1972 7ECA -- To fix or not to fix?

Yellowbird

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
17
Location
SE Michigan
I am treasurer of a flying club that has had N68526, a 1972 Citabria 7ECA for 40 years. Last fall, one of our members bounced a landing and nicked the prop. I suppose one could say it was a relatively light strike, because he taxied in and wasn't sure he hit it until he shut down the engine. In fact, both tips were bent back at about a 30 degree angle over about 1-1/2" on the tips. We got a repair quote for $16,300, which the insurance company agreed to pay (covering a new prop, labor, and engine inspection/reassembly). But then the A&P that we use said we better pull the prop and look at the cavity in the crankshaft behind the prop (for corrosion). We did, and found some pitting. The A&P said this means we will need a new crankshaft, and that apparently means a full rebuild vs. just an internal inspection. Of course the insurance co. isn't going to pay for corrosion, so that means we would have to put $22k (rebuild) plus about $1500 labor, plus $5000 prop into a $25k (??) airplane. Fabric is airworthy but a little rough, it has the original wood spar, and of course, no ADS-B. I think it could be ferried with a new prop. The engine had about 850 hours SMOH.

So the question is, is there a cheaper way through this, maybe a used engine/prop, or are we better off just selling the damaged aircraft for whatever we can get?
 

bluemoon

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
8
Has the crank been dialed to see if it was bent during the prop strike. If you are lucky it was bent during the accident and should be covered under insurance.
 

Bob Turner

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 4, 2018
Messages
2,826
Get a second opinion on the crank. Send it to Rick Romans or somebody. There are standards other than an eyeball check that apply. If you just take your $25 grand and get another, it, too, will be a pig in a poke.

This is just me, but there seems to be a recent tendency to replace everything with new. I don't think that is always necessary, even in aircraft. I see a lot of new camshafts in small Continentals, but have yet to see an old one worn out. A friend just bought brand new cylinders for his C-90 and gave me his standard bore, non-leaking old cylinders. When mine finally wear out, his go on, and I will then be set for life, assuming I make it to 95.

The reason there are $25K Citabrias out there is that they are far from perfect. After all, the same aircraft is still rolling out of the factory today for six times that price, and it does not fly very much better than the dirtbag one.
 
Last edited:

Yellowbird

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
17
Location
SE Michigan
Thanks, that's a good point. The crank has not been dialed. I don't know why our A&P did not do this, but when he was at the airplane this winter it was pretty cold (20F or so, and no heat). Perhaps once he decided replacement was warranted, he stopped and didn't think of insurance.

Bob, as for judging the corrosion, that is another good point. Since abandoning/selling the airplane is predicated on the corrosion being excessive and driving a major overhaul, a second opinion would be valuable. There are definately small pits that will snag a paper clip, but it wouldn't worry ME (which means exactly nothing). Who is Rick Romans?

Also, I was looking on the web for crankshaft prices and Ventura in CA quoted $3200 (not sure if new or used) which he said meets the corrosion standard. How big of deal is putting it in as part of the inspection? Obviously it means new main and rod bearings, but does that drive a full rebuild?

Thanks
Ted
 

Bob Turner

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 4, 2018
Messages
2,826
There are no regulations that require new parts on a teardown. It sounds like you have not disassembled the engine yet.

I would get data from Lycoming on the corrosion pits. Then compare that with what you have. Do the A/D, and check the crank runout with a dial indicator bolted to the case. If it passes both of those tests, and of course the A/D, then you are ready to bolt another prop on there and fly.

Three grand gets you a used crank, I bet. Another five grand in labor to install it? And it has "acceptable pits?" All crankshafts with voids that do not regularly get fresh oil will corrode. Water and acid get in there.
 

aftCG

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 3, 2018
Messages
526
Location
Tacoma, WA
I'm confused by the numbers (and the process).

Doesn't the $16,300 quote cover the complete teardown and assembly? It used to be generally accepted that if the nose of the crank dialed straight you hung a prop on and went flying. But then liability and a few bad results forced the issue of splitting the case, dialing the entire length and verifying that counterweights had not shifted.

My own aircraft went through this exact decision gate but thankfully it was in 2004 (way before I bought it). I have pics of the crank in the logs and it was solid rust, as if left in a farm field for decades.

A new crank was purchased for around $4600 at that time.

Anyway, if the $16k inspection is pulling a jug and looking around it seems very excessive. If it's a legit teardown then you should only be out the amount of the crank. Fresh bearings and Bob's your uncle.

Otherwise your club is going to take a $16k check and total the plane.

If the crank is rusty now then it was rusty a few weeks ago when it was flying in blissful ignorance.
 

Bartman

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
3,696
Location
New Jersey, USA
My own aircraft went through this exact decision gate but thankfully it was in 2004 (way before I bought it). I have pics of the crank in the logs and it was solid rust, as if left in a farm field for decades.
Mine too after a porpoised landing before I owned it but they didn't find anything wrong and put it back together, even the prop went for overhaul and landed back on the plane.

