MikeOH

The real, and critical, unknown here is just HOW MUCH MONEY Mooney needs to be 'resurrected. Then, there's going to be some kind of Laffer type curve of the number of Mooney 'investors' based on the share price point to raise that amount. So, how many millions do you think Mooney needs to be on solid 'ground'?

Well put!

BINGO!! That's what has stopped me. Frankly, while I'm not looking to upgrade avionics, the thought of even a qualified shop tearing my entire panel apart for a major upgrade makes me shudder. Plenty of reports of previously working items no longer working after panel surgery!

I've thought about the EXACT same thing! So, I'm interested in the responses, too. I've had parts of the panel apart under the supervision of an A&P, so I don't think that is going to stop us. My impression, however, is that there is a whole lot of stuff to disconnect and actually moving the position of instruments is going to, IMHO, run the MIF (maintenance induced failure) factor to unacceptable levels for my comfort. Obviously, moving anything related to the pitot/static system is going to require the inspection/sign-off from a shop. I do believe some have done overlays that look decent...but, of course, that doesn't relocate anything.

Not much difference when in a PROPERLY functioning cabin behind said inefficient piston engine. No where am I arguing that the ENGINE doesn't emit CO. No clue why you would think that??

Yuup! Right up there with, "Hold my beer, and watch this!"

Sounds like you are changing the goal posts here! Your original position was that you aren't concerned with your, IIRC, 20 ppm level in YOUR plane because the rest of us aren't really at zero anyway. Now, you appear to be saying that a single digit display, which is typical for these CO detectors/sensors, means we could have some level between 0 and 1. If agreeing with that makes you 'win the internet'...well, congratulations, "you win" THAT is not how this debate started. My CO detector WILL show 5 ppm and, therefore, I'm comfortable that when it reads zero that I'm not in any danger. I would NOT feel the same way if it read 20 ppm!

BS. Your 'logic' is a worthless as your 'promise'. If my sensor reads zero with the engine OFF, and I have seen as low as 5 ppm reading with the engine RUNNING, that PROVES your statement FALSE.

You keep harping this. Frankly, while you are entitled to your OPINION, you are not entitled to deny reality. My CO sensor performs a self-calibration for zero ppm EVERY time it is turned on. I.e., even if the sensor is not perfectly accurate at some higher level (e.g. reads 10 ppm when it's really 25 ppm) if it reads zero when in the hanger without the engine running, I can believe that the cabin is a 'real 0ppm' when the engine IS running and the sensor reads zero! Further, during some run ups, especially when the storm window is open, the sensor reads 10-15 ppm, so that is a FACT which proves the sensor is NOT dead and a zero reading is accurate. Your view seems to be that you can ignore a non-zero reading in YOUR plane by a false argument that the rest of us 'really' aren't at 0 ppm. Sorry, that's a BS argument. You don't want to chase down why your's isn't zero...fine by me. But don't act like the rest of us have non-zero cabin CO when, in fact, we do have zero!

Meh, when I dream of a 'new' plane, the parts availability thing just doesn't factor into it; that's been a concern for many brands and smacks of periodic 'sky is falling' rhetoric. In the eight years of my Mooney ownership I've only needed one factory part, the intake boot; Top Gun had one in stock when my plane was in for annual a couple of years ago and I jumped on it. By and large, between stock somewhere, aircraft boneyards, and OPP, if necessary, I'm just not that worried about parts. Leadtime on engines is a bigger threat to my continuous flying! IOW, I don't think looking at other planes/brands is really going to help that. Similarly, buying a newer Mooney or different model isn't going to solve it, either. More money is just going to get you more performance...like the saying goes, how fast you want to go depends on how much money you want to spend!

Thanks! I actually saw you posted that recently and I did just that on runup before my last flight. I did NOT notice any grease after I got back...maybe too soon to tell, but fingers crossed! For whatever reason, deep cycling a prop is not something I've ever been 'comfortable' doing, but I did this time!

Great memory! Oddly, my A&P installed it and it didn't work! He put the old one back in and it's been fine ever since! So, yes, I guess I did have a problem but it 'fixed' itself!

