Mark89114

I am still looking for a Mooney and the G1000 interests me, coming from a glass cockpit in the Hawker. My question is what is the reliability and cost of repair when something goes wrong?

As my roofer says, water runs down hill......

I think the whole ADSB thing is confusing and expensive.

Any reason you don't want to use flightplan.com?

How accurate is it? Maybe reasonable is a better word. How reliable is it? Is it worth anything? Hopefully you get my point, in that no single online calculation can accurately measure the complexity of an aircraft valuation, it is worth exactly what you sell it for or exactly what you buy it for. I am looking at an Ovation, plugged the variables in and lo and behold it is within 1-2% of asking price. I think the asking price is reasonable based on my research of comparable models, engine times, avionics and what not. I am just trying to get data points together on accurate evaluation. This by no means suggest I am going to offer starting price for negotiation.

I too have been looking but have come to the realization to get what I want I will have to spend more, that is just the way it is. If you want an airplane configured exactly how you want it you will have to spend your dollars that in reality you won't get back. You might spend $50K on a new panel but a year or two later I can guarantee you won't get your $50K back. That is the reason you see airplanes listed as "$80K invested selling for $40K". There is NO invesment in an airplane, accept that. For example I am looking for an Ovation, price spread (for what I can afford) is from $175K to $250K, the $175K airplane has high time engine and boat anchor avionics, the $250K example has low time engine and updated panel. By my napkin math, OH engine is $40K and adding a Garmin of some flavor $20K which puts you really close to the $250K airplane. Obviously these are all asking prices and there are more intricacies than I really want to think about.

I am looking for a 252 occasionally depending on balance of my checkbook and weighing plus's and minus's of each. One of the concerns is useful load. I questioned one broker/mechanic on it and he said their is an STC that gives a 150 lb weight increase for about $3K and some paperwork diddling and new speeds on the ASI. The only one I have come across is the Encore increase which is 230lbs and costs from $5k to $15K depending on who is answering on the forums. I think he is full of nonsense and just wants to sell an airplane or does this really exist? Thanks,

I don't believe it, the average is about 30 mid years in the entire U.S and Arizona represents maybe 2% of the US (100%/50, I know a gross simplification) so that would be about 1 mid air per year in AZ and I am sure there are more accidents than that. I also doubt the second "statistic" as well. Since most accidents 80-90% are pilot error and most pilots don't really do a lot of serious work on their airplane I don't believe it. Someone has an agenda on something or the numbers were misheard.

Thanks for everybody's input, a lot of good things. The one that escaped my thinking is the low annual hours on the engine. I should have put the asking price on there, it is $149,500. As I said it seems like a reasonable asking price to begin a negotiation. Regarding the UL issue, I saw one with long range tanks (106 gallons) leaving a useful of 175, which means I couldn't go...... I thought I saw the Encore upgrade was only around $5,000, not $15K as someone else posted. 231-Flyer, I don't think anybody truly values aviation correctly. There is no way you aren't upside the minute you buy an airplane, your list of items is going to cost $120K, ($45K rebuilt engine, $50K new avionics, new P&I, $25K) unless you want to fly an old airplane. Someone would have to give you the airplane, would you give your airplane away? I just put this on here to get my brain thinking harder.

I have been looking for awhile and saw this one come up. http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/MOONEY-M20K-252TSE/1986-MOONEY-M20K-252TSE/1327087.htm My opinon: Pluses: - low time engine - relatively low time airframe - one modern avionics GTN 750 Minuses: - looks like original paint and interior - only one modern box upgrade - specs don't list any uplink, data, traffic info, which seems odd, spend bunch of money on 750 This one is close for me to look at so I did, didn't look bad, pictures are representative. Price is reasonable, obviously that is their starting price, which should be high. Looking for some opinions, any purchase anywhere depends on me getting a piece of real estate sold, which should "be closing any day now....." Look forward to your feedback. Thanks, Mark

I am in the process of looking for a Mooney and looked at my first 252 on Friday. A thought just occurred to me and that is there weren't any static wicks. I vaguely recall a C172 having them for my IFR training, (many many years ago) and then the big shiny jets I flew most recently. Are Mooneys so efficient they don't generate static (joke) or is there something else going on? Or did I miss something really obvious?

What exactly differentiates the TSE from a "regular" 252. I haven't found the answer, I do know that the Encore is a little "souped" up. Or is it just marketing? Thank you and still looking. Mark

I am beginning the consideration of buying a Mooney, 231 or 252. I would need to go 900 miles westbound, so range will be tight, but if I have to stop, I have to stop. My concern is over turbo operation, currently a c-152 owner, but have 3500+ turbine time, so what I am saying is I know nothing about piston engine operation, not really nothing, but I can learn, but would rather not spend thousands learning. Obviously turbos are fussier, but are they really that fussy? How much additional expense am I going to occur over the long run if 15% of my trips are just short 30 minute trips. Any i advice or links would be appreciated. Thanks, Mark