Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Tcraft938 last won the day on July 18 2019

Tcraft938 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

35 Excellent

About Tcraft938

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 07/17/1967

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Brockport, NY
  • Interests
    Anything aviation, sailing vintage and tailwheel planes and family
  • Reg #
  • Model

Recent Profile Visitors

326 profile views
  1. The manual bar would have been a killer for him. LOL
  2. I'm not sure if this will help you, but here is a gear swing video on youtube. There are many others to chose from as well. Best of luck with it, I hope it works out for the better.
  3. What climb airspeed are you using and at what altitude? I'm breaking in a new engine which should be hot, but at 120-125mph climb even on 60F day, 374 is the highest CHT I'm seeing. 302 to 324 in 77% power cruise. What is your fuel flow in climb? If it helps I'm in the 15 to 16 gph range full rich. Are you sure your cowl flaps stay open in the climb? I know someone that had that issue, their cable was about to break. On the ground it didn't take much hand pressure on the flap to close it. He mounted a GoPro cam near the flap and sure enough around 100 mph the flaps closed even though he had the rod pulled out. If memory serves, there was a spring on the system connected backwards too. Just some thoughts, I'm not an A&P nor do I play one on TV :-) I am also new to the M20 ownership, more like a love affair so far. Hopefully it doesn't break my heart.
  4. Your post made me curious about confirming things with the Garmin 430w true airspeed and density altitude calculator, Garmin G5 and analog airspeed indicators, foreflight and winds aloft and flying a triangle course. 1963 M20D converted to retractable gear. Zero timed engine 28 hours on it and Scimitar 2 blade prop. My manifold pressure gauge may be reading a little lower than actual (original gauge) but according to POH charts speed is on target or a little better, fuel burn is lower, so maybe it's fairly accurate. At 5,500ft OAT 49F Baro 30.00" MP 23" 2400RPM IAS 160mph/139kts True Airspeed calculated to be 175mph/152kts, fuel burn 9.4 gph 100 degree rich of peak at 1312 EGT. The average groundspeed on triangle route was 151kts, and the winds indicated things were accurate. Christmas Day much colder, same MP and RPM and Altitude, temp was 20 degree F and Baro 30.37", TAS 178mph/155kts fuel burn was 9.8 gph EGT 1330 at 100 degree rich of peak. My A&P and the Overhaul shop want me flying it for at least an hour continuous (unless trouble) and no less than 75% power, so per book at these settings I should be about 77%, I don't know if the more efficient new propeller boosts that at all? If I run full rich, it's 2 mph faster and fuel burn is 11.0 gph, however my CO detector starts to show low numbers, so not combusting all the fuel. I guess some evening I'm going to the hangar with a light inside the cowl and I contort in the cabin looking for light showing through the firewall. I have to admit I did enjoy the fact that my friend in a much newer C182 had a hard time keeping up and he was burning almost 50% more fuel to do the same thing. I don't understand, after three hours he wasn't smiling like me at the fuel pump. hmmmm
  5. Is the CHT for the cylinder reasonably similar to the others and stay pretty steady in cruise?
  6. Cliffy, dead on sir. Snow storm this weekend and my A&P said, I'm doing an annual on an E model and owner doesn't want to assist, has no problem if you do if you want to start your education early, it will save him some $ and you will be more efficient for your annual next month, saving you more $ and me more time. He had me do very similar to what you said and it was not big deal, just some time and better me doing that simple work than paying him $80 per hour. Took pictures of things before I undid it, separate baggies labeled for the screws, few drops of oil in the baggy to help clean and lube them and set the clutch real low so don't strip them. He even had marks on his jacks for height and then wood blocks to go under the belly that were perfect to hold the belly pans in place to start the screws. He works alone most of the time so he has a million tricks to get a two man job done by himself. My favorite question from him, "a couple of months ago you helped with a Piper Arrow, which plane was easier and gave better view of retract system and control surface linkages and then ask yourself based on your answer, as I fly out of here which plane am I more confident Ed saw the most of and verified?' He smiled and then said, "yup Mooney's can be a PITA (pain in the axx) but they are a Brilliant PITA, everything else is a stupid PITA". My real lesson I think is to not worry so much about the horror stories and negative opinions about Mooney I have heard until I have actually experienced enough to form my own opinion.
  7. Do you see any entries in your airframe log or 337 form, etc? There should be something. The seats seem like a very worthwhile upgrade.
  8. Just my opinion, that Cardinal is a nice plane with a lot of wonderful additions and enhancements. However, it is a textbook case of "you'll never get out of it what you put into it". it looks like someone in their mind said (example), "I paid $60,000 and put $120,000 in paint and avionics in it, so $170,000 is a deal!!!" Unfortunately, it rarely works that way. Let's assume for a moment that someone is willing to pay $170,000 or $500,000 doesn't matter, will the insurance cover it for that? If the insurance does what will their requirements be? Oh, your a private pilot with 90 hours and no complex time? Sorry no insurance for you. As for your question about why Mooney command lower price? I think It has to do with appearance and perception as well as name recognition. Cessna is a name that even non-pilots know and chances are a pilot trained in a C-152 or C172 and all the lore that goes with it. Appearance, to the nervous passenger, the Cardinal looks bigger, which