Yeah, reading all the various 'issues' glass has, and the excuses of why that's ok, makes me happy with my steam gauges and GNS430W. In eight years I've NOT had a SINGLE problem with any of the gauges (TC, AI, DG, vacuum pump). However, the Garmin has 'bricked' once ($1800) and the Insight G3 has 'glitched' in various ways several times (see below) but always recovers with a power-cycle 'reboot' I'm in no rush to spend $50K to 'upgrade' to glass

THIS is the path I took 8 years ago. I bought a 1970 F model with decent paint and interior, the avionics I wanted (WAAS GPS/ILS, engine monitor, and autopilot), but a high-time (2100 hours) engine at a fantastic price. I now have 2700 hours on the engine and, like Vance, it's still running great! Honestly, I rather liked that I will be in control of the OH, rather than the unknown condition of lower time engine. To me, I think the reason I 'got lucky' is that my criteria for purchase was continuous frequent use by the previous owner. The PO of my plane owned it for 13 years and flew it 100 hours or more per year. Finding this kind of usage is harder than you may think! Based on that criteria I would take a good look at that '67 C model you linked; it appears to be in regular use. If you can knock some off that $80K price you could weather an immediate OH, if needed, but odds are you could fly a good while before coughing up the $50K.

JMHO, but I'd place odds that you will still have the problem; old shock discs won't cause the tracking problem. While replacing the discs you should take the opportunity to check all the bushings and washers for wear and replace as necessary. Otherwise, you're going to be pulling things apart, again!

While I can't rule that out, it doesn't seem too plausible as the prop was OVERHAULED. Additionally, I cannot detect ANY play when I attempt to push, pull, or twist the blades. If the bearings were worn that badly, I'd think there would be some movement.

Gee, I so love these 'how much is my plane worth' threads <sarcasm> Honestly, @Vance Harral gave you the best answer a few posts back. Sure, it's a little work but looking at ads and how long they 'hang around' is going to give you a pretty good where to start. Another approach is to call IndyAir for a quick 'rock bottom' price and add 15-20% and try for that. Coming to the 'Internet Experts' just results in a price based on: 1) Engine: Fresh OH $40K, because of infant mortality it needs to be discounted $20K, Run-out: $0, 'cause you may need to spend $60K next week, 500-1500 hours: $20/hour left since the buyer deserves a discount from the actual $30/hour! 2) Avionics: Latest & greatest: 50 cents on the dollar, Old 430WAAS: $3K, Anything less: $0 3) Airframe: Pre-2000: $0 since it's an antique, naturally. So, for a 1966 E with a fresh OH and a GNS430W = $44K, $40K if the GNS is not WAAS. Yes, I'm joking, but that's about how people seem to discuss "what's it worth" questions.

I believe there is a limit; I can't remember exactly what it was, unfortunately. 1/4" seems quite a bit. Mine has NO play, FWIW. OTOH, I rented a B model for many years that probably had at 1/8" of play!

@Cody Stallings I'm sure the O-rings were replaced when mine was overhauled, and then when I sent it back. What would be a possible reason it still leaks??

Using 1/2" thick tempered glass helps immensely

All of that makes sense to me. I'm still struggling with this method. I thought the trim wheel in the Mooney adjusted the angle of incidence of the stabilizer via a jackscrew. But I don't understand how the spring bungees play into this. Does the trim wheel also provide the preload to the springs? If so, why are they even necessary as I would think you would just adjust out the force with the stabilizer AOI. If not, where does the preload come from? If it is fixed, then it is really not being adjusted by the pilot and is not really an 'active' trim adjustment. More like what @DCarlton was referring to: the spring force would be dependent on the aerodynamic load, i.e. airspeed dependent. I'm probably missing something obvious...

^^^ THIS ^^^ My only disappointment is that my F has electric gear and flaps! It does have just manual trim, which I love! My ideal purchase would have been J-bar, and completely manual flaps like a B model (NOT even hydraulic).

An airplane??? Here on Earth???

Much like the fear over the 'no back spring' issue, I think the Dukes gear wear issue is somewhat over blown. I suspect that is due to the catastrophic outcome of the failure of either one, rather than hard data on how often this likely happens. I.e., out of all the gear ups that occur how many are because the gears failed? Further, based solely on my mechanics opinion, if the gears are regularly serviced/inspected per the AD, they actually wear very little. Consequently, I think @Ragsf15e is spot on with his comment that the gears would be nice to have available, but coughing up over $2K to have one 'on the shelf' is not terribly likely.

I think what @Jackk was getting at is that legality is based upon the stall speed at gross weight, NOT the weight and actual stall speed you choose to fly at. So, no, NOT legal if that number is over 59 knots CAS.