Used Q2 - should I buy it?

[dremerpilot]

Hi all,

I've just come across a Q2 on Craigslist for a heck of a price. Apparently the plane was almost (if not fully) finished, but the builder died before the first flight. It was stored in a shed, but judging by the corrosion on the included RevMaster 2100, I'm wondering how dry it was. Two things I've found out: the canards are the original airfoil (sensitive to surface contamination) and there is a puncture in the leading edge of the left canard. Basically, I'm wondering if it's worth getting into. I've read that adding vortex generators can take care of the lift issue (what does that do to speed?) and that repairing the fiberglass isn't a big issue, but I don't know. I haven't gone to look at it yet. I have significant mechanical aptitude, but no experience yet building planes; especially composites. Any thoughts, opinions, or guidance?

Thanks!

-David

[TMann]

If you are looking for a Q2 and the (as yet undisclosed) price is right then go for it.

You can build a lot of really cheap flight hours on a Q2. 

They are very fast and that RevMaster can't be beat for fuel economy.

This would be a great cross-country time builder.

 

If a Q2 is not your dream plane, then be aware.

They land pretty fast and that wide wheel base can be a limiting factor. Not all taxiways will accommodate the width.

 

I would suggest getting eyes on. It could be a good find.

[Kent Ashton]

$3000 is a decent price (see www.Barnstormers.com ad) but it it will still be a lot of work to get it rebuilt, refinished and flying.  From the patches, it looks like it might have been flying and wrecked.  There is not much support these days for the Quickies and it's amazing how old info disappears from the internet.  The www.quickheads.com site is not online anymore.  Some of the pages are at www.archive.org but not the forum posts, it seems.  Your best bet is to hunt down some Q2 owners and get some advice.  This fellow maybe

http://jdfinley.com/file-downloads/quickie-aircraft-documents/

 

To get it licensed, you will have to show documentation that it was built by amateurs, i.e., some sort of builder's log.  If it was previously issued an Airworthiness Certificate then you need to prove a chain-of-custody from the original builder or the FAA will not let you register it in your name.

[dremerpilot]

Thanks all for the info! I just learned that there is a broken bulkhead brace at the interface point of front/rear fuselage (see attached). That seems to lend credence to the flying and wrecked theory to me. Should I be concerned with the structural integrity of the entire craft then? Also, I don't know exactly what extended time in storage does to the structure; I think it went in somewhere around 2000. Just trying to figure if this is a project I could work slowly on, or if it is just a bad idea to begin with.

Edited November 7, 2017 by dremerpilot

[Jon Matcho]

The www.quickheads.com site is not online anymore.

 

Unfortunately that's as of just a few days ago.  I am also responsible for that site, which needs to be moved to a new host and reconfigured.  My plan is to merge it into the infrastructure that will be supporting the new Canard Zone without losing the Quickie identity (Quickies are not quite canards, they're "tandem wing aircraft").

 

I have significant mechanical aptitude, but no experience yet building planes; especially composites. Any thoughts, opinions, or guidance?

 

You're likely qualified to build, but at a glance I would not encourage you to take this project on unless it were free.  Better deals come up now and again, and if you join the Yahoo Q-List group (see here) you can ask and might get lucky with someone offering a nearly finished aircraft.

 

You'll get a lot of feedback on the Q2/Q200 taildragger, from they're killing machines to being wonderful airplanes.

 

I have an untouched Q2 kit (no engine, no spar) if you're interested.

[Kent Ashton]

Thanks all for the info! I just learned that there is a broken bulkhead brace at the interface point of front/rear fuselage (see attached). That seems to lend credence to the flying and wrecked theory to me. Should I be concerned with the structural integrity of the entire craft then? Also, I don't know exactly what extended time in storage does to the structure; I think it went in somewhere around 2000. Just trying to figure if this is a project I could work slowly on, or if it is just a bad idea to begin with.

 

 

You'd be amazed how easy it is to fix stuff like that.  For example, you can Sawzall-away the bulkhead, sand away old corner overlaps with an angle grinder, build a new bulkhead, etc.   Sometimes you can just repair what's there.  Good parts of the airplane are probably still good.  Engine looks like it needs to be torn down and checked.  Whole airplane needs stripping and painting.

 

Make sure it is a design that fits you and one you'd be excited about working on.   It looks like the last owner made that mistake.  If you have little experience with experimentals, take your time.   Good projects come up all the time.

[mikerturner215]

Hey everyone, new to the forum and to canards in general.  I thinking of picking up a Q-200 as well, to get my private in and then sell it.  I am an A&P so the work will be nothing out of the norm.  I was wondering what the re-sell market looks like for such a unique plane?  Any leads or info on that would be of great help.  Thanks

[Marc Zeitlin]

Hey everyone, new to the forum and to canards in general.  I thinking of picking up a Q-200 as well, to get my private in and then sell it.  I am an A&P so the work will be nothing out of the norm.  I was wondering what the re-sell market looks like for such a unique plane?  Any leads or info on that would be of great help.  Thanks

A Q-200 is not appropriate as a training aircraft unless it's a Tri-Q 200. But even then... Between the higher performance and the crappy ground handling (of the tailwheel version), that's not where you want to start. None of the canards are really good primary trainers due to the higher performance and landing speeds. Possible? Sure. Optimal? No.

 

Learn in something slower and then work your way into higher performance aircraft.

 

My $0.02.

[Jon Matcho]

Hey everyone, new to the forum and to canards in general.  I thinking of picking up a Q-200 as well, to get my private in and then sell it.  I am an A&P so the work will be nothing out of the norm.  I was wondering what the re-sell market looks like for such a unique plane?  Any leads or info on that would be of great help.  Thanks

 

Hello and welcome.  I am in a similar situation.  I am building a Cozy IV but couldn't resist picking up a prop-stricken Quickie TriQ-200 in hopes of getting in the air faster.  The TriQ-200 has performance similar to other canards (all fast), but without any of the quirky/tail-dragger handling associated with other Quickies.  

 

The big issue would be finding an instructor willing to transition into your Quickie, and then give you instruction in it.  Finally, there's little hope in having an FAA examiner go up in the Quickie with you.  I've since reworked my plan a bit, accepting that I need to get my certificate first and then transition into the TriQ.

 

As far as the resale value, you should be able to sell it for what you paid for but set your expectations real low here.  The upside of this is that you can get a great airplane for relatively low cost.  There are fewer Quickies than EZs, but I was hooked on the side-by-side seating and found an excellent plane.

 

Good luck!

Jon

[Kent Ashton]

Hey everyone, new to the forum and to canards in general.  I thinking of picking up a Q-200 as well, to get my private in and then sell it.  I am an A&P so the work will be nothing out of the norm.  I was wondering what the re-sell market looks like for such a unique plane?  Any leads or info on that would be of great help.  Thanks

 

If I were you--an A&P--, i'd buy a Cessna 152 or 172 for my training and sell it when you're done.  You won't lose any money, instructors will be familiar with the airplane, and so will the Inspector giving the checkride.  Every thing will go a lot smoother.

[mikerturner215]

Thanks everyone. I happen to work for a flight school so that makes finding an instructor super easy. These old Vietnam F-4 guys will fly anything. HAHAH!! But good call on the examiner. I just don't wanna pay for the plane. Keeps everything cheaper. I understand getting my ticket in a 172 but I cant stand certificated airplanes. But you guys have some good points, so thanks again.