I contacted a seller of a Kitfox IV in TN on barnstormers. He told me the following about his Kitfox IV for sale:
1. Always hangered.
2. Looks like the day it was built.
3. There is only one spot by the door where the belt rubbed the paint.
4. Seats are in great condition.
5. Hoses and lines are in good condition.
He asked me to make a deposit of $1,000 to hold the plane until I could get to TN to see the plane. I was hesitant but I agreed as he came across honest to me and I tend to try and trust people until proven otherwise.
Here is the short list of what I found:
1. This plane was not hangered all its life. The fabric in the plane was badly faded on both the pilot and passenger sides. The paint also looked like it was weathered pretty bad. I noticed some recent marks on the tires where it had just been rolled off of the trailer that comes with this "deal". So the plane appeared to be "staged for sale" in a hangar at the airport. My impression was that this plane was kept somewhere else and brought to this hangar for sale.
2. The right brake was leaking fluid.
3. The right rudder pedal was catching and rubbing.
4. The throttle you had to hold constantly or it would not maintain the set RPM.
5. The fuel hoses coming out of the wing tanks were cracked.
6. The oil cooler had been cut in half to fit under the cowling.
7. The oil and coolant hoses needed replacement.
8. The engine maintinance under the cowl was bad. He had 6 small zip ties chained together to hold one hose out of the way. So instead of buying 1 larger zip tie he put 6 small ones together to make it work.
9. He had duct tape on the underside of the plane and it was even falling off.
10. The EGT gauges did not work.
11. The trim was broken.
12. The leading edge tape needed replacement a long time ago.
13. The ball was way out of center and I was just told to remember where it was supposed to be.
On the 16 hour drive back my dad and I came up with well over 24 things wrong with the plane. The plane looked way way different than the pictures. My dad and I even questioned if it was the same plane. At the end of the day, we left without the plane. I just couldn't throw good money after bad. I called the guy after we went to lunch and he refused to give the money back. I didn't care at this point. I was too frustrated. I thought of all the things that were wrong and how I felt he was dishonest. And then I wondered what he might not be telling me. If he had a prop strike, would he have been honest about that? He did have two engine outs when it had a 2 stroke on it. Was he hiding hard landings from those? If he was dishonest about a few things I can only speculate what else he was dishonest about.
Some of the other things I knew beforehand but did not like but was willing to accept:
1. He ran 100LL and never used a lead scavenger.
2. He never re shimmed the gearbox in 1250 hours.
3. He never changed the coolant.
On a positive note, my dad and I had a great road trip out to TN. We saw some real nice country and listened to Band of Brothers on CD. I think I will always remember the trip with my dad to go buy a plane! and for that, it was worth more than actually coming home with one.
One thing I've learned over the years is.........you can't tell the condition of the airplane by pictures. Several months ago, a gentleman sent me some pics of a J-3 Cub, supposedly was recently covered and the engine had been overhauled. I was very skeptical of the overhaul quality after talking to him on the phone. Pics looked good.......they usually do. Some how, another buyer found out I was interested in the plane too. He had airline across the country to buy the plane and fly it home. he was very disappointed when he saw it and passed on it. He sent me some pics he took, those pics showed some of the very poor fabric job in places. Needless to say I passed too.
A couple years ago, I went and looked at another J-3 that had been disassembled and ready for cover......The fuselage had tubing welded in places that shouldn't have been there, and round tubing where square tubing should be and vice versa. Had some terrible welds, etc etc. Was missing lots of parts, and the 5 hr smoh engine was overhauled in 60's...........Yes I passed.
Recently looking for an engine for my Kitfox, I've found several engines with low time SMOH, but when I call, they were done 40-50 years ago and had been sitting since.
All I can say is be careful and ask questions, and lots of close up pictures, and still don't send any money, till you've seen it up close.
Whenever I've sold an airplane, and a potential buyer calls after seeing the ad, I usually start off by telling the worse things about the plane and going from there.
Your story drives home my thoughts of how so many people are today. I am constantly disappointed by others. I just dont know how they sleep at night. I too will mention the bad first when i sell something. Maybe thats why i usually end up with the short end of the stick. Glad to hear it was a good trip with your dad though. Ken
I try my best to be as honest and forthright as possible when I talk to prospective buyers. I'm probably more negative that I should be when discribing something. I would much rather someone tell me it is better than I described than have them disappointed and upset for traveling to look at it and wasting time. The last three guys that looked at my KF all mentioned that I discribed it accurately.
