1980Mooney

It sounds like you have a gem of an Archer. I would not count on 160 kts in the typical J that you might be able to purchase - more like 155. And it sounds like you have the perfect ownership situation - the plane costs you almost nothing. Your plane is dead simple and rugged with the O-360. The Mooney is going to need more maintenance. You mention that there is little maintenance on your field. A Mooney that is waiting for a mechanic or at a remote field to be maintained will not be faster than your Archer that is always ready to go..... You mention the double cost of insurance. You will be paying all the cost of the Mooney and maintenance where your Archer is currently basically free. Annuals will be more because of the gear, etc. Expect to deal with wing fuel tank leaks on the Mooney at some point - costly and a pain. Now on that hypothetical 500 nm flight, your Archer will only take about 45 minutes more than the typical J. The cost and all the extra time and effort to have a Mooney properly maintained at a limited service airport may be worth it to you. It just depends upon your mission. Now 20 years ago I took a J and added 300 hp. IO-550 - I got speed for cross country flights. I got higher fuel consumption. I got higher Annual costs and higher maintenance. I also got a plane that has limited prop clearance, a lot of weight on the nose gear. It fit my mission for the time. But that time may be coming to a close.

Same. Precise Flight 4 person system with Oyxmizer cannulas for about 20 years. The only problem I have is that some FBO or maintenance shops don't have the right size adapter to fit my bottle. Agree on your suggestion to keep it simple. I also suggest you get a system in which each user can adjust flow. Supplemental oxygen can be useful on long flights and night flights even below 10,000. You may find that you are more alert and less fatigued.

A sobering and lucid assessment of the current situation. Like the canary in a coal mine.

I am wondering how in this day and age “AOG“ makes any difference. If a part is available, in inventory or on the shelf then all you have to do is agree to pay exorbitant overnight shipping. It doesn’t seem that there’s any way to expedite faster than that. If a part is not available then no amount of “AOG“ is going to make it magically appear - look at the no-back spring thread above. https://mooneyspace.com/topic/39944-source-for-gear-clutch-backspring/?tab=comments#comment-689670 Basically you can go pound sand while waiting. Now if you’re dealing with something that has a service component required such as IRAN or overhaul it raises a different question. Virtually every shop has a backlog and no spare capacity. I suspect the shop has other failed starter adapters in various states of overhaul and repair. Probably every one of those starter adapters came from a plane that has been down for a significant amount of time waiting for a functioning starter adapter. What justification would the shop have to preferentially move one overhaul up and push another back further disadvantaging that owner. They are all down and unflyable. Everyone just needs to wait in line. I’m not sure what others experience has been lately but it seems to me that the service businesses are staying very disciplined regarding working what they deem regular hours and not interrupting their holidays or vacations. I have been dealing with Rocket Engineering for 3 months getting an engine mount repaired. They work 4 hours a day 4 days a week. I just spoke to Houston Tank Specialists at Eagle Lake. They are booked through January. If you have a serious chronic leak you just have to get in line and wait. And i would be seriously upset if my schedule got bumped after waiting weeks and months because they said someone was “AOG”

Good luck on that. With that kind of timing it seems extremely tight. Yes this is the new norm. I just went through an annual from hell. This is the longest slowest Annual I have ever experienced. My A&P was slow. There were a number of things that they didn’t look at for weeks and then discovered a problem. At what should have been the end of the Annual at 3.5 weeks they declared there was corrosion on the engine mount. I had to send my engine mount to Rocket Engineering for repair - everything was slow. - shipping and Rocket - and I am talking months. This Annual is measured in months rather than weeks.

This is a good point. Just remember that you are contemplating buying a "unicorn". It may make great financial and operational sense if it fits your "mission" and time horizon. Basically M20L Modworks conversion, Rocket Engineering Missile 300 and M20S Eagle upgrades are potentially lower cost ways to acquire "Ovation" performance. Each has its pros and cons. On a M20L ModWorks conversion, from the firewall back you get a long body that is similar to the later long bodies so there is some commonality of parts. From the firewall forward it is unique to ModWorks which has been long gone. You are stuck with 2,900 lb. GW. Granted that engine is TCM but things like corrosion on the engine mount could be a lot of trouble in the future. Who has the drawings and specs? As stated above there are only a few still airworthy. Rocket Engineering did something similar with the Missile 300. They took a midbody M20J and changed everything firewall forward by adding a 300 hp TCM IO-550A 300 hp. Performance is similar to an Ovation in a shorter body. GW is 3,200 lbs. I had one of the last conversions done back in 2001. They did about 52 Missile conversions total I believe. It has been fairly reliable and most are in service. From the firewall back most M20J specs, part manuals, service manuals are online. Due to the age of model certification lots of J parts are available direct from suppliers or salvage. Rocket is still in business half days supporting the plane. They have retained all the specs and drawings for the modification. I recently had corrosion on the engine mount. Rocket repaired it but it was not cheap and took a couple months. The owner is now in his 70's so I have to be realistic about how much longer it will be supported. If you can get this unicorn at a good price it may work out well. I would be cautious about putting too much investment in it however. If you plan to keep it for 20 years that is one thing but if you have to sell in the near future for unforeseen reasons it will be slow (that spells "discount"). I don't understand your comment about touch up paint coming off in the rain. A new paint job will not make it go faster or increase your GW, but it will lighten your wallet. I would buy it, maintain as necessary and then just fly the heck out of it.

