Utah20Gflyer

The best thing you can do is brutally lean the engine during ground operations. I lean until right before the engine will quit.

Sold

It depends. In my case my 800 was installed in a 3.125 hole with an adapter. This could be a factor though depending on current installation and available panel space.

I had a 800 and upgraded using a used 830. There is almost no labor in the switch. You unplug the 700 and plug in 730 and configure. Personally I wold either find a used 730 or I would do a primary GI275 EIS. If you have to spend any significant amount of money I would suggest going to a primary EIS.

The fixed costs of owning a Mooney are close to what you would pay for a rental plane and instructor to get your private. There is no way you are going to save money. If you want to pay a lot more because you want to fly a Mooney then that would make more sense to me.

I wouldn’t think there would be much airspeed benefit with a one piece belly. There really isn’t much down there to create drag. The real speed advantage is how fast you can take it off for inspection. I’ll be feeling very jealous in April when I’m on my back taking out a hundred screws for my annual. Fun fact - half the weight and cost of building a Mooney is screws.

Could you shim out the top shock mounts on the top of the panel to make up the difference in angle? Sounds like you are already close.

The engine overhaul is 25 years old. With 900 hours that puts average utilization at 36 hours per year which might be ok depending on how it happened and where it happened. You’ll need to get access to the log books so you can learn more. There is a decent chance it sat for some period of time. You need to know if and when it sat, for how long, how many hours it’s been flown since it sat. Any engine that sits unused is very high risk until 200-300 hours have been put on it in a relatively short period of time. What part of the country it sat in is also an important consideration. A decent paint job is probably 15k, I would want a discount for no paint. Polished aluminum is a lot of work to maintain properly. GI 275s are very nice, the lack of WAAS is a negative, you have a relatively easy upgrade path via Avadyne though but still at least 10k.

The IO360 is only more efficient than the O360 in cruise when ran lean of peak. Every other situation the O360 will burn less fuel. It takes avgas to make that extra 20hp. Even LOP in cruise you are probably only saving maybe 1/2 a gallon an hour. I conservatively plan 9 gph for cruise but in reality am doing 8-8.5 gph, sometimes in the 7s if I go up to 12,500. This is at WOT. Im not trying to make the case the O360 is better just that they are VERY similar and both have their advantages and disadvantages. If I was in your situation I would pick the best plane I could find regardless of which engine it had. I also wouldn’t focus too much on low time although I understand where you are coming from. Being flown regularly and properly maintained are the two things you actually want to pay attention to. Low time is no guarantee of not having to do a major overhaul. A 300 hour SMOH that was overhauled 12 years ago is high risk. The plane that has a 12 year old engine with 1800 hours on it actually has a lower risk of needing an overhaul. Lower risk but not no risk. It’s a plane so financial risk is baked in. The purchase is a small part of the total cost of ownership. It normally pays to buy the best loved and maintained airplane you can find. It’s cheaper to buy a well maintained airplane than rehab one. Catch up maintenance isn’t cheap.

Looks like you have an early C which has the short rudder versus the F which has the full size rudder. I believe the late C Mooneys got the full size rudder as well so the tail you have might be usable. I’d compare the F tail part number to a late C part number as that would demonstrate compatibility with the C airframe. You may also be changing from smooth elevators to ribbed or vice versa. Make sure the new tail doesn’t have the bi-metal elevator counterweights. Your IA of course will have to figure out all the legalities of the swap.

If I had 350k and wanted a really capable traveling machine I’d look at the Piper Malibu. That would put you at the bottom end of that market but the Malibu has the trifecta of Turbocharged, FIKI and pressurization (also A/C which is nice) Being a 6 place you can effectively use it with 4 adults on real missions. Operating costs are going to be higher than a turbo Mooney but your dispatch rate will be higher as it fits a wider variety of mission profiles. The Malibu was a clean sheet design meant to incorporate all the systems for a real traveling machine which is why it still has a 1200lb+ useful load with all the systems you would want. When you load up a Mooney with those systems and some fuel to get somewhere they become 1-2 person airplanes. Ultimately the question is how much money are you willing to trade for a higher dispatch rate. My G model Mooney with a nice IFR panel would probably give you a 65 percent dispatch rate, a turbo Mooney with FIKI maybe 80 percent, a Malibu maybe 95 percent( numbers were pulled out of my rear end) The costs are probably 20k a year for my G model. 40k for a turbo Mooney, 60k for a Malibu. The costs go up a lot faster than the dispatch rate. The numbers are obviously not anything near exact but I believe the relationship between cost and utility are correct.

