Mooney217RN

Looks like we sadly lost another one ☹️ https://fox4kc.com/2019/12/31/witnesses-describe-seeing-ball-of-flames-behind-homes-as-plane-crashes-in-overland-park-killing-two/

It’s likely your fuel sender gasket. This was a recurring problem in my E Model. My leak was on the co-pilot side, had to replace that gasket more than once.

I am based out of TRK. For the life of me, I cannot find a WAAS approach.

Two other matters. Go with a more recent Ovation, like an Ovation 2GX or Ovation 3 if it is within your budget. The panel on the "vintage" Ovations is 2" higher than the more recent Ovations. Ergo, you have less visibility out the windscreen. It may even be 3" of difference, I forget, but it is significant and noticeable. Contrary to Paul's comment above, I respectfully disagree on the ADS-B. If it is not equipped, it can be a significant expense to equip. I would walk away or factor it into the price. If it doesn't have WAAS, well, it doesn't have WAAS. I didn't care about that because to date I still haven't found a WAAS approach in my region.

Skipilot- I just bought a new Ovation last June (2018). Love it. I would highly recommend low time, 310hp conversion and G1000 avionics suite. If it doesn't have ADS-B, walk away. I am based at a high altitude airport and did the 310HP conversion at the recommendation of Don Kaye. Well worth it. You won't get any meaningful additional cruise speed out of it, but it will get you off the ground faster in high density altitude environments. it's really a different airplane with the 310HP conversion. I flew mine about 6 weeks +/- before I did the conversion and would never go back. I don't have TKS or air conditioning, nor do I want either. TKS slows you down. A/C is worthless. I have been in aircraft equipped with A/C, total waste of $$$, doesn't work well. The only unexpected issue I had was the starter adapter beginning to fail, and I had it replaced immediately. I am overly pleased with the Ovation, and I have flown a Mooney for 20 years. The Ovation has been referred to as the "Queen of the Fleet". I'd agree. Best bird they have made. You really don't need the Acclaim unless you regularly fly up in the flight levels. At 14,000', the Ovation does great.

Derek, congratulations! I remember when I got my E model 20 years ago and my instructor was practicing with me. We would climb, cruise, descend and land. Lots of that. On our final flight home, I turned to him and said that this is what I had always imagined flying would be like. A “real” airplane that is. Having accumulated 350-400 hours at that point I had flown a few aircraft but mostly 172 & 182 time. I had flown another E model in flight training, and enjoyed it. Words of wisdom here - it’s better to explain why you went around as opposed to why you didn’t. Last year I got into a new Mooney. There’s a transition to that for certain. enjoy that 201!

I bought a single piece mat for the cockpit from SCS. I am very please with it. I have an Ovation, and I think the mat was marketed for the Bravo. Really a nice product. I would highly recommend it.

First of all, your talking apples & oranges. I have 25-30 hours in the SR22 line. It’s not a very well made aircraft. Your point about the Acclaim is well taken however. Too many Acclaim buyers never realize the performance of the Acclaim as they fly it like an Ovation. In another thread I stated that Mooney’s problem is a lack of entry level product. You cannot have a company that manufactures one product geared solely at the very upper echelon. That is what Mooney has become. The Ovation & Acclaim are the top of the product line. Where does the low time pilot coming out of a 172 go to step up out of a rental? Surely not the Acclaim, and likely not the Ovation.

I had the exact thing occur in my Ovation. I check that latch before departure as part of my checklist sequence.

