I am beginning the selection process to acquire a Stearman. I welcome all advice or wisdom the BeechTalk-o-sphere has to send my way. I am particularly interested in operating costs, engine operation best practices, maintenance gotchas and pre-buy landmines.

Barry, if you are in the Dallas area I'm happy to catch up in person, show you mine, share my experience (all good) and take you around the patch. I base at Arlington and have owned mine for a couple of years. More fun than a barrel of monkeys. PM me your contact info and we'll set it up.

Edit: Just looked at your info again and realized we met the other day in your hangar. A Stearman would look nice in there...here's proof!

Check out my Bucker Jungmann in the For Sale section. Stearmans are cool if you have a reason for the nostalgia (like your dad flew one or something) but as a practical fun machine they are big, heavy, slow, hard to move on the ground, and not that fun to fly.

The Bucker is easy to move in/out of hangar, 30kts faster, burns less gas, better handling, more aerobatic and easier to land.

Totally a shameless plug to sell my airplane (for space reasons) but I would strongly consider it over a Stearman. Bucker is a Porsche 911 and the Stearman is a Cement Truck by comparison.

...which is exactly why I want one. Thanks for the feedback though, all opinions welcome.

Talk to Mike Porter. Maintains, repairs and checks out many in the Stearman. Also flies the Collins Foundation TF-51 when he is called.

Finally have a little more time, so I'll rattle on a bit if that's okay.

Your engine options are 220 Continental, 225 Lycoming, the 300 Lycoming and the 450 Pratt. The sweetest one for the airframe, going by anecdote, seems to be the 300 Lycoming. Not too big, not too little. Though they come with more expense on the purchase (they are prized commodities), the complexity of a constant speed prop and some reports of parts availability issues on that engine. Plan on spending $70-90k for a nice flyable stocker, more than $100k for the bigger engines. I assume 15 gph block on fuel burn, and run it pretty much balls to the wall. Redline is 2075 rpm and I run it at 1900 on cross-countries. Local boondocking, I'll run at 1800 or so. Don't mess with the mixture...don't ever get that high.

I went with a stocker Continental because they are dirt simple to fly, work on and maintain. No barn burner in climb (800 fpm or so solo, 5-600 fpm with two aboard) or cruise, but they get the job done. Aerobatics are an exercise in energy management - I usually do them until all my altitude is all gone, then I fly home with a smile on my face.

Props matter. The wooden ones (MT and Sensenich) look great and are smooth as silk. But the performance stinks. The McCauley metal option was made for that airframe/engine combo, but comes with a hundred-hour AD that can turn it into a wall ornament overnight if they find a crack. The Ham Standard one is fairly common and does okay on performance. I have a duster prop (Ham Standard 5404 hub and Sensenich blades) which is rare, but is metal, ground adjustable, no AD and performs great. The difference between the best and the worst is 400 fpm a minute or so in initial climb and 15 mph or so on top-end cruise.

Airframes are dirt simple and you can open it up like a tin can in about five minutes. Plenty of room to look at and work on stuff, unless you are removing the carburetor, in which case you have to remove the proverbial nut they built the airplane around. Most come equipped with an electric starter and a radio/transponder combo. Main landing gear struts and the tail wheel assembly require attention now and then, so best to have a 'Stearman guru' to look that stuff over every other annual or so. The best of them, Robbie Vajdos, is right here in Texas and is on my speed dial - but I rarely need him other than to chat and tell war stories. He does my annuals, along with a bunch of other Texas Stearman guys. He buys and sells them as well...I'll PM you his number. Fabric is fabric...get one that has polyester and has been taken care of (hangared). Pete Jones (Air Repair) airframes aren't 100% authentic Oshkosh winners, but you do have some understanding of the factory- like process of restoration and the attention to quality. There are more than a hundred of those airframes out there and I can attest to their build and quality.

It is a pussycat in the air, but you do hear a bunch of stuff about ground handling. Once you do 15 landings or so and get the sight picture dialed in, it isn't terribly challenging. I three point it and it has one good throw in it before it gets sorted out. Landing roll in that situation is very short. You throw in pavement, a little sloppy technique and, particularly a little wind, and things can get interesting. It isn't predictable in those situations and it does really test your ability to turn chicken s**t into chicken salad. But that's why I have a Stearman rather than a Cub. Fun, but challenging in certain situations.

Finally, I'm not a big 'joiner', but I've come to adore the community around the airplane. Lots of them in the Metroplex and good fly-ins (both organized and impromptu) within easy reach. The Stearman Restorers Association is a good owner group, with an online forum and lots of institutional memory. Just got back from the gig in Jennings, LA and you won't find better people than Stearman people. A generational shift is happening as well. Lots of 'younger' guys buying them and flying them - hopefully ensuring some longevity for the breed.

It'll make you a better pilot...get one!

CK... When you go give Barry a ride... I need one too.!

Here is what I always ponder when I'm flying a stock Stearman on pavement...

The bottom wing of a Stearman is never more than a heartbeat away from being a canvas bag full of toothpicks.

Doug, I reject your nightmarish visions and substitute more rudder!

One unique thing about Stearman ground handling is that it holds a generous amount of fuel and it is in the center section, which is waaayyyy off the ground. Now figure all of that mass perched up high, add in limited visibility, narrow gear, and grabby breaks and things can get interesting, especially on pavement.

Grass makes it easier, as does having updated brakes (redlines), or at least fit the shoes to the drums so they don't grab. Choose your days and runways wisely for the first couple of dozen hours and you should be fine.

CK is absolutely correct on acro in a Stearman. I ran mine like it had an electric motor up front when doing acro. It was either on or off. Wide open on takeoff and climb, leave it wide open while doing loops, aileron rolls, barrel rolls, cubans, reverse cubans, hammerheads, etc. and when you notice that the ground is getting close, then it is time to either climb back up and do it again, or pull the power back and land. After you do this for a while, you will have a huge appreciation for the skills of John Moore. I still can't figure out how he gets so much out of so little.

CK is also right about props. The wooden prop is a dog which might be a big reason why I have the opinion that I do about the airplane. I did get to fly a friends plane with the steel McCauley and it pulled much much better. Back when I had mine, everybody was salivating about the upcoming MT prop, but I think it turned out to be a lot of hype and not much of an improvement over the old wooden club that we were all using anyway.

One more thing, before you plop down your hard earned cash, see if you can score a ride in a 40's vintage Waco.

I pride myself on stick and rudder skills, the Stearman is the only airplane I'm very uncomfortable landing on pavement. It is like it has a mind of its own and doesn't respond to control inputs.

Bucker has never scared me on landing and is a 2 finger airplane on the controls. (another shameless plug)

The Rudder is not the problem, it is aileron, and the stock Stearman with 2 ailerons is seriously short on aileron authority in crosswinds.

A -450 with 4 ailerons is a good crosswind airplane.

3 of my neighbors just got back from Jennings; 2 Stearman and one RV-6. The one flying the RV6 had the biggest grin when he got back.
When one does these kind of trips, he has to also undo them.

Is there a landing/ground handling penalty on the 450hp vs 225? I'm thinking the heavier engine should be a factor in some way.

The other thing is that there is a world of difference between front cockpit and the back. The back is a real windbox. The front is relatively pleasant. I'd stick a case of oil in the baggage and fly mine from the front all the time if I could. But I can't crank it or work the radios from up there.