JOSRU was the IAF for the RNAV rwy 8 approach. It’s a little baffling if he did have an IFR gps in the plane that he couldn’t load an approach and navigate to the IAF. If you are going to actually fly an illegal instrument approach with an IPad it would seem like a good idea to bring a charger and also maybe a back up device.

My best guess to add an electronic AI/HSI a WAAS Gps and an Engine monitor you are looking at 25k. That is if you go with one of the budget Gps navigators like the 175/355/375. If you go for a 650 you are looking at 30k minimum. If you want it then buy a plane with it. It’s cheaper, lower risk and less headache.

I have a 355 and an 830 that are linked up. The fuel planning functions are very nice. I’d strongly suggest CIES senders and a digital fuel gauge of some sort. I personally used the aerospace logic gauge. Having accurate fuel information increases the utility of the airplane. If I had it to do over I would have gotten a GI 275 primary EIS. Getting rid of old primary senders and gauges is a plus to me. I have two GI275s AI and HSI, they are worth the extra cost in my opinion. Very nice. If you go with the GI275s I would stick with the current autopilot which is compatible and see if that is repairable.

I started with Avemco. The instructor I used had Mooney time but no time in a G model. So I’m pretty sure it isn’t a requirement for currency in the exact letter model. The make is Mooney, the model is M20, or at least that is the way I would interpret it. I’ve flown C,G and J model Mooneys and I didn’t notice any significant difference. This may not apply to long body Mooneys which introduce a lot more power to the equation, but I have no experience with those. I asked if my previous Mooney time applied to my transition requirement of 10 hours. I was told all transition training had to be done in the insured aircraft. Doesn’t hurt to ask though. I’d do that.

I only see a notam for today and tomorrow and it just requires prior arrangement of parking, no additional fees. Do you have any additional information available? Thanks

I had a similar problem which was resolved by bleeding air out of the brake line.

I’d say most likely the problem is you have air in your right brake line, an issue with your right master cylinder or both.

I did this after a significant avionics upgrade. Pretty easy. Call them, they make the change, pay difference with a credit card. All done.

If the bore scope looks good I would continue on as you have been doing. I’d start doing oil analysis as another data point.

Make sure to verify the right part # is installed. I don’t have any real reason to suggest this other than sometimes the wrong part won’t produce the right result.

At 400 hours I would IRAN the engine, above 1000 hours I would begin considering a major overhaul but might still IRAN depending on my plans with the plane. The reason is that the value difference between a 0 SMOH engine and 400 SMOH is very little. 0 vs 2000 there is a big difference in the value which better justifies the increased cost of the Major overhaul.

How you are going to indicate the data from the new gps navigator is an important consideration. I considered a gps175 and a 106B CDI as the most budget option. In the end I went with a GNC 355 and a GI 275 HSI. To me it just didn’t make sense to spend 3k on a CDI when I knew I wanted a HSI. You might want to consider a G5 or GI 275 HSI, they are nice! The 430 is still an option as there will be lots of units coming out of planes and you have the Avidyne upgrade path available. The real killer to a GPS navigator is the loss of database updates which I don’t see happening for a long time. Given the choice I think I’d go for the GPS175.

In the western US you need a turbo airplane to fly In IMC in the winter. Icing is present almost continuously and while an Ovation could climb to the MEAs in most scenarios you would be left with few options if that altitude ended up being unacceptable.

I upgraded to two GI 275s and love them. It will undoubtedly be more expensive to go that route but you do get a lot more information like distances and times to next waypoint. Terrain, traffic, weather etc if connected to the right equipment. The extra cost may be offset by an increase in the aircraft value.