mooniac15u

I don't use Tapatalk but I believe it has its own ads independent from the source forums like MS. Are you using the free version of the app?

You might also have some malware. Have you tried logging into Mooneyspace from a different computer or device?

It looks like Sigma-Tek still makes these. http://www.sigmatek.com/pages/prod_description/PD_ACC_vacswt.html

That's more likely a problem with an add-on that got installed in your browser. Search for "Text Enhance" in Google and you should see a variety of sites with guidance on how to get rid of it.

If your CHTs hit 700 you are looking at new cylinders.

I hope your CHTs didn't really hit 700.

The external receptacle is not attached to the access door. They are just mounted so that they align.

FWIW, my 1963 M20D had an external power receptacle in the front. I don't know if it was original or added later. It was on the left side of the cowl below the battery access door. The solenoid was mounted on the firewall near the battery. You can see the access door in this photo.

This aircraft had a tail number change. It was formerly N6954U. It had a significant runway overrun incident in 1966 which may not show up when searching the current tail number. That's so old that it probably doesn't make a difference but you should know the full history.

The other aspect of trying to charge via the external plug is that most chargers won't supply any power unless they can detect that they are hooked to a battery. With the solenoid in the circuit it won't detect the battery and won't supply the power needed to activate the solenoid. The couple of times that I attached a charger to the external port I had to use one that has a jumpstart mode to activate the solenoid and then I could switch it to charge mode.

The third pin powers a solenoid that connects the positive pin to the battery. Without that solenoid you would always have a hot pin behind that little door which wouldn't be very safe. Since the solenoid draws power when the external plug is connected it isn't a very practical way to charge your battery. The charger will be unable to sense the charge status of the battery because there will be a constant draw from the solenoid.

The parts catalog says 330.

I actually don't know about the F and G. I assumed that you could because of their similarity to J's but you would have to ask the F owners if any of them have rear shoulder harnesses. I owned a short-body Mooney (M20D) for 8 years and I searched for a rear seat shoulder harness solution but never found one. I even asked the Mooney reps at Oshkosh about it back in 2007 and they told me there weren't attachment points. Here's an old Mooneyspace thread on should harness retrofitting and Paula from Alpha Aviation says the same thing as the Mooney reps.

Something else to consider for rear seat passengers is shoulder harnesses. Short-body Mooneys do not have attachment points for rear seat shoulder harnesses. When the kids are little and still in baby seats it's not a problem. However, once they move up to boosters or out of kid seats entirely it becomes an issue to consider. The mid-body Mooneys (F, G, J, K) have a different steel cage configuration that allows for rear shoulder harnesses.

The available room in the back seat has more to do with the height of the front seat occupants. Our M20D worked fine while the kids were in car seats. Once they needed some legroom nobody wanted to sit behind me (I'm 6'5"). A few inches make a big difference in the back seat when the front seat is all the way back. Everyone is happier now in our M20J. The OP said he is tall and needs the seat all the way back. How tall are you @gsxrpilot and @Bob_Belville? It would help put those photos in context.

When spraying a liquid like gasoline you can build up a significant static charge. You don't even need a hot engine or hot electric circuit, the static build up can cause the needed spark. If possible you should ground your sprayer to the engine or airframe before spraying.

Draining excess water via the sumps was discussed. The open question was whether very small amounts of residual water could be eliminated by adding alcohol. Isopropanol helps with both phase separation and freezing point depression regardless of the source of water. Pure gasoline can only hold about 0.03% water by volume at normal ambient temperatures where a 10% ethanol blend can hold about 0.5%. Either way a small amount of isopropanol won't add a lot of capacity but it will help.

OP's profile says he's from Kansas City. Google says N9058V was registered to a new owner in Colorado earlier this year.

Here's the Mooney Service Instruction regarding use of isopropanol as a fuel additive. Just keep in mind that most of the isopropanol sold as "rubbing alcohol" contains as much as 30% water. Make sure you know what you have before you add it to your tank. http://mooney.com/en/si/M20-64.pdf

Both ethanol and isopropanol are hygroscopic so they will absorb moisture up to a point. As @carusoam points out, the alcohol doesn't care where that water comes from. Fuel tanks have vents so they are open to the atmosphere but the amount of water transferred to the interior of the tank is likely limited due to the relatively small openings. Ethanol does tend to promote corrosion of metals but I don't think there is ethanol in DOT 3 brake fluid. I think the alcohols in brake fluid are glycols which may have different properties. I'm not sure what impact they have on metals.

After the inspection portion of an annual there is usually a list of all discrepancies categorized as airworthiness or recommended. You might want to ask the owner for a copy of the discrepancy list and the final itemized bill. It would give you an idea of what was done vs what might have been deferred.

You need molecular equivalents as opposed to mass or volume equivalents. Water has a molecular weight of 18, ethanol is 46, and isopropanol is 60. So to have a 1:1 molecular ratio you need a little more than twice as much ethanol by mass and 3 times as much isopropanol. However, as @carusoam points out the optimal ratio is likely greater than 1:1 for solubilizing the water. There's probably a maximum amount of alcohol you want to mix into the fuel before you start causing other problems. Your best bet would be to follow POH guidelines regarding what type of alcohol and how much to use for a single tank full and then repeat a for a few fillups. Agitating the mixture definitely gives best results but fortunately you have diffusion working for you even if you just let it sit. Flying the plane probably provides a good bit of agitation.

I'm one of the chemists and I think that was an excellent description. @nels Large volumes of water should be removed by draining it off the bottom. Small quantities present either in the bottom of the tank or in fuel added to the tank are what you want to address with alcohol. You are correct that it will distribute the water throughout the fuel but that is what you want. It is far better to distribute the water than to feed a high concentration to your engine for even a short time. A few ounces of water distributed across 25 gallons of fuel will not be noticeable. The alcohol should also have the effect of not allowing the water to freeze in undesirable places like fuel lines.

I was wondering about the Klixon switch covers which I think you have in your plane. There have been multiple attempts to replicate them by 3D printing but the results have been less than optimal. Maybe injection molding is the answer. There have been multiple threads on the topic:

Although a couple of juries have awarded damages there is little actual scientific evidence that asbestos-free talcum powder increases your cancer risk.