I am looking at a possible buy on a 262. Can anyone tell me how the 262 compares to the 252. I know the 262 is suppose to be a clone of the 252 FWF but I see some indications that there are differences. Are the speeds the same or is one model faster than the other. How about useful load, are they similar? I have seen some 252 with useful loads over 900 lbs but some 262's in the 800 lb range. How about resale value? I would appear the 252 has a higher resale value. Any similarities or differences would be appreciated and if you have a 262, how do you like it. Thanks.
Comparison of Mooney 252 and Mooney 262 conversion
Posted 20 January 2011 - 07:32 PM
The 252 will have a higher hull value since generally they are newer airframes and don't have the perceived "stigma" of a mod. I believe they also have 28V systems instead of 14V of the earlier 231 and 262 conversions. Useful load will be a function of installed equipment on individual planes more than anything else IMO. If the conversion is on an early K, it won't have some of the later aerodynamic enhancements of the later 231 or 252 model, and I'm not sure if the conversions included these aero bits or just the FWF package. Many of these can of course be added later (as I've done on my early J).
If I were shopping, I wouldn't rule out a 262 vs. a 252 and instead look for the best equipped and maintained example I could find/afford. There is at least one 262 owner here and hopefully he'll chime in soon. :)
Posted 20 January 2011 - 08:11 PM
This 262 conversion was done on what appears to be one of the last 231's that were made in 1985 and was called the special edition and had the one piece fiberglass belly. From what I can tell it had the full 252 FWF done in addition to a new leather interior, 2006, new paint, 2006, the wing, rudder and gear door mods along with the soundproofing, a package of new instruments, 2008 (due to the older ones being stolen). It has an unusual feature in that the owners installed a weatherscout radar system in the plane in addition to the Garmin 430, 480 and MX-20 with traffic and XM. No deicing equipment or hot prop on the plane. Don't know if I would really need that although I do make trips up north a couple of times a year in the summer. Paint looks brand new as does the leather interior and the door panels and glass look almost brand new. Has about 500 hours left on the engine before TBO. Really can't decide if I should wait for a 252 or seriously consider this 262. Any help here would be appreciated. I really need the speed and altitude performance of the 252 and am trying to see if I can get that with this 262.
Posted 20 January 2011 - 09:05 PM
There are number of minor airframe differences such a rear bucket seats that fold down and are easily removable in the 252. Obviously a 262 will have the same engine as the 252, the TSIO-360-MB that has a complete turbo system rather than just the blower found in the 231, and therefore should have essentially identical performance. The main difference though and benefit for pursing the 252 is 28V electrical system with the optional dual alternators. The 231, and therefore I presume the 262 conversion will have same 14V system with a single 60 amp (perhaps 70) alternator. I had a 231 before my 252 and I can tell that you that 14V system was too weak to run everything at night with the lights on, pitot heat on and the weather radar - just as the POH warns. The dual 28v 70 amp alternators provide you with 4 times the output and eliminate loss of the electrical system when you loose an alternator. Its great piece of mind. The 252 also has much improved cowl with electrically operated cowl flaps that are infinitely adjustable, which enables you to get just enough cooling without the 6-8kt speed penalty I recall from the open 231 cowlflap (allowed only 3 positions, closed, in trail or slightly open and fully open) - but hopefully the 262 conversion includes the 252 cowling. Other improvements on the 252 were standby electric vacuum system and that they made several 231 options all standard on the 252, including speed brakes and the hot prop. Flying turbo altitudes the hot prop is very useful and would easily cost $8K to add.
Lastly I had the weather scout radar on my prior 231, it was a factory option at the time. IMO its worthless and not worth the weight its robbing you of your useful load. Dump it and get your self satellite weather from XM or WSI and a GMX200 or similar MFD to display weather and provide music and you'll have something you can rely on with much more information.