I've been reading through all the comments online including the future speculation of the product line. Earlier this year I posted online about my experience flying with a friend & neighbor of mine who bought a brand new Cirrus SR-22 GTS. We flew to dinner one night in that beautiful plane of hers. Some of the comments in response to my observations were critical of my comparison between the two product lines, Mooney & Cirrus. But one of the the things I said is at the core of Mooney's demise. Years ago, Mooney built a line of aircraft that included a variety of models. There was the C, D, E & F. There was a G model for a while. In the late 1970's through the 1980's, there was the J, K & L bodies, the K having two variations. Later, the long body models were born from the PFM (L). We had the Bravo, Ovation and later the Acclaim. The 252 became the Encore, arguably one of the best of breed. All the while, there was a common thread - the J Model (201) was available and sought after. But the profit margins were better on the long body Mooneys. So like many manufacturers, Mooney went where the money was and after a change of ownership, the J model and the Encore were shelved. The factory was left with the Bravo, Ovation and later the Acclaim to replace the Bravo. Seemed like a good business decision, right? Not so quick. One of the things I mentioned in my post about the Cirrus is that you can easily transition into an SR-22 from a C172 or C182 or similar trainer. Take my aircraft ownership as a case in point. I went from about 300-350 hours in a C172 with some C182 time into an E Model. Really nice transition. It didn't hurt that our local flight school had an E Model (which is still at our airport but owned by a good friend now). The E Model was a perfect transition for a low time pilot into a complex platform. Later in life (last year), after a couple thousand hours of time in the E model, I traded up to a near new Ovation 3. I wanted more aircraft, faster speeds to bridge the gaps of distance, and I wanted more capability. Thanks to Don Kaye and Will Wobbe, I received good transition training. I found that moving into the Ovation 3 was a handful coming out of the E Model. I couldn't imagine going into an Ovation Ultra coming out of a C172, let alone transitioning into an Acclaim as a low time pilot. When Mooney decided to pare down the product line to two models, they determined their fate in my opinion. Very few people (if any) are going to move into an Acclaim or Ovation with only a few hundred hours of flight time. The 201 was such a success because you could move into a 201 easily from only a few hundred hours of flight time. It was a logical move. Then you're into a 201, and after a few years, you want more. You step up to the Ovation or the 252 Encore (when it was in production). Nobody today is going to really know what an Ovation or Acclaim is, because they never flew the lower end of the product line. All that was left were the two top ends of historical production. There was no entry level Mooney to introduce pilots to the product line. I liken this to BMW. Years ago my first new car was a BMW 320i. It was a wonderful car, powered by a 1.8 liter inline 4 cylinder motor. It had a 5 speed manual gearbox, roll down windows, a crank operated sunroof, manual seats, two doors, dual mirrors. It was so much fun to drive. BMW sold a lot of 320i cars. I put 375,000 miles on mine before I sold it. And a few years after that, I bought an E46 323i. I also have an M8 and an X3. BMW has continued to build 4 basic models - a sports sedan (3 Series), a sedan (5 series) a coupe (6 or 8 series) and a luxury sedan (7 series). They also have a successful line of SAV's, the X series. But look at that car of mine from 37 years ago - it set me on a path to own BMW's. It was the entry level BMW, affordable, sporty, efficient, and a true pleasure to drive. A drivers car. Mooney neglected the entry level, and in my opinion, that has led to the demise of the brand. Only those of us who have flown Mooney aircraft will know how good they are. People coming out of training aircraft won't get into a new Mooney, because there was no entry level model to get into. That my friends is the root of WHY the factory is shut down, and likely will not re-open. If Mooney were to ever emerge from this shutdown (and I have seen a few as an owner), the only way they rise from the ashes is to bring back the 201. Short of that, we won't see the factory re-open, sadly.

I flew my 1974 E Model for 19 years before moving into my new Ovation last year. I would regularly fly into KSQL which is now 2,600' in length. It used to be shorter, I believe 2,400'. I never had any problem landing the E Model there, and had ample runway. Same goes for the Ovation, which I have to be more careful with to be on speed and target altitude. I would use 75 indicated airspeed on final, roll off the rest as you approach the threshold. The plane will continue to "fly" at a lower speed prior to stalling the wing at 57 +/-. Come in full flaps, full stall landing. In an E model you should have little problem with 2,200' provided you practice with an instructor at your home airfield. Two words of caution - don't land downwind and always be prepared to go around. It's better to explain why you went around as opposed to explaining why you didn't go around. When I got checked out in my E Model years ago, I landed on a 2,000' runway. It was doable, but I wouldn't do it again.

Unfortunately Top Gun does not perform this service, but they are a fantastic shop regardless. I had to get my 3 blade prop on my Ovation balanced. Take it to Mather Aviation at KMHR, which is where Top Gun recommended I take it for this service.