The problem with all of this, to me, is that a 7ECA with old fabric and a fresh engine isn't going to generate the kind of sale price that would make that engine anything close to a good investment. The cost of fabric down the road will be as much as the entire airplane might be worth on a good day if the group is going to just hand it over and let someone else do all of the work. So the money spent on the engine won't do nearly as much for the resale value as it would on an airframe in much better condition. You guys are more well versed than I am in the costs of engine work but the wood spar 7ECA's are resale-value-constrained by the what a decent wood spar 7GCAA would go for and the wood spar 7GCAA's are resale-value-constrained by what a decent 7KCAB would go for and so on up the list of variants until the aluminum spar airplanes begin to constrain what an owner of a really nice wood spar airplane can hope to ask in a sale. There are so many models and the prices are not very far from each other so doing too much to a lesser model doesn't generate a whole lot in resale value.....IMHO.

Now if the plane can be kept flying without a major investment and if that more reasonable amount can be spread out amongst a few owners then it sounds like there's hope.
 

Yellowbird

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
17
Location
SE Michigan
The quote and insurance of $16,300 is for removal of the engine, shipping to an engine facility for tear down and inspection, reassembly with expected parts (assuming no prop strike damage to engine parts), reinstallation, airframe inspection, and a new prop --- I.e. It is a complete job assuming no damage except the propeller. That would be a simple choice. The stumbling block is that our usual A&P looked at the crank cavity corrosion and told us the prop strike inspection would not be enough since there are small but visible pits. He said we would need a crankshaft (at minimum) and probably a full rebuid (about $22k). Out of the $16300, only about $10000 was allocated for the engine shop disassembly/inspection/reassembly, so with the $22k rebuild, we would still need to add about $6300. So that gets us to investing $28300 in the airplane, which doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.

Our A&P also thought we could get 10k or so for the damaged plane as is. That might be OK, but I am doubting we could get it. (Any thoughts regarding the value of a 1972 7ECA, with dead engine, as is?)

So, since starting this thread, I've started to try to look at what is assumption and what is fact. I found that Lycoming service bulletin 533C for prop strike does indeed require full tear down and inspection following a prop strike like ours for all their piston engines. Also, SB-505B allows ZERO pitting in the crank cavity, but the O-235 series is not listed as being covered by the SB (Only larger engines). So, I am now wondering if our crank might actually be OK for corrosion, and perhaps could be inspected for prop strike damage and re-installed after all. (That is, after checking externally with a dial indicator to get as much intelligence as cheaply possible )

Or, since I can get a refurbished crank for about $3000 plus bearings, maybe that would be realistic. But there is still the risk that a lot more will end up needing to be done, so the fixed price rebuild, might be the only way to go with our engine, especially if the crank is known to be needed (except ruled out by cost)

I also located a used O-235-C1 (1100hours SMOH, but quite old) for about $9500. If it's any good, that could be a path out with a cost about equal to the insurance money. I think that might be the best, lowest risk, option if we could find an engine we were confident of, at a reasonable price.

For now, I need to confirm the corrosion issue, and get some dial readings

Thanks for all your thoughts
 

aftCG

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 3, 2018
Messages
526
Location
Tacoma, WA
Here is a little perspective, just my opinion.

Last week your club had a Citabria. In fact your club has made use of that Citabria for 40 years, which is pretty good service. Generally when my machinery gets that old I figure it doesn't owe me anything. Yes there are some $25k Citabrias out there. There are days I might take that for mine on a quick sale.

Ask yourself, and I guess your club since you're the treasurer, if you're confident you could locate a "no ugly surprises" replacement aircraft with good logs, then get it ferried and taxes paid for $28,300? If your potential purchase isn't very close by you will burn some budget and shoe leather looking at planes. And you're right, new ones are beautiful but in the end they haul two butts and an afternoon worth of gas at around 95 knots.

Bartman's questions are painful to read, because they're harshly mathematical. Is your club's goal to sell the plane next year? Five years? If so then he's right about the condition of fabric and ugly interiors coming into it. And if you've swallowed the Tide pods (as the majority of the buyers have) you'll need aluminum wings too.

Let's do some other math. Your mechanic was ethical to prepare you for the "hey can you come in so we can go over what we found?" phone calls by giving you the $22k number. At 850 hours an O-235 is just rolling up its shirt sleeves. I'd be leaning towards the refurb crank and bearings, then IRAN anything that would require splitting the case. Now you're at $10,000 + $3,000 + some other chunk of the remaining $3300. It doesn't seem hopeless now does it?

Going that route will provide your club with a good reliable engine for minimum impact (and less risk than a used engine). Skip that advice if your club plans on selling. That partial rebuild will look sketchy to a prospective customer. A full rebuild would provide the buyer comfort but you'll never make your money up on it.

Question that could muck all this up: Is your insurance company writing you a check for $16,300 and wiping their hands? Or are there stipulations that could result in them totaling the plane?