I have been 'burned' also by the less than honest sellers. I have come to realize that one person's idea of a 'like new' item can mean something totally different than my idea of 'like new'.
In the early 90's I was intent on buying a Lake Amphibian, and looked at a bunch of them for sale. Problem was the nice ones were well past my budget. Then I stumbled on a much less expensive one only a hundred miles away. On the phone the seller told me the plane was top notch, so thinking I found my affordable but nice Lake Amphib, excited to the max, I drove down to have a look with checkbook in hand. But, oh my god! The plane looked absolutely horrific. There wasn't any part on that plane that looked top notch. The interior literally had duct tape and scotch tape all over it holding things together, and half of the painted interior parts had the paint chipped off or flaking. And the exterior? That had about 12 different paint colors, a combination of the original 1964 paint now all faded and chalky, along with multi colored primered panels that had been replaced randomly. Even the glass was horrible. The plexi glass windows had so many stress cracks there were parts of them that were hard to see out of.
It was kept tied down on the grass alongside the runway with bird netting over the engine. The old guy that owned it was a nice guy, but obviously had a much different perspective than I of what top notch meant. He did admit that he had people come from many other states to buy it, but they never even got out of their cars to look at it because it looked so bad.
BUT, the engine and prop had just been overhauled by reputable shops, and mechanically the old ratty looking Lake was in pretty good mechanical condition. So I negotiated the price down further, now making it a good price if you were looking at it as a project rather than a flying airplane, and bought it. Five years later I ended up with one of the nicest old Lake Amphibs around. Oh, and it is a really good flying one to boot (it's much lighter than newer ones).
Funny part of that story is years later when flying a flight instructor friend around in my freshly restored Lake, he went on to tell me the airport he worked at for a while had this incredibly bad looking Lake tied down there, owned by an old guy that had lost his medical. He said the old guy told him he could fly it all he wanted if he just put fuel in it, as he didn't want to see it become I active. But my friend said even though he had obtained his seaplane rating and was just chomping at the bit to get a seaplane to fly, he very nicely told the old guy he wasn't interested in flying his old Lake. Well, you should have seen his face when I told him the plane he was in was that old guy's Lake! The expression on his face was precious.
I think most airplanes for sale are overstated. So I approach every potential purchase with the buyer beware attitude. And if I get a better airplane I'm much happier
I've learned my lesson on sending money to hold it until I can see it! I've bought and sold 3 powered parachutes over the last 10 years. I've always pointed out the things that were issues. I had a 582 on one that was just hard to start no matter what I did. I let the buyer know that before he drove all the way to NM to pick it up. Those are some good stories to learn from about the Lake and Cub!
I have decided to try and get my boys into aviation. I could start with a powered parachute but I always found the dual controls useless. That's what started me down the journey of a kitfox or zenith. Not too worried about teaching them in a tailwheel because it would be a long time before I would actually let them have the controls for takeoff and landing. The zenith was crossed off the list initially because the 1100lb gross weight of the 701. And alot of the 701's were built heavy. One I looked at only had a useful weight of 430lbs. Not enough to fly with me and dad on board. I will continue my search for a well maintained IV or light 701. Just have to be patient and smart about it. And head the advice of things like you guys on the forum.
Wes
You'd be much happier with a Kitfox 4 than a 701 Zenair (I've flown them both).
Not only will the Kitfox haul more weight, but you will also like the cruise speeds better (much better. It will feel like a hotrod by comparison!). I also think tbe Kitfox is a sturdier airplane, which is probably why it can haul more weight. The 701 is a fun airplane to fly, like most LSA types are. But the Kitfox is much more versatile because of all of its capabilities, much more nimble in flight, and has the benefit of wings that fold in five minutes, should you desire that.
The Kitfox as a trainer will make for better pilots too, as it is a great flyer but sensitive on controls so you definitely have to "fly it to the hangar door". So if a new pilot gets good in a Kitfox he will probably find transitioning to other aircraft much easier. That's not to say a Kitfox is hard to fly, it's not. But it does require good stick and rudder skills to fly it well.
Buyer beware!
Reply With Quote