Earlier this year I commented on the marketing success of Cirrus Design. While it is not built to the quality of the Mooney, Cirrus sells aircraft and gets pilots into planes at an impressive rate. Cirrus is vertically integrated, and they've created a culture among their owners that keeps them coming back for more. I have flown the SR-22 line, and I have a little more than 25 hours in them. they're a great bird. Are they comparable to a Mooney? Not even close. In fact, I smoked an SR-22GTS the other day by 40kts in level flight without even trying. That said, Mooney failed to get the product out in front of the consumer, and I lay that blame squarely at their doorstep. The product is fantastic, the pricing is really good when you look at the value & quality of the product, but the marketing has been horrible for many, many years. It goes to show you that you can manufacture a high quality product at a good value and fail because the market has no clue what you have to offer. Relying on 3rd party sales reps who have no interest in the success of the product was the weak link in the supply chain.

Rest in Peace Mark Michael

Fellow Mooniacs- My favorite Mooney t-shirt was falling apart from years of wear & tear. Jolie Lucas gave it to me probably ten years ago. I went online to see if I could buy a new Mooney shirt - no such luck. So I went to my local graphic design shop who makes custom shirts and clothing on a regular basis. My initial order was expensive, as I went with the minimum number of shirts (24). Now I'll never wear them all, and a few of them are already committed to lucky recipients. If you'd like to buy one from me, please send me an email Mooney217RN@yahoo.com All shirts are XL, 100% cotton. They are pocket t's which I really like. I have attached photos to this message. I figure there will be a dozen or so available, so first come, first serve, $25 per shirt plus whatever the cost is to ship to you.

A fine bird! I bought one (Ovation 2GX, converted to Ovation 3GX) last year.

It's time to replace your engine driven fuel pump.

My point exactly from the original post. I was merely trying to elaborate why Cirrus outsells Mooney, which is clearly marketing, or a lack thereof. I will refrain from commentary in the future, I wasn't intending to start a thread of discourse. By the way, I like the Cirrus. I just feel the Mooney is a better plane for me, and a far better value.

Like this family? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2066691/Plane-Crash-near-Chicagos-Crystal-Lake-kills-businessman-Ray-Harris-2-daughters.html

The climb rate on my Ovation 3GX is far better than the Cirrus. The cruise speed on the Ovation is around 190+ the Cirrus is 175. I flew my Ovation Thursday morning, the Cirrus that evening. I think I know the diffference.

Wrong. There have been fatalities and severe injuries from the impact. I want to say that there was one earlier this year in San Diego with fatalities. Could be wrong about that, but I vaguely recall it.

Somebody asked how new is my Ovation. It’s an Ovation 3GX, pre-ultra. I prefer the single door, I’m used to it after decades of Mooney flying. I have been in two Ultras, one Ovation and one Acclaim. A slight bit nicer than my Ovation, but the Cirrus interior ergonomics are noticeably nicer, just my opinion. i live in Northern California, and at the AOPA Fly In in June, no Mooney reps or factory new plane on display. That’s simply unacceptable from my perspective. The only AOPA event in the Western United States, and unless I missed it, we were not represented. Pretty pathetic. I attended an Air Show at my home airport (TRK) last month, Cirrus had multiple planes on display. Went to an airport open house in Carson City, Nevada in June, same thing, new Cirrus aircraft with reps on display. Cirrus is marketing their product line, Mooney is not. Therein lies the biggest difference.

I couldn’t agree more with your comment. Similar to those that buy an Acclaim but use it as an Ovation. You’re spot on.

