Davidv

I’m not a mechanic or very knowledgeable but my understanding is that the MP on turbo will vary depending on your specific atmospheric conditions. I have noticed similar variations on my turbo, sometimes it makes 38 and sometimes a little less on takeoff.

For whatever it’s worth, I have the Ram mount (the one people are scared of impaling them) with the IPad 5 and have never had any overheat warnings, even on a 5 hr flight with sun.

Looks great, where did you have it done?

By not much more I meant about $2K, which to me is a good deal since I can now do all approaches. My shop sold the unit for $6850 plus install labor which was about the same as the GTX-345 labor (maybe 5 more hours or so if I recall). Unfortunately I have to update my Sandel software to the latest to make it talk to the 375 but I assume that would be the case for any new navigator since the software hasn’t been updated in a while.

I’m going to use this as my standalone all in one. I had a KLn-94 and KT-76A that wasn’t working well either so this is potentially the best solution. Maybe I’ll get a larger primary GPS at some point but this should solve the problem for now at a cost not much more than a GTX-345.

Yes, it was just good news for me because I had contacted both Foreflight and Garmin right after they announced the 375 to ask if they would work together (because an initial press release had said only Garmin pilot) and both had told me they didn’t but were working on it.

Just wanted to provide a piece of information for anyone interested. I’m currently getting a GNX-375 installed but was previously worried that it would only work with Garmin Pilot for the time being. However, Garmin just confirmed as well as some others on Beech Talk that it seems to be working. I received this email from Garmin today: “At this time, pilots are reporting that the two are compatible, with flight plan transfer, ADS-B, FIS-B, and AHRS all functioning well on Foreflight when connected to a GNX 375.” I’ll give a pirep once it’s in (hopefully) soon. Any reports from others would be appreciated as well.

I usually take the dewpoint, multiply it by the amount of quarts of oil in my engine, and divide by the OAT to figure out when to start my descent. All kidding aside, I've found that anywhere between a 7/1 and 6/1 (Distance/ALT*6 or 7) depending on my speed and other variables (turbulence, airspace, ect...) works best in my aircraft. And so we kill two thread topics with one stone, I slowly start bringing down my MP in the later part of the descent. Not necessarily for "shock cooling" reasons, but because I spent so much gas money getting up there that if I can keep it in the green and it's smooth air, no need to cut power.

He’s the airplane version of Nick Burns, except with zero talent.

I can’t speak for jump schools or other commercial operators, but I don’t make money flying my plane so I don’t have a reason to fly the engine far outside the manufacturers specs. I don’t think there is any evidence that shows that drastic temperature changes will cause an immediate, direct effect (changing cracked cylinders every month) but probably not good in the long run. There are people like @gsxrpilot above who have had no issues and that’s terrific. From his other posts it sounds like he takes very good care of his airplane, and I don’t know what other differences there may be between his plane and mine. It’s just up to everyone’s individual preference. If I wanted to and had the budget, I could fly my plane at 34/24 everywhere and just keep a big budget for potential maintenance issues but that’s not in the cards for me right now.

I'm with @carusoam. Does the science perfectly back up shock cooling? Not really, since you are exceeding the manufacturers recommended cooling rate of 50 degrees per minute (at least in my plane) as you go to idle in landing and then shut off the engine. However, it can't hurt to be kind by not pulling power too drastically in your descent. I see it as kind of an asymmetric reward: Disregard shock cooling theories in your operation of the engine: Pro: Tell people there is no such thing as shock cooling, possibly start your descents a little later (although doesn't help much) Con: May have an expensive problem on your hands (again, "may" being the operative word, and in no way saying there is some certainty that you are tearing apart your cylinders, just going by the manufacturers suggestions) Try to cool as minimal as possible when practical: Pro: May help longevity of your cylinders, but certainly wouldn't hurt Con:

I actually think almost all of his videos (or at least the ones I saw on his channel) are in the Northeast in CT. I don't really take offense to the Florida comment like some others may because it would be like me saying "of course it's a cirrus pilot" (queue the line of people about to tell me how much better a cirrus is and how they did in fact once spin one in Europe). But would anyone else but a Cirrus pilot do this? Probably not. :). I will say that it feels like we have our disproportionate amount of incidents down here but it could be because the world is coming here to train. It could also be that we have over 15K GA aircraft based in this state vs. something like 6K in Ohio, for example.