On the soapbox for a moment
When I was a teenager I wandered airport ramps with my camera. I could identify anything, even the forgotten hulks in the weeds. Those included Ercoupes (of course), C140s and Luscombes. J-3s always seemed to find shelter over the years but J-4s and Taylorcrafts not so much. Among those unloved derelicts was at least one Cessna 195. None of those planes were "worth fixing".
 

Bob Turner

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 4, 2018
Messages
2,826
This is not an unusual dilemma. Dollar for dollar, used Citabrias, Pacers, and Mooneys are really good deals. But if you need a perfect airplane, a $25K Citabria is not the plan. It will cost $50 K to bring it up to some sort of "standard".

Doing it yourself is the solution, of course, but clubs often just start, and that's the end.

A non-flying Citabria with all the pieces is indeed ten grand. A flying version is $25 grand. It is smart to put new main and rod bearings in there, but not necessary, especially at the 900 hour mark.

Liability being what it is, all mechanics will suggest new, and if you send crank or case to a rebuild facility they simply regrind and rebore no matter what. A serviceable standard crank gets converted to a new limits ten under crank, and bearing prices triple. You have to decide what you want. If you really want new, ACA is still delivering the GCAA.
 

Bartman

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
3,696
Location
New Jersey, USA
Also, SB-505B allows ZERO pitting in the crank cavity, but the O-235 series is not listed as being covered by the SB (Only larger engines). So, I am now wondering if our crank might actually be OK for corrosion, and perhaps could be inspected for prop strike damage and re-installed after all.
How do you guys use the plane?
 

Bartman

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
3,696
Location
New Jersey, USA
Bartman's questions are painful to read, because they're harshly mathematical. Is your club's goal to sell the plane next year? Five years? If so then he's right about the condition of fabric and ugly interiors coming into it.
My airplane is already past making financial sense and is well into the "love-is-blind" category of ownership!
 

Yellowbird

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
17
Location
SE Michigan
How do you guys use the plane?
We use the airplane mostly for short day trips (i.e put-in-bay, 3W2), fly-ins, and and hamburger runs. Aerobatics are prohibited by the bylaws. Some of our 5 members love the airplane, but not all. (I would love to personally take it on as a project, but timing is TERRIBLE, as I started an experimental just last fall. ) We DO have trouble attracting members, and we are down from 7. I think since there are just not many "tailwheel ready" pilots out there -- despite what I think were very reasonable rates: $2900 buy in, $50/mo dues, $49/hr wet. But, it always gets attention on the ramp especially when it's pants are on. I will miss it if we let it go, hence efforts to see if it's really a lost cause.
 

Yellowbird

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
17
Location
SE Michigan
Of course, "cute plane" comments or nostalgia conversations (plus $2) will buy a cup of coffee. Nonetheless, it IS cute and I love the feel as the tail starts to fly...
 

Bob Turner

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 4, 2018
Messages
2,826
So how about some pictures? It is possible that the rest of your airplane is better than the average $25K Citabria. Spring gear may even take it out of that group.
 

Bruce

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
439
Location
Knoxville TN
very good points have been brought up, just starting my project and being in a good position of soul owner my thoughts would be somewhat different. First what is actually being offered by the insurance co? If I was offered 16500 for what? Second not wanting to sound cheap but also being an A&P I am thinking the crankshaft AD is based on the HP of motor and dose not apply to under 150 HP, I could be wrong but pull it and see. Next SB unless in Canada is a suggestion and not required. If it dosn't apply then why sweat that part of the equation? Next any A&P can do the inspection on the motor so why is it being sent out? Is the insurance co requiring this and a new prop, if not find a good used one,

All being said if they are just going to give the check and leave all the decisions to you I would fix what I have. You already know what the glitches with this aircraft are. No surprises dial in crankshaft maybe pull accessory case check gears (drive gear) hanged a used prop and go. Just my 2 cents

Good luck with the decision making very easy for one but not so with club involved.
 

Yellowbird

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
17
Location
SE Michigan
The insurance co. is just writing a check - decisions are all ours. We asked "what if there is more damage?" and from what our club president said (he is handling the insurance), they said they would cross that bridge when it comes up. So I am assuming the check does not require a liability release from the company, and our president said he would not sign for that. It's a little strange to me, because the hull insurance is actually carried by each member (club just carries liability) so I would think negotiations would be with that member, not the club. But I'm not in that loop.
 

Yellowbird

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
17
Location
SE Michigan
...Next any A&P can do the inspection on the motor so why is it being sent out?...
We got two quotes, one from the FBO, and one from the A&P we use for our annuals. Both were within a few hundred dollars and both use outside shops. One was Penn Yan Aero, I don't recall the other, but I recall it as being another large, quality shop. Neither A&P would touch the internals. That sort of paralyzes us since once it goes out and you find the job expands, you are stuck. I guess I thought probably liability always drives the work to go out.