at nearly any price. But I might be mistaken :). Any thoughts welcome.
Click to expand...
If the owner is unreasonably emotionally attached, his heirs will be far more clear-eyed. Especially if that attachment comes with ongoing storage fees. I wonder where its been kept for that long?

Good luck to you.
 
DJTorrente said:
But ... but... "This isn't just a kit. It's a launchpad for something exceptional"!!! And you just can't put a price on that, can you?!? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yeah, the marketing bits in TAP always get a chuckle out of me. But I get it... They want to build some enthusiasm!

In other news: it appears the owner just edited the post this morning and actually increased the price to $98k (95->98). So I'm going to assume they're pretty married to that range. That prices me out of the project.
No way I'm throwing down $100k for a half-finished project that started 23 years ago. Couldn't justify $100k when it still needs like >$100k worth of stuff and lots of time investment required to be flyable. Oh well. It was worth a look.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
Yeah, the marketing bits in TAP always get a chuckle out of me. But I get it... They want to build some enthusiasm!

In other news: it appears the owner just edited the post this morning and actually increased the price to $98k (95->98). So I'm going to assume they're pretty married to that range. That prices me out of the project.
No way I'm throwing down $100k for a half-finished project that started 23 years ago. Couldn't justify $100k when it still needs like >$100k worth of stuff and lots of time investment required to be flyable. Oh well. It was worth a look.
Click to expand...

Offer him $9,800. Make sure he didn't accidentally misplace a decimal.
 
2-Bit Speed said:
Offer him $9,800. Make sure he didn't accidentally misplace a decimal.
Click to expand...
If he misplaced the decimal on both prices, then I'm worried about that lack of attention to detail applying to his homebuilt aircraft construction, too ;)

In all honesty, your suggested offer is closer to what I would have offered than his asking price. It's clear the person isn't going to finish the build, and he/she needs to find a very specific type of person willing to pick that project up. The capex they incurred seems to be from decades ago, so I imagine the financial hurt of selling it "at a loss" wouldn't be as severe as if they'd just started the build last year. My guess is that it sells for nowhere near $100k unless there is someone really desperate to build a legacy. Then again I've never bought a kit, much less a partially completed one, so what do I know!
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
In other news: it appears the owner just edited the post this morning and actually increased the price to $98k (95->98).
Click to expand...
Maybe he just edited it again, because when I click on the link, it says: 1764626197219.png
 
Vance Breese said:
It is my observation that there is very little value added from the work already completed until she flies.
A lot of time may be spent figuring out if the work was done to your standards.
Good luck!
Click to expand...
My experience also. If a new kit is 35K, a partially built project is about 35K.

If you are going to buy a partially built kit see if you can get the seller to throw in some of the build tools,
 
Just me, I wouldn't trust any structural composite part of an aircraft that wasn't built by either a reputable manufacturer, or someone I knew well enough to trust their integrity, attention to detail, and skill with my life. I've never built a full sized airplane, but I have worked with fiberglass and carbon fiber at a hobby level, and there are way more ways to get it wrong than right, and I don't believe you can test some of them without testing to failure.

One example - with a wet layup, that's supposed to be done as one continuous operation, the builder takes a little break. Maybe to have lunch, maybe they're tired, maybe they run out of material. They come back at it, some of the epoxy is still wet, but some is partly cured and there's a little amine blush on top. They put the rest of the layers on, and 80% of it adheres just fine. But it 100% looks and sounds fine. (You can sometimes hear delaminated composite by tapping on it. But not necessarily improperly/inconsistently adhered.)

Or...they mix the epoxy up really well. But it's been sitting around for a year and a half. It's only in a middle layer. It mostly cures. Looks just fine. It'll be ok. Or they don't measure it right, or they don't mix it right, or they don't use an appropriate epoxy at all, or they lay up part of it too dry, or the cloth is contaminated. Etc.

Perhaps my views are overly cautious.
 
This is another one (lancair IV instead of legacy -- very different missions I know), though substantially more complete. Though it's taken another quarter century to complete.


I don't mean to judge, I've never built, but I have to ask if there's a point where you just say the old progress on the airframe is essentially not much of a value add because it's so dated? In a case like this I'd rather ask the engine/prop are separated from the airframe for sale (I'd want to affix my own). Is that reasonable?