to them means more substantial and that has to be safer, and I don't like this climbing on the wing idea. I get this when parents bring kids to me on EAA young eagle flights. Then they look inside, it's so small, etc. The pilot in me does like the two doors of the Cardinal, the spaciousness of cabin. However the aviator and accountant in me said, "what will the Cardinal do for me that the Mooney won't for the extra money?" The answer was nothing, and 70% of the time I fly alone, so who care about a second door or extra space? The baggage compartment in the Cardinal is not real useful thanks to the main gear housing blocking the doorway, my A&P said my annuals and maintenance would be much more expensive on the Cardinal gear than the Mooney, some parts on Cardinal are harder to get than the Mooney and his opinion was, "if you and another guy buy a nice Mooney and nice cardinal of similar age and condition, the one with the Cardinal will be my meal ticket". Those sentiments combined with initial and recurrent costs tipped me the Mooney route. I think of it as cost per mile :-) I was fortunate to find a Mooney with great paper trail. Since owning it I've poured through the receipts of what the previous owner had into it especially with avionics/panel upgrade. I sincerely feel bad for him now, I could not get half the work done now and stay within the purchase price of the plane. As the local avionics tech told me, "did you know the shipping tape from Garmin costs $5000? Yup, when you buy that GTN650 for about $14,000, it's worth every penny then I cut that box open and the GTN is worth $9,000. I can sell you some of that tape for $1000". :-) End of the day, to each their own. Do what you want with your money to make you happy and it is well worth every penny. If both planes were the exact same price.... that would be a tougher question.
  9. I was thinking about the more simple frontal enclosure sold by LASAR. They claim 5 mph and better CHT. While I love the looks of bigger projects like LoPresti, I don't think I can justify that kind of $ and labor to improve looks and perhaps nominal increase in speed/efficiency. Just got down with OH engine and I have a feeling the not too distant future entails doing something with fuel tanks and paint after that. Perhaps during paint would be the time to incorporate some of the various mods like cowl enclosure, gap seals, one piece belly pan. Incidentally, my A&P tells me that at annual next month he can guarantee after assigning me the task to do the three belly panels I will be putting the one piece at the top of my priority list. He keeps joking that he's already ordered it. LOL
  10. I REALLY appreciate this post since I only have a few hours in our new to us 63 M20C. Also I flew it yesterday on a cold winter day and at 8500' -8C I was seeing numbers I didn't believe, 182 mph or 158 kts True 2400 rpm 22.5 MP. I'm still doing the engine break-in so I have been keeping copious data notes from each flight. If your curious, attached is a data sheet of the first flight. I don't have any speed mods but I would like to get a few. Number one on my list is the cowl enclosure, for better cooling and aesthetics. It allegedly improves speed 5mph, I would be curious if those on the group saw increases to speed or rate of climb for items such as the cowl enclosure, gap seals, etc. PS I also attached an excel file that looks much better and can see flights #1, 3 and 7. Over the first 10 hours or so it seemed to get a little faster at the same power settings. The latest issue I have noticed is it appears my MP gauge is reading almost 2" lower than actual. I believe this because when on the ground if I set the altimeter to elevation the MP gauge is almost 2" lower as well as in cruise if I set for book, I'm significantly faster than book and burning a little more fuel per hour. Annual is next month so will learn what that will entail. Flight No 1 Date: 9/3/2019 Tach End 4,574.55 T/O Time 11:05am Tach Start 4,573.20 Flight Duration 1.35 hrs To of Climb Cruise Cruise Pattern Time 11:14 11:40 11:55 12:10 Squaks & Discrepencies IAS mph 157 153 158 120 1 Prop RPM low for T/O approx 2640 True Airspeed 171 167 166 124 - - - - 2 Fuel Flow Inop reads 0.0 Alt 4500 4500 2500 1800 3 Small oil leak appears front of oil cooler OAT 61 62 66 74 RPM 2500 2400 2400 2500 Notes & Comments MP inches 23 23 23 15 1 Oil consumption, approx 1 qt % Power 77% 74% 78% 52% 2 Fuel used, approx 12.5 gallons Fuel Pres 4.8 4.8 5 4.8 3 Ave Fuel burn 10.8 gph Oil Temp 182 178 180 184 4 Estimated power based on 180 hp = 80.4% Oil Pres 72 71 74 69 5 Indicates engine is capable of > 180 hp CHT Cyl 1 300 290 272 292 Cyl 2 264 239 228 246 Cyl 3 315 313 298 307 Cyl 4 313 304 288 298 EGT Cyl 1 1254 1218 1224 Cyl 2 1163 1082 1098 Cyl 3 1256 1244 1246 Cyl 4 1132 1092 1115 Volts 13.8 13.2 13.1 13.1 Min Max Redline Oil Temp 100 225 245 Oil Press 55 95 25 Idle Fuel Press 1.0 8.0 3.0 desired CHT 100 450 500 Break in Data.xlsx
  11. I know this is not 100% Mooney specific, but it is to my new to me Mooney. I have a Garmin 430W and while it is "old tech" by today's standards it is new to me as far as ownership. To update the database, does one need to be a part of the Garmin plan and for IFR and approach data also have a Jepp subscription? Or is it an either or? Both are rather expensive, so I would hate to subscribe to both if one would suffice. Thanks
  12. That is the exact reason why I would like to purchase the two pieces. I checked LASAR and they are sold out of one of them. With Mooney now closed, are there other good sources? Thanks
  13. Thanks for providing me with the education. I'm a new owner of a 63 M20C. Annual will be coming up in January, so I want to make sure I have what is needed.
  14. Which model Mooney are these for. LASAR has some for sale but only two pieces. Thanks
  15. I’m curious if anyone has had a G5 or two for awhile and has done the upgrade that will give you true airspeed, wind direction and speed? My understanding it needs something like GAD 33 installed. How hard and expensive with that? Thanks