Low-time Micco SP-20 - how much would you pay?

[foka4]

Perfect open-ended forum question, eh?

Like Kent, I've been looking for the perfect next airplane, but I'm finding a limited selection. Here are the requirements: 2 seats, economical (at least in terms of MPG, but ideally in terms of low fuel consumption as well), SPIFR capable, and a tailwheel. Nice-to-haves include retractable gear and 200 hp (for complex and high performance time).

Honestly, I think the LSA category has limited the options, because it's pulled some good 140kt, IFR-capable, 5gph designs into a 120kt VFR category.

Since I don't care if a plane is certified or not, my list includes the 2-place RVs, but the only certified candidates I've found are the Globe Swift and the Micco. I've found a couple of Micco SP-20s for sale, but I'm a little hesitant, so I'd like to hear some opinions.

(BTW - the Fury isn't on my list because I think it'll be 15 years before I can afford one. Other than that, it truly is the perfect airplane.)

M

 

[TMetzinger]

Perfect open-ended forum question, eh?

Like Kent, I've been looking for the perfect next airplane, but I'm finding a limited selection. Here are the requirements: 2 seats, economical (at least in terms of MPG, but ideally in terms of low fuel consumption as well), SPIFR capable, and a tailwheel. Nice-to-haves include retractable gear and 200 hp (for complex and high performance time).

Just to pick a nit - doesn't the engine have to be OVER 200 HP to be high performance?

 

[foka4]

Tim, maybe you're splitting hairs, but I'd sure hate to pony up for an airplane that misses the mark by 1hp. I guess I'll have to look into it. Thanks!

M

 

[Ghery]

Just to pick a nit - doesn't the engine have to be OVER 200 HP to be high performance?

Yes, it does. That's why all I got with the PA-28R-200 was my complex endorsement. Had to use the C-182 for the high performance endorsement. Not that I minded, just that much more flying.

 

[Henning]

Tim, maybe you're splitting hairs, but I'd sure hate to pony up for an airplane that misses the mark by 1hp. I guess I'll have to look into it. Thanks!

M

Yep, because if it's gonna log as HP time, it's got to be 201+hp.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Here are the requirements: 2 seats, economical (at least in terms of MPG, but ideally in terms of low fuel consumption as well), SPIFR capable, and a tailwheel. Nice-to-haves include retractable gear and 200 hp (for complex and high performance time).

Dude, that says 210hp Super Swift all over it.

 

[Ken Ibold]

The SP-20 is a nice airplane, but pales in comparison to its big brother, the SP-26, which is also aerobatic to boot.

The wisdom of buying an orphan of which there are only a few in existance is questionable indeed, unless you have the time/money/expertise to deal with the replacement parts issues and other things that would normally come in the form of factory support or aftermarket support that stems from large numbers of aircraft in the field.

I would look at the RVs first, and then the Swift. A good amateur-built is, in many respects, a superior ownership experience than a certified aircraft, and all other things equal I think newer = better until you have a lot of ownership experience.

 

[steingar]

Fly an RV, and you'll be sold.

 

[flyersfan31]

Fly an RV, and you'll be sold.

Better yet, build one yourself!!!

 

[foka4]

Supposedly Micco parts are available once again.

Looks like the 210 Swift might be the only affordable way to get complex, HP, tailwheel time.

With an engineering background and a lifetime of tinkering and wrenching, I'm totally comfortable with the idea of building an RV, but considering that used RVs are in much greater supply than my free time these days, I've slowly swayed toward the "why build it when you can buy it" mentality. I think the ideal scenario would be to find a nearly complete RV carcass that I could equip to my liking. But I'm pretty picky about other people's workmanship (or workwomanship, as the case may be).

I'm definitely sold on the idea of aircraft ownership. It's worked great with the Foka and the 140. The Foka is an orphan for all practical purposes, but it's made of wood, so parts grow on trees. I enjoy working on aircraft, and ownership has provided opportunity to dig into things further than you can on a rental plane.

Looks like I may have too many competing objectives. I guess I should just hang tight and focus more on the one thing that opens up options: earning more cash.

m

 

[steingar]

If you like tinkering buy and experimental. Tinker all you want. You don't get to do that on a certificated airframe, except for a fairly short list of mechanical and cosmetic tasks.