If you just want a J Service Manual why don't you download the "free.fr" one on the internet? I think if is only about 15mb. and it is complete. There is a second file that has the electrical.

Ditto to what others have already said. In fact since you already have experience in multiple types, complex and you have your Instrument, it should not be hard at all for you. I trained exclusively in 172's but I bought a Mooney J model about a month before my checkride in a flightschool 172. I immediately transitioned to the Mooney and have been flying it for the last 22 years. I personally like the electric gear so don't pass up a good purchase candidate Mooney just because it does not have a J bar,

And if I try to watch it on my desktop computer it just says: Sorry! We could not locate the item you are trying to view.

When I watch the video on an iPhone it appears that there is so much vibration that the entire panel is blurry. But at the sale time you are at only 950 rpm (on the ground I assume). Is that some sort of video conversion artifact or do you have a lot of vibration?

It’s the Mooney Corp website. It clearly says that it is “Mooney Technical Support”. If it is not Technical Support perhaps they should stop stating it on the website.

Have you looked at "Air Traffic" on the Mooney Corp website lately? Most of the Models/topics have no postings in months and it seems that the only responses are from other owners. "Mooney Technical Support" appears to be MIA (if there still is any).

So if I understand the "rabbit hole" proposition: You have a well equipped Mooney that is a very capable and stable IFR platform With autopilot, alt hold, digital PFD, GPSS, Flightstream etc. Everything works perfectly You contemplate spending $30-40K - maybe you save a few dollars salvaging the old units The result is that you will have a well equipped Mooney that is a very capable and stable IFR platform OK so you trade a rate based autopilot for an attitude based unit. You will be able to touch one of the screens with your finger. And you can get stability protection and Smart Glide which you don't mention so it is not clear if it is any value to you. Going all Garmin may play better together and have a smoother upgrade path over time. And the new equipment may reduce maintenance cost (but there are a lot of comments on MS and others about the Garmin servos being weak and may not go the distance). But basically it seems like a slicker version of what you have with the same capability plus a couple bells and whistles. Has the S-Tec or any of the other components failed you or restricted you from making a mission that you desired? Will the new set-up allow you to do things or make missions that were never before possible? Will you be able to fly in weather or instrument conditions not previously possible? From a monetary standpoint you are contemplating adding upgrades that could be close to 50% of the current value of a 55 year old plane. If you add $40k of avionics upgrades to a $80K plane will you be able to sell it for $120K?....no. Will it be worth $90k?....probably. Will it be worth $100k?....maybe someone will pay. Perhaps half of the upgrade cost is unrecoverable - in the short term you can't get it back and in the long term Garmin will have new equipment out making the GTN750xi as obsolete as the GTN750 you replaced so you still won't get it back. The previous comments by carusoam above reminds me that avionics are becoming like iPhones or Samsung Galaxy's - it's all about screen size and processor speed. An iPhone 8 works just as well as an iPhone 12 for 98% of the tasks. They run the same apps. And today comes the 13 which Apple hopes you will pay a premium for a modest improvement. It becomes a treadmill of spending. But if the unrecoverable 50% investment produces value in your eyes then spend it - Garmin and your avionics shop will be happy too.

