All Activity

If it ain't broke...

My old partners have our beautiful Missile with Jimmy (Don Maxwell is installing a majored engine. This plane will be a wonderful Mooney when overhaul is completed.

148 knots IS fast. Numbers were marketing and nothing more.you have an awesome plane. Fools errand?

So speedwise, your E is well within the normal range for the model if not a tad on the slow side. The three bladed prop is not as efficient as a two blade. There are plenty of people who will tell you that it doesn’t make a difference and there are plenty that will tell you it’s costing you 5kts. You won’t have any idea unless you change propellers. The truth is, it doesn’t matter because from a practical matter, none of these planes are separated by that much in terms of speed. I have a 67F that I know it will do just over 150kts in cruise at just about any altitude under 10,000 feet. That being said, my current average GPS block speed as tracked over the last 5000nm is 144.9kts. It just recently fell below 145kts because of several trips under two hours that tend towards lower block speeds (for obvious reasons). What would I need to do to get a significant increase in speed? I’ve thought about this many times. Aircraft owners tend to assign a whole lot of value to things that really don’t make that big of a difference operationally. That’s why you’ll see people brag over a 7kt difference in cruise speed. The reality is that for me to realize a significant increase in time compression, range, or load carrying capacity, I would have to move into a high-performance twin or a turbine. Sometimes the best course of action is to recognize that what you have is delivering excellent output value for the input. If you want to tweak your E to be faster, I think that’s an admirable pursuit, but even if you were able to fettle and message it into 155kt cruiser, the time savings for most trips would be minuscule. I stopped wishing my bird was more than it is a long time ago and just decided to admire it for how well it does what it does.

Write the items down in a list, and start with the big show stoppers. Check for a corroded spar before you waste much time reading plugs and such.

Horsepower is same for all years. 1.Many older Js including mine have been updated with the 2 mag engine, winglets, removing ram air, etc to really make assumptions based on the year. 2.There’s too many variables to really subdivide Js into different years; Engine time, avionics, etc.

I remember the guys in the composites shop used to "debulk" with vacuum bags. Precut your fiber patches, lay them in place (no resin or prepreg and leave cold) bag and vac and then let it sit overnight. The fibers would tend to stay-put a lot easier after that.

Or MDOC....whatever happend to him?

Airframe hours, engine hours, model year, avionics , damage history and interior/exterior condition are the variables. There's about a $120k spread between on base airframe value between a 77 and a 98 before any of the other adjustments are made. Feel free to message me if you want me to run a Vref for you.

I ended up removing the honeycomb that was in the section of the spinner hump in about an inch or two on either side of that. We thought that we could stack up 1 inch wide layers of carbon, but looking back I think the better way to do it is to put a piece of foam, blue foam in that area, but make it taller than the factory did, say a half inch or 3/4 of an inch instead of the factory 1/4 inch. Then vacuum bag over that you have a real beam.

I would recommend putting some trapezoidal shaped blue foam as a stiffener maybe just after of what’s there for factory …..make it an inch wide then half an inch tall. Then when you vacuum bag your carbon over that, it acts more like a beam. Mine has held up well but it has one crack along the left side of the spinner about 4 inches long but this is after 800 hours of flying or more actually.

I bought 1TF in 2007, and this repair was done before I purchased it. As you can see, it was just brushed on thick with only a couple of layers of mesh, and it delaminated, so I suspect it is not the approved MGS epoxy. I started with a 40-grit disc on a drill, and that worked pretty well, but honestly, it came off easier with just using a knife and one of those painter's multi-tools. I also burned thru one small areal so I found it best not to use the sanding disc for the big stuff. The knife would get under the edges, but it was too thin to get leverage, and the painter's tool worked perfectly for this. I did hit the entire area with 40 grit sandpaper and then washed with soap and a scrub brush. I'll have to clean with MEK and do some additional preparation, but I have a good start. As you can see, the previous repair extended all the way to the honeycomb, and I wanted to remove all the old delaminating resin from the picture. One question for Byron @jetdriven. Did you completely remove the honeycomb, or did you cover it with carbon fiber? Jamie

Sorry to sound somewhat preachy about the perspective of a pre-buy, but I've always viewed pre-buys as a chance to identify weaknesses, not strengths. Find reasons not to buy the airplane instead of finding reasons to support an emotional hope that it is a "good buy". See it as a deposition, as it were, as in what do you not know about your case? Don't use a pre-buy as a chance to argue in favor of buying the plane. Use it as the chance to find any and every reason not to buy it. If it passes that high hurdle, then you'll more likely than not end up with fewer regrets.

Read the entire article. From the article: "In addition to 96 vortex generators affixed to the upper surface of the wings and another 80 affixed to the underside of the horizontal stabilizers, the upgrade includes tougher gear attach points and some wing strengthening. The mods are not retrofittable to older Meridians, Piper having deemed them too complex for field installation." From personal experience, the Gross Weight increase had to be done at the Piper factory in Vero Beach FL since the wing needed to be opened up, re-skinned and repainted and the entire landing gear had to be changed out. And, of course, once all of that was done the VGs were installed. In 2003 the price to have the Gross Weight increase was $80,000. The last I heard, if you wanted to have Piper do the GWI on an early Meridian (2001 to some of the 2002 models) it was now in the neighborhood of $150,000.

Since I am grounded due to a broken spinner bulkhead I decided to bring the upper cowl home and start the rebuild process. I have this 2013 thread from @jetdriven saved and will use that as a guide, but the pictures did not migrate as we changed servers. I have some supplies gathered, including the MGS epoxy and hardeners, carbon fiber in both woven sheet and unidirectional as well. Gathering supplies to do bagging, and I'll do it right to the best of my ability, but I'm certain it will be better than what I have now. Here are some pictures before, and during the removal process.

