Schllc

I would not claim it was an overhaul. That would never go in your favor because it would be a misrepresentation. It’s more of just a curiosity, because of what was changed. I would think if it was me making the decisions after a prop strike, and they did this much work, I would say just finish the overhaul. I honestly can’t think of anything else that would need to be done..

The first thing I should say is I know that unless it’s an overhaul it’s not an overhaul. But, as i was reviewing the logs of my acclaim again, just for curiosity sake. It reminded me that I meant to pose this question when I bought it. The previous owner had a gear up landing and the engine was sent to a very reputable shop for the sudden stoppage tear down. Per the repair ticket, they replaced the cylinders, pistons, connecting rods, lifters, cam and crank, all with new or reman parts. They also changed all the bearings and bushings, rebuilt the mags and changed the alternator and starter adapter as well as both turbos and rebuilt the exhaust. Doesn’t this seem like an overhaul to anyone else point being it is not, and cannot be represent as such, but why wouldn’t you if all this was done? flame away!

You are fortunate that your dad still has the car as your memories matured. I remember working on a 1940 desoto sedan that was parked in my grandfather and fathers office garage for years. It never really interested me then but would love to have it to restore now just for the memories.

Lol. I read it twice before asking! that is a really fair price for the condition and equipment.

Did I miss it or is there a price in there somewhere?

The challenge for the ladies, is they have to remove the pants, and get over the stage fright thing to do the deed. We use adult diapers in an emergency. They are t great but they don’t make a mess. But the last time my daughter had a real need she couldn’t get herself to pee at all in the plane. She even got to the point of severe pain and crying, and couldn’t go so we had to land anyway. Not sure if a more comfortable device would have worked with the cramped quarters. A wide mouth plastic jugs seems to be the favored option for the guys. There aren’t that many people in the market but I’m sure if you came up with a better option I’m sure my girls would be happy. Don’t think it’s a get rich venture but have at it!

Some really good advice here, some of which I have employed, and some of which I am going to be trying out in the future. The challenge I have is that I live at in incredibly busy airport for private jets, as well as a couple of flight schools and the normal traffic. I also seldom fly without filing ifr. I do my best to avoid uncontrolled fields, which is another discussion, but relevant to “pattern”, as it’s been discussed in nearly every post. I would venture to say that one in 20 of my landings, if that many, follow a full pattern. 9 of 10 are some variant of a slam dunk of 10,000 feet 10 miles from the airport or a report midfield, interrupted with a direct to the numbers to get inside a jet on a 10 mile final doing twice my speed. All of these ideals are pretty difficult to replicate when you have wildly different approaches. To be clear, I am mostly referring to the reference points like on downwind, or abeam the numbers etc. These are just not regular things in my world unless I go out to an uncontrolled field or a slow enough one to request this. Whatever method you use, being at the right altitude, the right speed and the right MP on final are all immutable for a good landing. Violate any of those and you will have issues. I believe while the methods described by the guys here who have forgotten more than I’ll ever know about mooney’s are valid and sound, there is a heck lot of “feel” required as well to get to that place, and while that may not be teachable, it is no less relevant. Fly often, know your airplanes behavior and characteristics and know when things are just too out of tune to try the landing.

Not sure about his handle changing. I emailed him about a door seal and he said he deleted his account on Mooneyspace and would not be returning.

I’ve seen planes logbooks where they have been sent in repeatedly for repairs and I’ve seen 16 year old planes that never had them touched. 1000 hours and 5000 hours seems awfully arbitrary. I wouldn’t send for service until required for function. They aren’t really needed in a Mooney anyway so why spend 1500+ unless they need service.

My experience is limited to the last 8 years… but it would seem that what you spend on the plane is generally at least what it will sell for it if it’s properly maintained. I realize this isn’t axiomatic, but planes don’t generally depreciate. The cost of owning and using is the expense, and when you sell it, you get awfully close to what you paid. For me, the cost of ownership for new planes has been pretty inexpensive. I haven’t had to do avionic upgrades or major repairs. I think generally new planes have less issues. It’s all a trade off. I didn’t want downtime, so I went newer. It’s worked out so far.

