DustinNwind

Hi All, As everyone else here, I love my Mooney but moving on to something else. All the speed mods you could want, newly overhauled engine, paint, interior with new seatbelts/generator 15 hours ago, brand new solid state regulator, external oil filter, and maintain by the best in Mooney business. Wing leveler works flawless - I've done IMC and long cross countries with it. This is a cherry plane that sips 10 gph at 155knots true. Oil and 100 hour inspection done every 50 hours, just because I like to. This is the perfect candidate to put the GNX 375. A lot of high res photos + documents on website: www.N5763Q.com TT: ~6,500 hr Engine SMOH: ~150 hr Prop Since new, NON AD: ~250 hr Annual: 08/01/019 $72,000 Feel free to give me a call or text is better, 310-467-2787. All the best, Dustin shoulder harnesses and windows excellent. Overhauled

Brice, I can't speak for anyone else, but I bought a plane with out an autopilot based on them telling me they were waiting on STC from FAA which I was willing to wait for and have for a year now - sufficient time if the paperwork was sent off. I know very well how long FAA takes to move things along, but we're not evening talking about the STC process now because TT hasn't gotten to that point with Mooney yet (they haven't sent off the paperwork to FAA so the STC process has not started). Who knows what reasoning people have for misleading others, we could go down the list of baffling situations where it makes so sense (why did POTUS just lie about his fathers birthday place, heck if I know?!), but it happens. All I appreciate is a real update on where they are with the process so consumers can make an educated plan of attack rather than wait on something that won't happen for another year (end of 2019 is the NEW projected STC).

For everyone that is saying it wasn't a lie - this was a blatant lie as they said they are waiting on paperwork back from FAA.. they haven't even submitted paperwork to the FAA from my conversation yesterday. "We have been focusing on the Cessna line and now we will start on the Mooney". Hey Navi, tough crowd in here because a lot of folks have been given false information. Go buy a plane and get lied to the better part of a year. When you have skin in the game and own a plane you'll understand - might be better to be a spectator in the mean time.

I've been hand flying the last 400 hours and don't mind it but the safety margins go down significantly in hard IMC - selling a mint machine mostly in the next couple of weeks.

I just talked to TruTrak yesterday and the young lady that started a month ago was bewildered why anyone would have said the AP for Mooney would have been in service in spring - they haven't even submitted any paperwork to FAA. She said they have only worked on the 172, 180, 182 and 185. Cory, the guy that was telling everyone it would be done by end of 2018, then beginning of 2019 and of course by now, spring has been fired. They are projecting the end of the year at the earliest. Incredibly disappointing as I purchased my airplane with a new engine and without an autopilot based on their lies.

Just talked to TruTrak - the government pushed their certification to mid spring. Everything is done, just paperwork now.

Buddy of mine pulled an stec 60 out of his glasair, should I just instal that in the M20E?

This is such a bummer - I bought my M20E without an autopilot just for the GFC500 because they said "next 12 months E". Which would you recommend now?

I agree " slow airspeed combined with higher rate base-to-final turns & departure stalls are definitely killing distracted pilots" . I'm not instructor but I do know that 80mph and a standard rate turn will give you tighter turns than 100/90mph turns.

I noticed a lot of people associating a tight pattern with high bank angle. Remember slower speed, less bank can have a better result than high speed and high bank angle. The faster you go the wider your turn is going to be, thus just slow down, do a standard rate turn, land her, and make the tower and traffic happy.

@jaylw314 You are correct, it's not linear. The peak of the difference is on take off and the lowest difference is upon landing.

Exactly - the best way to get an accurate reading on the #3 cylinder is to piggyback this adapter. Unfortunately whoever put this engine back together cross threaded the adapter into the cylinder. Now I have a pickle - do I unscrew it out and add the piggyback and hope it goes back in, otherwise I'd be looking at changing out the #3 cylinder. @carusoam the reason it reads so hot on the spark plug is because it's next to a piece of steel that is generating very high heat and not dissipating it like a block of aluminum would. From what my mechanics are saying at least.

Carusoam, All has been done with a mechanic, in fact we had 3 mechanics on the ground and a right seat pilot monitoring the JPI as I flew today to document temps. I appreciate the notion that I should "trust" what people are telling me on a forum is correct but I only accept things that are verified - even more so things need to be verified if I'm getting temps that could cause an engine failure. I verify not only for my pocket book but for the life of my passengers and the my life. So please respect that I'm going to go the extra mile to confirm why something is happening. I don't consider anything I've done extra work, it's just work. Also, I'm so ecstatic there is such a helpful group of folks here willing to tell their knowledge. I'm confused on where you got my aggression towards MS? The only thing I'm aggravated with is who ever rethreaded the probe into this engine muscled it in and torqued it the wrong way so I can't take it out with out having to tap a new hole due to ruining the treads. 1) All TCs have been identified and that's how we trouble shot today. 2) I want all TCs to work properly as the JPI should be real numbers. 3) I'm not a mechanic nor do I want to be a mechanic, thus I have a mechanic + it's the law. 4) It took 2 for your guidance. 5) As I said in the first sentence and I'll say it again, thank you everyone for your words, it has made the trouble shooting easier. Your help is invaluable. As for JPI technical department I will and can not accept their answer "it's normal for the spark plug probe to read roughly 50 degrees warmer than it is. You just have to figure on that in your calculations". I believe in doing something the right way or don't do it at all. Making a probe that reads wrong is not making an accurate piece of equipment.