2/3 of the airplanes for clients don’t even make it to the shop for a PPI because there’s so many glaring things wrong in the history. Fishy Shadetree overhauls from 25 years ago and then a top with Gibson chrome cylinders half halfway between now and then., For example. But if you get past that you need to spend 15 hours looking at it. And anything that gets missed, the buyer owns. There is no upper limit to what this might cost. I have a landing gear actuator at Lasar right now with a bent jackscrew and it’s chattering on the down stroke. It’s gonna cost $4000 to get this thing out of the shop. And that’s just to fix the actuator that we already have. That’s not even replacing in the back spring. That would be two grand more.

I've grown exceedingly pessimistic over the years. I had to develop cost estimates at work before I retired; materials, labor, travel, etc. After a while I learned that if you didn't triple whatever you thought it should take you'd come up short; everyone around me joked and agreed; triple it and you'll be about right. I've found aircraft maintenance to be very similar. Even if you're lucky enough to be billed 10 hours, you'll get the plane back together in a week; maybe three days minimum. Based on Mooneyspace recommendations, I pulled the aft two inspection plates behind the stub spar during my last annual. Apparently they hadn't been removed for years; screws were frozen. By the time we got the plates off, and vacuumed out all of the carpet residue and debris that had accumulated in the area behind the spar, that alone was at least a two hour task. Whatever you touch seems to lead to more work. I'm not saying don't do it, I'm just suggesting folks plan on more work than they expect. I guess you'll know if you'll buy it and have a chance to do the work before you put it back together. I've wondered what it would be like to inspect and buy a plane that's only a few years old; that would be a joy; thin log books; squeaky clean airframes. I've also thought how great it would be to buy a solid airframe, gut it, and restore it ground up. That too would be a joy. Everything in the middle feels like a compromise.

Very cool list to see this in one short list. As an avid J follower, I'm sure every (dare I say) first-gen J driver/owner is thrilled to see their machines lumped in together with the (dare I say) later-gen Js. Though tempting, I try not to automatically consider a later model J any better, per se, than an earlier iteration, or for that matter an earlier iteration any worse, per se, than a later one. There are marked differences in the type (dual/single mags, split rear seats/single-back bench seat, airframe mods galore, etc). I find it interesting that Mooney actually got away with type certifying the M20J through as many iterations as they did, even though the gross weight and power plant(s) were distinctly different (see Cessna 172 and Piper PA-28 Arrow series as good examples of different type certificates and altogether different airplanes, but similar in market designation. That said, an Arrow is not an Arrow II is not an Arrow III, etc.). Yet an M20J is an M20J. Perhaps those far better versed in the type can set my confusion straight? Is it because the number of seats and actual horsepower remained the same throughout the production run? Not much else did remain the same from 1977 to ~1998. I'd be crazy to assume that a later model Allegro should be priced similar to a 1978 M20J and vice versa, an earlier 1978 M20J shouldn't be priced similar to a later Allegro. Thus these averages are a bit tough to analyze from a value standpoint. This really does boil down to the "eye of the beholder". I'm sure there are absolute 1977 beauties out there that are every bit worth $200K and some later model turds that shouldn't bring half of that. For many more reasons than this current chat about this, I sure wish Roy LoPresti was still around to ask him why and how Mooney got away with this--there has to be a fascinating back story to the moniker (other than the 201 mph top design speed at the time). Maybe the most telling of this list of averages is the fluctuation of numbers available from month to month (albeit in this small sample from Controller listings). Low appears to be 18 and the high appears to be 27, all within ~8 months of each other.

The 201 windshield is riveted flush to my best recollection, not sure about round head screws on bottom of wing, my airplane does not have them, there are people that can add up such drag counts, never got that far, if the cowl closure is done next simple thing are flap gap and aileron gap seals, should get you 1-2 kt, see how that feels, windshield is time consuming and better done by somebody who has done a lot of them, tie down rings can be replaced with Lasar combo jack points

According to AIN Online, the first Meridian (2001) was severely limited when it rolled out of Vero Beach: "With full fuel, the typical Meridian could carry 350 pounds in the cockpit and cabin–sufficient for little more than a couple and their weekend bags." https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2007-10-08/vortex-generators-boost-meridians-useful-load Apparently, they stuck on a bunch of vortex generators to help get the stall speed down, and open the door for gross weight increases.

New panel cut! Hardware and wiring about done! Waiting for the Carbon Fiber overlay and hook up! -Don

It is very easy to overload if you put in 4+ people and try to fly 800nm. Baggage area is max 100lbs too. It’s a very nice 4 seater, but yes, i bet a lot of people overload them, 500hp turbine on the front really makes it go.

One other quick question. Is there any mod that would replace the infinite number of round head exposed screws on the underside of the wings and/or around the windshield with something flatter and less exposed? Would that make a difference?

You have a full-blown case of ‘Mooney-itis.’ You might get to the 155 number with all the speed mods on your E… including wing root and stab fairings besides the 201 windscreen and maybe a new J/Lopresti/Sabremech cowl. There’s a C on our ramp with inner gear doors. But, Mooney-itis is insidious. Once you get to that 155 number, either with your highly modified E or a new-to-you J, you’ll be looking for more. My advice, start looking for your Rocket…

You would get an extra 10 knots in a J, so that’s an extra 30 nm over a 3 hour trip. You also would be able to carry more fuel, more range. If you want to take 5-6 hour trips without stopping, having plenty of fuel leftover, a J would save you a lot of time.