I read the thread on the message board and felt compelled to start a new one, only because I have had this discussion with someone who recently opted for a new SR22 GTS. Last evening, I had the pleasure of flying that brand new SR22 GTS. I have about 25 hours +/- in the SR22 by sheer chance, I had thought about going from the Mooney line into a Cirrus years ago, but there were some issues with the Cirrus I didn't like. From my perspective, Cirrus is beating Mooney in sales handily for a few reasons. First and foremost, marketing. I attend a few industry shows and open houses at airports throughout any given year. I never, ever see a Mooney on display. Yet Cirrus representatives seem to always be there. Mooney is notoriously missing from most air shows and airport open houses. I have been to three this summer, no sign of anyone from Mooney, but Cirrus was present at all three events. When it comes to ergonomics, I think Cirrus has done a wonderful job. Their aircraft are well appointed, comfortable, and the interior is well designed. The side stick is a bit odd, but you quickly get used to it. I am a huge proponent of the throttle quadrant being controlled by levers. My 1974 E Model had levers. My new Ovation has vernier controls. I prefer the levers. Cirrus has a quirky lever that controls throttle & prop through a mechanical linkage, but it works. Their mixture control is a lever. The interior layout in the Cirrus is better than the Mooney, period. The seats are much nicer, the layout is user friendly and everything is easy to reach. The fuel selector valve is on the center console, not on the floor. (In my former E Model it was under my right heel, so who am I to complain?). The Cirrus handles well, lands easily, flies pretty smoothly. I have always liked it. It's a good airplane, and if you ask me, if Cirrus is getting people to buy their product and get into airplanes, more power to them. That's a good thing. Now I am in a unique position, as I have a near new Ovation, so I can compare. But why are we comparing? That's the question we need to ask ourselves. We're comparing oranges to nectarines. Both round, both fruit, both taste good. That's where it ends. The Cirrus lacks a few things which I don't like. Starting with retractable gear, nosewheel steering, speed brakes & true prop control. I suppose the SR22 line doesn't need speed brakes. Then there's the performance - you guessed it, we rock. My Ovation can smoke an SR22 GTS in all performance categories, spare landing. Climb rate, cruise speed and handling? The Mooney has that Cirrus beat hands down. Keep in mind we're talking an Ovation, a normally aspirated IO-550G against a turbo 550. Something else I noticed last evening flying the Cirrus - while the cockpit is very nice, we have more room in the modern day Mooneys. The new owner of this SR22 has flown with me in my Ovation, and she noticed it too. I am not sure about useful load, nor do I care. The Mooney is a far better bang for the buck no matter how you dice it. Landing the Cirrus is a piece of cake. Landing the Ovation, you better be on your game or else. Now there's no question that Mooney manufactures a better product, so why are people gravitating towards the Cirrus? Besides the obvious I have outlined above, which are correctable shortcomings, there are two primary reasons - first is culture being marketed by Cirrus. They're going after a younger audience who might have very well learned in an SR20 at a flight school. Mooneys don't exactly make it into flight schools very often, although my flight school years ago had an E model, which is likely why I am flying an Ovation today. The younger crowd loves the digitization of the cockpit, and Cirrus has done an excellent job designing it. The other reason Cirrus is selling airplanes at a good pace is that you can go from being a low time pilot into a Cirrus pretty easily. The transition isn't as cumbersome or challenging as going from a C172 into an Acclaim or Ovation. You really can't do that, it's not practical or feasible. Cirrus has designed a plane for people to transition into once they get their certificate, it's just that simple. Now for the hidden shortcomings. Cirrus owners haven't a clue about what the maintenance expenses are going to be. Those SR22's will kill your wallet on maintenance. Further, the Cirrus concept is that you will buy one now, and buy one in 5-10 years to replace the one you have now, similar to an automobile purchase. Brilliant marketing concept, and again, they're marketing this product phenomenally well. Finally, let's remember the Mooney is a High Performance Complex aircraft. The Cirrus is NOT a Complex aircraft. You don't need a Complex endorsement. One other dirty little secret they never tell the owners about those lovely Cirri - you pull the chute, you total the airplane right there and then, and there's no guarantee you're going to survive once the parachute is deployed. But they need that parachute for more than the reasons you know about; the sink rate on an engine out is about as bad as it gets. It comes down well, and if the engine poops out, you might as well be flying the Space Shuttle, because that's the kind of sink rate this thing has. The glide ratio is horrible, I think it's about 8:1. Another good reason why they have that parachute. If Mooney wants to compete with Cirrus, they need to go back to manufacturing the 201 or the 252 Encore, better the ergonomics and market the line with enthusiasm. You can transition into a 201 or Encore fairly easily in my opinion once you have a few hundred hours of experience. To me, having flown both as recently as yesterday, the differences are glaring, and overcoming the shortcomings on the Mooney line are easily achieved. Mooney Aircraft sell themselves, once you get into the cockpit and fly them. And therein lies the problem, there's nobody committed at Mooney who is pushing the product line out to the public.

Actually looks like a good buy. Here's some things to consider however - get compressions off all 4 cylinders. If any are below 72, you have new cylinders to buy. The 3 blade prop is pretty, but...be forwarned that it throws off the balance on a 4 cylinder engine. The only 3 blader that works is the MT composite. A few other matters to look at - when was the engine overhauled? Beyond 12 years, and you must do an oil analysis, pull the screen, and search for wear/tear. A/D on the yokes/control tubes. The tubes must be inspected at the yoke mount for signs of wear and/or cracking. Finally, fuel selector valve is another item to look at for servicing.