Some people may cringe for looking on Best Buy, but I was thinking about this one to run xplane: https://www.bestbuy.com/site/cyberpowerpc-desktop-intel-core-i7-9700k-16gb-memory-nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-2tb-hard-drive-240gb-solid-state-drive-black/6325861.p?skuId=6325861 the one thing I’m not sure of is the video card memory. 6GB seems to be standard but is that enough or do I really need 8 or more to have a flawless experience?

I had the same issue but retyped the mail in and it worked. I’ve noticed this bug with PayPal when you copy and paste addresses.

Ha yes, there was some sarcasm in my answer.

So on the solo flight video he’s flying at looks like slow flight over an airport while using his phone in one hand to video? Did I miss something here? glad this guy has a chute.

Thanks! I can never seem to figure out the pictures here either.

Can I ask a big favor? If someone who previously installed GEE-BEE's kit in their Bravo could take/send several pictures of the post installation that would be appreciated. While I'm confident my A&P and myself can figure out the exact piece locations it would help to see the completed product from a few different angles. My baffle is in such bad shape it may even be difficult to match some of them exactly.

Alex, I had just said “many” people, especially people like me who don’t have the latest and greatest engine monitor (only a lowly EDM-700). I’m not smart enough to get into a ROP vs. LOP discussion, but I know it varies aircraft to aircraft and person to person. I don’t have GAMIs on mine, for example. Over the years it looks like there has been a discussion in the threads about this and it could just be conservatism or some real other reasons.

Looks like a few in the market right now https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/list/category/6/piston-single-aircraft/manufacturer/mooney/model/m20k-encore

+1 on doing this yourself, I've removed and reinstalled the brakes several times now and have about 0 A&P knowledge or skills. One of mine stopped working shortly after I purchased my plane so I sent them into PF and they said that they hadn't seen my brakes since they shipped them to Mooney in 1991. Needless to say it was not a cheap overhaul, but I got back pretty much brand new brakes. A little preventative maintenance lowers the chance of spending about $2K.

Agreed, I'm a little slower than you numbers but mine is a 1992 and still would only trade it for a newer Bravo or Acclaim. I made it from Nashville to Ft. Lauderdale in 3.5 hrs last month at 15,500 and loved every minute. I'm just about to swap out my baffling for Gee-Bee's kit so that should allow me to fly higher with better temps (my current seals are a total mess and won't let me get much better than 380-390 without being too rich).

@carusoam I don’t mean to nit pick since your post was very good and informative, but I believe my TIO-540 has 270HP. However, you still feel a big difference on takeoff between the 270 lycoming and 280 continental.

Fuel efficiency is a difference as others have pointed out because many people with the TIO-540 won’t run lean of peak because it’s too risky with our temps. I haven’t heard of many people out there who run the engine per the POH at peak and expect to make TBO without swapping multiple cylinders. It’s not all 540s, just the combination of this engine inside of the Mooney cowling. Like most, I burn about 18 gph in my bravo at cruise. This week @Deb was gracious enough to give me a ride back from the avionics shop in their extremely nice ovation burning 12.3 gph at 170 TAS. If I climb very high, I’ll close some of that efficiency gap, but the IO-550 fuel burn sure does feel nice on quicker trips.

I agree, I'm mostly flying in a very flat part of U.S. (south Florida) and just use it as another piece of backup information. I only got to see the terrain part when I flew up to Nashville several weeks ago.