KJATCt

Best of all you know YOUR airplane tip to tail. That is worth a helluva lot! This Mooney disease is a beautiful affliction.

I bought my 1965 E from a family member that was in similar condition (no turbo). I have since replaced almost all avionics, the interior, and the engine and prop. I now have another 60k in it. The up side if any is that I now have a great airplane and I was able to pay over time. The down side; it would have been far cheaper to just buy one with all that I wanted. This airplane means a lot to my family and I and we will keep it forever. I am not sure it will be cost effective to restore ANY certified aircraft due to the cost of FAA "blessed" parts. Just an opinion, hope it helps.

I have the aspen installed with a 430w. Money well spent. It even talks to my fuel flow and Britain ap.

Mooney makes a kit to replace the springs. http://www.mooney.com/images/pdfs/sb-pdf/sbm20-144.pdf I used this on my 65 E and it been great for 3 years now. I was breaking about two springs a year in the old configuration.

Quote: DaV8or Looks good! Hard to know how fast you'll go yet. I'm assuming you're still breaking in the engine.

The after pics! I still need to finish the painting. I do like the looks and I seem to have picked up about 7-10 knots. This is between a new engine, Top Prop, and the cowl so how much speed the cowl added is anyones guess.

well a probe swap showed the same, perhaps these are break in woes?

I have finished a SWTA 201 cowl coversion. The cht on #4 is a good 30-40 degrees colder than #3. Anyone with this kit seeing the same thing? Mitch, I have not forgotten about you PM me about the baffels so I can get those to you. CHT1 291 (piggy pack probe) CHT2 335 CHT3 359 CHT4 317 OIL 181, MP 23, RPM 2400, OAT 51f, FF 10.7gph I have not tried swapping probes, I am doing that today.

I had my aspen 1000 pro installed at High Desert Avionics in Lancaster CA. Fox field (KWJF). Great work/price!!

Quote: DaV8or I am curious about this question too. I currently have the SWTA 201 style cowl, but about the only way I can make my Mooney go faster (I'm pretty much out of mods) is either go to the real 201 cowl or go Lopresti. I thought a used 201 would be cheaper than a Lopresti. Is there an STC for using the 201 cowl or do you have to get field approval? I'm not planning on doing a change any time soon, but maybe in a few years when I get the itch to repaint I might just do it.

I am in the process of doing a SWTA 201 cowl mod to my 65 M20E. My first thought was a used 201 cowl, I spoke to Paul Lowen at LASAR and he said it would be in the area of 10K and thats before the feds got their hands on it. So far I have no complaints on the SWTA cowl kit. I did replace the spinner and mounting kit. It went from the ring gear mount to mounting directly to the prop hub. see the end of this thread for details, pix. (the thread starts out about cowl closure but morphs into full blown cowl mods) http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=2&threadid=784

Fiberglass took a bit longer than I thought however, it is here now and work continues. We (my IA an I) are now cutting the frame out of the old cowling. The bottom frame still needs a bit of trimming. The fiberglass will be riveted to it. Here are the pix so far, more to follow...

have you tried talking to Bil Wheat out in Kerrville? The factory may have some intrest and be willing to lend an engineering hand.

Congrats!! Make sure to let your insurance provider know it should drop your rate, A LOT!!

What a paint job!!

Guess STEEL here it has a cronograph and a tachymeter. Unlit though (after 10 years the glow in the dark hands only last a few minutes), maybe I will look for a good Seiko or Citizen.

Quote: DaV8or I don't have any experience otherwise, but the SWTA 201 cowl is what my plane has and it seems well done and performs as advertised as far as I can tell. IMO, it's a great compromise between a real 201 cowl or the Lopresti and a simple closure mod. It really does make it look like a 201 and therefore, pretty cool. I think you'll really like it.

Ok so I have chosen the SWTA 201 cowl. I have the new engine and baffles in place. I have not flown it of course but I do like the engine accessibility this set up offers vs the “doghouse”. The fiberglass cowling should be here in about two weeks I will post more pix then.

Quote: dmevans I've had to hot start my 67' F four times since I took ownership last weekend. I use the method almost all Mooney pilots recommend and it has worked like a charm without fail. 1. Set throttle at 1000 RPM before shutdown 2. When getting back into the cockpit, don't touch the throttle. 3. Fuel pump is NOT used 4. DO NOT touch the throttle 5. Mixture - Full Lean 6. Crank engine until it fires/sputters then gradually increase the mixture

On my E the probe is just in front of the spin on oil filter on the adaptor plate.

Quote: eaglebkh I'm really enjoying my Aspen, though I am on unit #2. The first one kept trying to use the backup battery. Some annoying tid-bits... The tapes don't always match the round gauges, which is most annoying with altitude (20-60ft diff). The auto-brightness is too bright at night and always has to be turned down manually. The glideslope indicator is up top in the AI instead of down low in the HSI, but that's just a matter of preference for me, as I'm used to it being down low. One note to anyone using a yoke mount of any kind: be sure not to push the yoke all the way forward while turning the ailerons, as this will cause the yoke mount to slam into the bezel of the Aspen display. Found that out on unit #1 - happened at run-up during control surface check. May only be an issue on vintage mooneys.

Quote: edgargravel KJATCt: I would be interested in finding out the differences in CHT caused by taking out the doghouse and replacing it with baffling. With a modified cowl (+ a pound or two, - weight of doghouse, + weight of baffling) I am not certain there would be any significant weight increase or decrease fwd of the firewall, but I would like to be sure that the aiflow over the cylinders is not adversely affected by the loss of the doghouse.