I may be missing something, but what was the objective of the rant? Is it that negligent people who shouldn’t own aircraft are skewing statistics? I also think the “none” comment may be a bit extreme. I have a Hobbs meter and an additional cigarette lighter installed in the baggage area of my aircraft. Both are INOP and it has nothing to do with my ability or willingness to correct. My plane is a g1000 and the time on the MDF is the only time that matters, and I have no use for the cigarette lighter in the baggage area. I’m certainly not going to ground my plane, or waste time putting it down for these items. I’ll wait for an airworthy or routine maintenance item to come first.

You do not lean in the climb at all in the acclaim.

One of the best features of the digital logs is it produces an instant 8710 for future ratings.

Oh, I agree, I print and make a pdf copy about 6 times a year, but eight years now and there has never been a glitch…

FF log is backed up on their cloud and is completely legal. I only had about 20 hours in my original logbook and I transferred it all to ForeFlight and have never had a paper log

I probably explained it poorly the first time. I’m comparing the acclaim to an ovation. I have about 450 hours in ovations and about 600 in acclaims. From takeoff to about 400-500’ the ovation is much faster in the climb than the acclaim. It launches off the runway, and the acclaim almost feels anemic when you are accustomed to the ovation. At around the 400-500 foot altitude the acclaim is at least as fast as the ovation and slowly starts to out climb the ovation, so the ROC difference after 4-500’ is probably not much until 4000-5000’, which is when the difference becomes really noticeable.

I don’t have ownership experience with the k models, but I have owned ovations and acclaims. So the comparison of the same engine with and without turbo is relevant The ovation up to about 400’ agl, out performs the acclaim. After that, the turbo really kicks in and it slowly starts to out climb/perform the ovation, and by 5000’ leaves the ovation in its dust. I would imagine the Turbo version of the same engine in the K does the same thing. Some of the acclaims I’ve flown also require a temporary reduction in the ROC shortly after takeoff to reduce cht. From everything the OP had described, it sounds like the performance is normal to me.

This is a known issue with some acclaims. I had it on two of mine. No one has been able to explain it or fix it. It was really only a problem at really low rpm’s, so I got into the habit of just boosting the rpm’s a little as I turned. One of them had gami’s and the other did not.

+1 for Cole. Good communication, stand up guy. Picked me up at my hotel at 630am to save me the Uber. I didn’t ask, he offered. would definitely go back.

I’m pretty sure we have been subjected to above said government since the early 90’s, and it isn’t getting any better in my lifetime.

Someone mentioned earlier that this could increase the price of fuel up to $3 per gallon. I wonder if the marker will tolerate that kind of increase. That is huge.

I have landed many times in both an acclaim and an ovation at X01 which is 2400’x50’. Zero displaced threshold and water on three sides, with room to spare. You must be on your numbers! That being said (I’m throwing up a little in my mouth as I say this)…. Your mission, and multiple owners, and budget, sounds like a Cessna 182 is a much better option.

Guilty as charged! I can’t help myself. I would keep every one if I could!

Make sure you note anything non stock on your plane, fuel capacity, traffic etc. all that has to be reconfigured during reinstall and the shops almost always miss one or two if you don’t point them out. Try to find someone who has done it on a Mooney as well, there are some sequential items that if done out of order can rack up the time. Maxwell’s would be my first choice if convenient.

Nothing against GMax, Jimmy is a solid guy, but Thunderbird, owned by Richard Similie, is probably a better resource for late model mooney’s. He was with Premier for a long time, and probably sold more than half the fleet when they sold new. He is really dialed in with those buyers. It’s a different demographic. https://thunderbirdaircraft.com