As you fly more and study winds aloft you will find that high altitude is not always your friend speed-wise ….especially on your westbound legs. However the return leg will be great unless the winds have shifted. Funny thing I always feel that I have headwind…. As someone said aviation is balancing act if tradeoffs POH Early M20J GW was 2,740 lbs. Later was 2,900 https://pilotage.e-monsite.com/medias/files/m20j-poh3203b.pdf https://www.nqac.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/M20J-POH.pdf M20K POH http://www.sparrowflyingclub.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/M20K-POH-N654JB.pdf https://www.oesc-aero.at/downloads/POH_Mooney_M20K_OEKOG.pdf

I see that you have been flying out of Hooks, Houston Southwest and Pearland. I am based at Sugar Land. First, transitioning to a Mooney as a low time pilot is not difficult with a good instructor. I bought a J model at the same time I got my PPL. I immediately went from a C-172 to the Mooney. Landing is all about managing and bleeding off the energy of the Mooney as it translates into rate of descent and speed. And I used it for my IFR training and at the same time underwent a 300 hp Missile conversion by Rocket Engineering. Second, I am surprised that no-one has asked you what you think your mission is - fly fast? fly high? how many seats do you need to fill? is high density altitude capability in the middle of a hot summer day a must have? do you have an operating cost max range? The concerns that you have mentioned are insurance availability (at any cost?), $200K limit all in cost with repairs, quality of pre-buy and a good IFR platform. Are you going to fly mainly out of and around Texas? - Gulf coast? Or are you planning to fly in the Rockies a lot? Are you planning to typically fly alone or with passengers? max number? What distance do you think the typical trip will be? if you are flying typically below 10,000 ft. then a K isn't really much faster than a J. Granted you get a better rate of climb as the altitude increases. And the turbocharged engine of the K can better handle high density altitude takeoffs but the wing and propeller still suffer the same as the J. But where we are on the Texas Gulf Coast, that high density altitude capability is of no real benefit. The K really shines at high altitude - mask wearing oxygen altitude. But funny thing if you look at a lot of flight history for unpressurized planes with high altitude capability, flights are predominantly below 12,000 ft. Why? - because many passengers don't like the hassle of oxygen and few like wearing full masks. Some are ok - it is just a choice. And if you don't carry passengers then it is no problem. The tradeoff for the benefits of the K are complexity and cost. Also fuel burn and useful load. A turbocharged 6 cylinder Continental will require more engine management and is less forgiving than the 4 cylinder Lycoming that you are used to. When you are learning IFR and building experience you may become consumed with basics and may not be able to pay as much attention to the engine settings as some. Yes it is safe but you may just run it hotter - you will be more likely to cook some cylinders or the turbo over its life. Annuals for a turbocharged 6 will be more than a 4 cylinder Lycoming. Overhauls will be eyewatering. More parts, more complexity, more tightly packed and more shop hours at about $100/hour anywhere around Houston. Some here will say you can dial back the boost and the engine to manage fuel burn - that means fly it like a J. The K that you are looking at has a Useful Load of 797 lbs. and 106 gal fuel tanks. Let's say you are planning a trip with IFR reserves and you plan for 80 gallons. Let's say you have 10 lbs of junk on your hat rack, a 15 lb flight bag, 30 lbs of luggage/bags and 5 lbs of water/drinks/food. That leaves 257 lbs. total for you and passengers. No passengers then no problem. Maybe you are skinny with a very skinny passenger. Third - have you looked at the logs posted on the for sale website? The logs posted don't appear to be complete but what is there shows that this plane has experienced a lot of corrosion repairs. It looks like it led a hard life early on in Canada. 1998 NTSB reported " DURING ANNUAL INSPECTION NOTED AILERON ROD RUSTY. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION, FOUND ROD RUSTED TO THE EXTENT IT COULD BE SEPARATED IN TWO WITH LIGHT HAND PRESSURE. SUBMITTER RECOMMENDED INSPECTING AT EACH ANNUAL." If you look at the maintenance logs all they say is both aileron tubes were replaced. There are numerous log entries where they have treated corrosion over time. Lots of re-riveting Corrosion is bad news and hard to stop. If it is one place then the entire plane has been subject to it. You will definitely need a very thorough pre-buy opening all the panels and pulling rear seats to look at the spar. Also the interior panels to look at the steel frame for corrosion. Also the "New" engine is from 2008 - a Mod Works 262 conversion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heYy6dI4TOk The price has been dropping https://plane-sale.com/en/search_aircraft/single_engine/mooney/231_(m20k)_w__252_fwf_engine_upgrade!/73030 The avionics were upgraded because much was INOP. Looks like they took the radar out - and the UL is still only 797 lbs. From just before the upgrade in the past year. You can see the old panel. https://www.aircraft.com/aircraft/151753529/n261cb-1980-mooney-m20k-231 This could be the plane you want and all repaired properly but it needs to be priced right. get more complexity and cost with some other tradeoffs.

How do you conclude "The center section of the spar was most certainly compromised by the impact"? If you believe that the wings folded up vertically outboard of the main landing gear before impact then they were no longer placing any load (or minimal at best) upon the center section of the main spar at the moment of impact. With no loading or levering of the wings transmitted to and upon the center of the spar at the moment of impact, it does not seem reasonable that the impact alone would cause "The main and rear wings spars were highly fragmented in the center of the airplane between the separated left and right wings."