Posted 20 January 2011 - 09:34 PM
I have a 262 trophy conversion on a 1983 airframe. The difference is the 14v vs 24v electrical system. That is just about the only difference. I have the split folding rear seats, dual alternators, backup vacume, speed brakes, hot prop, the same cowl flaps, and all of the gap seals and hinge seals of the 252. It really is a beautiful engine package. I live in the flatland of Texas and you might wonder why I have a turbo. Take off to 10,000' in 10 minutes on a 100 degree summer day. Enough of a reason for me. The climb is 900 fpm+ to at least 17,500'.
Posted 20 January 2011 - 09:40 PM
The 262 I am looking at doesn't have a hot prop but does have dual alternators, but probably the 14v system. The 262 is suppose to be similar to the 252 FWF so I need to check to see if it has the electric cowl. You think it would if it is the same as the 252 FWF. I wonder if I could work a deal, if I buy it to dump the weather radar and get the hot prop put in. Maybe more useful.
Posted 20 January 2011 - 09:42 PM
Can anyone give me any idea if the speeds of the 262 are similar to the 252? I understand the service ceilings are the same on both planes.
Posted 21 January 2011 - 03:14 AM
I would expect the same speeds on both and would expect the 262 conversion included POH performance charts to be identical to the 252 - but can't attest to that. There are other differences if you take the time to review the type certificate. For example, the 231 landing gear extension and gear extended speeds were limited to 130 kts where as the 252 went to 140 and 165 kts respectively. Manuevering speed also went up from 117 in the 231 airframe to 123 kts on the 252. Other subtle differences include the 252 can be upgraded to the Encore SB engine to allow a 230 lb increase in max gross and are eligible for FIKI. But overall, there just aren't that many 252's out there and even fewer Encores.
Posted 21 January 2011 - 11:45 AM
My trophy conversion has the performance portions of hte 252 POH included as part of the upgrade. Some confusion may be the "full" Trophy 262 package vs. the engine upgrade that some of the mooney shops offer. The Trophy conversion used the actual 252 cowling, cowl flaps and gear doors from the mooney factory. I don't think the engine upgrade shops went the "full monty". The Trophy conversion was more than just the engine swap. The restrictions to the gear limit speeds and the inability of the gross weight upgrade are correct.
Posted 21 January 2011 - 10:17 PM
The model I am looking at has the full trophy conversion done in 1998 with new paint and leather interior done in 2006. It is a nice looking Mooney with fairly new avionics (most are 2 years old). The price is $120,000 with 1500 hours on the engine. It is a bank repossessed plane that is going through a prebuy inspection at a Mooney shop. I am guessing I can fly it for a couple of years and see if I like it and then overhaul the engine or sell it. I am wondering how people on this website like their 262's (anything you would like to share good or bad about you 262 would be appreciated) and what kind of resale value it will have a couple of years from now. Again, any help would really be appreciated. I have about 3000 hours in an M20E but have never flown an M20K model and have been out of flying for about 10 years. I have just been getting back into flying over the last 12 months. Everyone's responses have really been helpful to me in making my buying decision. Thanks to everyone. It is really appreciated.
Posted 26 January 2011 - 10:26 AM
Dale, noticed you said the airplane you're looking at has 1500 hrs SMOH and in another post, 'about 500 hrs left to TBO'. Just wanted to make sure you're aware that it's an 1800 hr TBO for that engine.
Also, I took my 262 up to FL 250 2 days ago and saw 195kts true...272kts ground (eastbound...), and 303kts for a little bit in the descent.
Hope that gives you some more to chew on.
Posted 27 January 2011 - 06:19 PM
Wow! Those are some great numbers.
There was much confusion on the 262 I am looking at, as far as time on the engine. Apparently, from a review of the logbooks and the hobbs meter on the plane it was determined that the engine has fewer hours that what was initially indicated. I am still waiting for them to give me a complete idea of all the issues, as the Mooney shop is inspecting it now. I understand I can upgrade the electrical system on the 262 from a 14V system to a 28V system, although with the dual alternators in place for the 14V system, is this type of upgrade worth it. If anyone has an opinion, please let me know. Thanks again for everyone's help on this. It is appreciated.