Hi Folks, Thanks everyone for the help, we have figured out the problem. The issue as others have mentioned is the JPI probe on #3 goes to the spark plug to get its reading which causes ~50 degrees warmer. We confirmed this by putting the #3 probe on #1 spark plug and reading the JPI instrument. As we predicted it was going to be ~40 degrees warmer (10 degrees cooler than when on #3 due to being in the front with a little more air). As others have mentioned also, you can piggy back JPI #3 probe to the ships original CHT. Well the problem on my engine is that who ever put the new probe into the engine twisted the probe threading and we can't remove it with out having to possibly tap it to get it back in with a 50/50 change of ruining the cylinder. Engine only has 25 hours so it's tough to justify this ruining a cylinder.

Just got a PPI done at LASAR 5 days ago. This is my first Mooney and thought - why not take it to the folks that know these ships in and out. Scheduled the PPI 2 weeks out, was given a quote then, then flew her in at the date scheduled. Chris and Tom let me help the whole way through which is how I wanted to learn about my new plane. They were kind and knowledgable. New ownership has a great vision for the future and the energy to accomplish it. For those prices it would be nice to get a crew car and updated shop.

Thanks everyone for their feedback on the issue as it has helped me move along. I talked to JPI today and they said with the CHT probe on the spark plug that 50 degrees warmer is normal. That makes no sense to me to have a wrong number be "normal". Kinda pissed me off that they are saying that's acceptable.. I used RVT and plugged the holes in the baffling - and still the same issue. Tomorrow my mechanic and I will be piggyback the original ships CHT probe and see how that goes. Attached are the photos of how it looks now. Again, thanks everyone for your comments and I'll let you know my findings. Regards, D

I know it’s bad if these are the actual temps, the question is has anyone experencied this on a JPI 700 for the #3 cylinder. If you pull the the throttle back all cylinders get cooler so that’s not direct help to figure out the #3 cylinder issue.

We put a new probe in and still did the same thing, but it might not be a JPI 700 probe.

Hi All! I'm the new owner of a 65' M20E. Really excited to join the Mooney family after looking for the right bird for the last 6 months. Any time you get a new machine it goes through some issues - Here's mine maybe someone can help out: The plane has a new engine from Western Skyways around 15 hours now. The #3 cylinder is running extremely hot on climb out (475) and during level flight 415 - this is all according to a JPI 700. The rest of the cylinders are normal. Oddly the original CHT is showing very low temps. We checked injector flow and it's flowing correct. The mechanic says that the probe is faulty. Attached is a photo (left cylinder is #3) after 5 take offs hitting the 450+ and 415 for 3 hour cross country, of course all according to JPI 700 - wouldn't you think the engine would be a different color if it was actually running that hot? Any help on this would be greatly appreciated!

• Could this happen without someone seeing it? This obviously went unnoticed and I've had a number of people say - good find, but to me it was an obvious find glaring at you like a full moon at 35,000' . • Is this type of corrosion from nature or from a bad batch of metal? I'm not going to give out the N number or the name of the seller, as he's a great guy and I'm fully under the impression he was/ is not aware of the situation fully. Again, to reiterate, it's not on the open market and hopefully he takes care of it or scraps it before it does. The plane is a 1966 M20E that sits outdoors on the west coast on the coast. Again, thank you everyone for your question, input and discussion. This is a fitting conversation to have considering what happened to Piper - most Mooney owners assume their plane is robust and impervious to structural failure due to nothing happening in the past.. the past is a good talking till the present stops you dead in your tracks. It would be nice get a better picture of what the aging metals are looking like in various situations and how that would effect all aircraft. Could this be a good Mooney Corporate candidate for structural test under corrosive state?

It's not on the open market and he didn't know it existed till this AM when I started looking around (so I'm told). I sent him a text letting him know the severity of the situation, now it's in his hands how he handles it. I wouldn't even put a donor wing on this as I've never seen that much corrosion before - who knows how deep and where else it is on the plane.

Thanks guys, I really appreciate the quick feedback. It's a friend of a friends plane and scary to know that it went up today with 4 people and full luggage on a long cross country. Hope to join the Mooney Fam soon. Again, thank you all so much. Dustin

Hi all, I've been lurking in the background of mooneyspace for the 6 months as I look for my next plane. I'm pretty set on a m20 for many obvious reason I don't need to sell you on. I went to look at a mooney this morning and saw this (photo attached) - is this corrosion or a tank gasket? Photo is under the port side wheel well on the front wall of the wheel well. Your help would be greatly appreciated. -Dustin

Hi Alan, have you uploaded the logs yet? Regards, Dustin

Sent you a message. Thanks!