That is one lucky high school!

I believe that Mooney switched from zinc chromate to epoxy on the steel bits/frame starting in 1986. Raymond J highlights the connections of dissimilar steel to aluminum. In BeechTalk Norman Earle highlights that he has seen intergranular corrosion on the wing spar caps and doublers when parting out Mooneys. He said he suspects poor heat treatment of the alloys rendering it a quality control issue that does not necessarily effect the entire fleet. Intergranular Corrosion in aluminum from Materials Science and Materials Engineering 2020: "Intergranular corrosion is a special form of microstructurally influenced corrosion, whereby the grain boundary ‘region’ of the alloy is electrochemically different to the bulk or adjacent alloy microstructure. Intergranular corrosion can occur in a variety of aluminum alloys, but is especially prevalent in the heat treatable 2xxx, 6xxx, and 7xxx series. Alloys of the 5xxx series with more than 3.5 wt% magnesium can be sensitized to intergranular corrosion by thermal exposure. 3xxx alloys containing manganese will occasionally exhibit intergranular sensitivity (Colvin, 2001). In aluminum-copper alloys, precipitation of Al2Cu particles at the grain boundaries leaves the adjacent solid solution anodic and more prone to corrosion. With aluminum-magnesium alloys the opposite situation occurs, since the precipitated phase Mg2Al3 is less noble than the solid solution. Serious intergranular attack in these alloys may however be avoided, provided that correct manufacturing and heat treatment conditions are observed. " I can find nothing in the manuals about the alloys used in the many many pieces (as highlighted above by M20Doc) that make up the so called "one piece" wing spar. Does anyone know? If it turns out that corrosion did play a role in the wing spar failure, even secondary to an instrument upset/pilot spatial disorientation, this will be bad news for both owners and Mooney. Could be a Spar AD coming. If so and caused by years of spilled drinks and water leaks then there will be many Mooneys retired. If caused by poor material specs or poor QA/QC during manufacture then many Mooneys retired and many lawsuits. I don't think insurance covers any of this.....

"... it's very likely you'll fly more than 80 hours per year"....or not. Every situation is different. You mention "bride" so you are embarking on a new family life of some kind. Some spouses are crazy about it, some support it, some tolerate and some hate it. Sometimes the situation is supportive until first bad flight in terrible IFR. And family and job demands sometimes get in the way of the best flying intentions as time goes by. I don't want to get into Canadian Matrimonial law and Matrimonial property rights, but philosophically your new bride will be owning half and half of that $20-30K you spend every year on the plane is hers. This is no longer an individual decision - it is a shared decision. She may or may not feel that the plane is delivering that level of value equal to the spending. You are right to include the opportunity cost or cost of capital. It is like the cost of interest if you borrowed money to finance the plane entirely. And that is because, after spending available funds on the plane, you may need to borrow more elsewhere to fund the acquisition of the home you and your bride want or maybe kids educations, etc (borrow an amount equal to the cash funds that you spent on the plane). Some here in other topics/threads joke about keeping the plane and getting a divorce after unanticipated incidents and high costs.. Just remember that the pilots commenting here have either supportive/tolerant families or no families that influence their individual thinking and decision-making. Those pilots/owners whose families did not support the spending, in general, are not commenting because they sold their planes and have no reason to spend time on this site. I suggest that you continue to rent for the time being. See how your new bride takes to flying via General Aviation. If she remains excited then maybe it makes sense to think about buying.

I recommend trying to preserve/repair the existing Royalite headliner. The holes are drilled in the right places - it is trimmed to fit. All the duct fittings are attached. Look at this past topic for pictures of a J model of that basic vintage. It is the same as the K. Replacing the plastic panels or headliner with new plastic increases your work by about a factor of 10 in my experience. The parts manual is not a big help because it does not show any screws or fastening points.

Yes - according to the FAA Accident/Incident report N4328H had the magneto refurbished during Annual 5 weeks before it fell off. Maybe that is why it was economic to salvage a 1978 J model by helicopter - the shop was paying for the entire debacle. It looks like the top cowling is off and they lifted the front by the hook on the engine thereby avoiding crushing the aluminum fuselage in front of the wing root like the other lifts. Flightaware shows that it is still flying.

That looks like a quick drain fitting. I have one just like that Rocket Engineering added to the IO550 in my Missile conversion. You should have another aluminum tube with a matching female fitting and a hose attached.