Posted 27 January 2011 - 06:36 PM
I have never heard of a 14V-28V conversion before. The benefit is generally more electrical power and smaller gage wires (weight savings) but not all of the electrical goodies might be compatible with both voltages. Modern avionics are probably OK, but I bet the vintage stuff as well as lights, starter, etc. would need to be replaced and such a job is very likely not economically feasible.
Posted 27 January 2011 - 07:24 PM
I also had never heard that you could do a 14V-28V conversion. The first I heard of it was when I was discussing the differences between the 262 and 252 with the Mooney shop and they said there was an stc for this conversion. If it can be done, is it worth the time and expense? I am considering upgrading the panel, which would probably be the time to do this electrical upgrade, if at all. Do any of the owners with a 14V system and dual alternators feel that this would be a great upgrade to have or is it just not worth the time and expense? Thanks.
Posted 27 January 2011 - 08:05 PM
I can't imagine it be possible to convert from 14v to 28v - imagine every bulb in the plane would have to be changed out including the external and interior down to instrument lights; including strobe power supplies, starters, prop heat boots and meter and switches and breakers rated for 14v; the list goes on and must be cost prohibitive to even consider. What I would believe though is a dual alternator STC for the 14v system - but I am just surmising. Yet would love to see the STC # to look it up.
Posted 27 January 2011 - 09:08 PM
A 24v system has some nice weight saving advantages and stronger electric motors. They make good sense when designing a plane fresh, building from scratch or a complete overhaul / rebuild.
I will go out on a limb and say that a 24v system has never been retrofitted to a 12v Mooney.
It is possible, just not practical, with nearly insignificant advantages. Money would be better spent buying a different mooney with the 24v system in place already.
There is always a few guys who love their Moonies so much it deserves every upgrade out there. Go ahead and speak up......
flame suit on...
Posted 28 January 2011 - 12:37 PM
I will go out on a limb and say that a 24v system has never been retrofitted to a 12v Mooney.
No danger falling off that limb....someone is giving Dale very bad data!
Who are you working with down here, Dale ? If you need some one-on-one assistance, PM me.
Posted 28 January 2011 - 02:00 PM
The issue is going to be a weight issue. There are power supplies to convert 14 to 28 (I know cause I have one), and I am sure there are power supplies that go the other way. You would need such a power supply in order to keep your existing avionics, because most of them come in a 14v or a 28v model, but not both. The problem you would get into is how many of these power supplies you would need to install to run everything, They are not lightweight and each power supply is about .5 amu each plus install.
Another thought for you. One difference between the 252 28v and the 231 14v. The 28v can be fitted with FIKI TKS. The 231 14v can be fitted for TKS, but not FIKI, so what good is that? Part of the reason for that is that the 231 14v system cannot be modified for two alternators, and therefore lacks redundancy. If one alternator were to go down in IMC the deice would quit. I do not know if TKS can do a FIKI 14v if there are two alternators. You would want to check that.
You may have no interest in FIKI deice. I don't have it. I can tell you it is going to be the main factor in what I purchase for my next plane, because lack of FIKI keeps you on the ground way too much of the time, even in the summer I have run into possible icing conditions in mountain areas.
Posted 28 January 2011 - 06:18 PM
If one alternator were to go down in IMC the deice would quit.
Well, it would quit once the battery was exhausted--depending on the in-flight electrical loads, that could be as much as a few hours. If you have a warning light for alternator failure, there's no reason to keep on anywhere near that long.
Posted 12 February 2011 - 12:50 PM
Does anyone know what SB M-20-208 compliant means in a Mooney M20K? I have seen this bantered about but have no idea what it means. If anyone knows, please post.
Also, someone posted eariler that the Mooney 262 couldn't be fitted with TKS FIKE system because of the 14v system. They said that it only had one alternator. I thought the 262 conversion came with two 70 amp alternators? If anyone knows, please post. Thanks.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users