Also: if an experienced Lancair specialist said the airframe build quality was good, then that asking price seems beyond reasonable. Cheap even.
 
Last edited:
From that ad, that stood out to me, seller's words:

"The microfiber coating on wings and fuselage was removed and replaced to decrease weight and smoothness. As an amature, my original was too thick."
"Then moved it to N Las Vegas in '21 for some rework w experienced builder."
"I'm satisfied these modifications are safety/reliability improvements."
"Or consult w buyer for all my engineering and construction improvements."

Seller sounds like a genuinely nice guy that's been through some rough patches. But that doesn't speak to build or repair or rework or re-engineering capability.

Maybe it's a perfect build, but I wouldn't assume it. Example of composite not done quite right. Almost right. Not quite right:

www.kathrynsreport.com

Lancair Evolution, N7569A: Accident occurred February 07, 2021 at Shively Field Airport (KSAA) Saratoga, Carbon County, Wyoming

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final repor...
www.kathrynsreport.com www.kathrynsreport.com
from that: https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/95177/pdf

I won't rain on your ideas anymore, you're an adult and a pilot. I kinda think your dream might be clouding your judgement, but I don't know your risk tolerance or motivations. If you were a family member I'd be yelling at you...out of concern. If I were to buy a partially built airplane, it would be riveted.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
I've never built
Click to expand...
Unless you really want to build, I would suggest looking for a flying EAB. With MOSAIC allowing non-builders to complete condition inspection, the benefit of being builder of record is negligible imho. Find a flying one either on the higher end and pay the premium, or on the lower end and do whatever mods you want to make it your aircraft.
 
Albany Tom said:
Seller sounds like a genuinely nice guy that's been through some rough patches. But that doesn't speak to build or repair or rework or re-engineering capability.
Click to expand...
It's hard for me to trace the heritage of the different Lancair designs over the permutations of the companies, so I don't know if my take on the accident report you linked has any bearing on the OP airframe. That being said, my read of the accident report raises some fundamental questions regarding the basic engineering and understanding of that engineering, not just *re* engineering, of the subject airplane.

Nauga,
not a fan
 
nauga said:
It's hard for me to trace the heritage of the different Lancair designs over the permutations of the companies, so I don't know if my take on the accident report you linked has any bearing on the OP airframe. That being said, my read of the accident report raises some fundamental questions regarding the basic engineering and understanding of that engineering, not just *re* engineering, of the subject airplane.

Nauga,
not a fan
Click to expand...
That's fair, and a good point. I'm combining at least two potentially unrelated risks for a home built aircraft. One is that a builder strays from the original design and/or methods intentionally, which I'd call re-engineering. To me, that's dangerous even if the builder is very knowledgeable, because it's nearly impossible to predict the unintended coupling of one change with another system, and along with that it's probably difficult to test how it affects the aircraft without flying it. The second risk is that the builder unintentionally doesn't follow the correct procedures. That would be things that may seem insignificant, like using the wrong kind of sander, to things that someone just might not know, like having a dry layup or other cause of a future de-lamination.

In no way do I want to put down the Lancair designs or the use of composites for home built aircraft. Everything I've heard about them has been positive, except that they're a handful and that's by design and expected from the performance. And I am certain it's possible to do composites at home safely if you follow the right procedures.
 
Albany Tom said:
In no way do I want to put down the Lancair designs...
Click to expand...
Critical thinking is not mandatory when selecting a kit, but it is helpful. Some people see cheese; others, myself included, look in the holes.
Specific to the windscreen failure report you posted, why do you think Lancair was unwilling or unable to provide engineering data requested by the NTSB and NIAR for their high performance pressurized turboprop airplane?

Nauga,
and his big tail
 
nauga said:
Critical thinking is not mandatory when selecting a kit, but it is helpful. Some people see cheese; others, myself included, look in the holes.
Specific to the windscreen failure report you posted, why do you think Lancair was unwilling or unable to provide engineering data requested by the NTSB and NIAR for their high performance pressurized turboprop airplane?

Nauga,
and his big tail
Click to expand...
:) I'm not going to speculate on communications between a manufacturer and the NTSB, except to say it's interesting that it made it into the report.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top