KLRDMD

I've owned four Mooneys; C, [turbo] F, K & M models and have flight time in C, E, F, G, J, K, M & R model Mooneys. Additionally I have owned three Beech products and am about to get my fourth next month (S35 Bonanza and two B55 Barons so far). While it won't be popular on MooneySpace, I believe the 33/35 model Bonanzas to be the finest single engine airplanes made. If you want to hear others echo that sentiment, head on over to BeechTalk Yes, the Mooneys are generally more efficient and cheaper to maintain but the Bonanza is just so much more comfortable and an absolute joy to fly. Cabin widths are virtually identical. You can even measure to the armrest cutout in a Mooney and show the Mooney is wider but that's inconsequential. The cabin is much higher in a Bonanza and the huge windows make it seem to be very much larger inside the Bonanza than the Mooney. Early Mooneys sometimes feel like I'm in a tank looking out the tiny windows. Gross weights, useful loads and true airspeeds are generally greater for the Bonanza. That comes at a cost of fuel consumption and a bit more engine maintenance. For the same hull value, insurance and airframe maintenance will be very similar. You have to look very closely at one or two things with a Bonanza. The first is the empty CG. Bonanzas do shift CG rearward as fuel burns off but it isn't nearly the issue that some make it out to be. My rule is I will not look at a 33/35 series Bonanza with an empty CG above 80.0. The second is specific to the 35 series Bonanzas. Make sure the ruddervators are in good shape. Replacements are available but they are quite expensive. Download the free Bonanza Performance App and play around with various configurations for W&B. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/bonanza-performance/id910038344 Personally, I wouldn't look earlier than a J model Bonanza and only if it had an upgraded engine. You can put a -550 in a J or later Bonanza which transforms the airplane. At least get an IO-470 with a modern prop on any Bonanza. Bottom line: They are both good airplanes with somewhat different strengths and weaknesses and they will appeal to a sightly different audience. You won't get a fair comparison here on MooneySpace. You also won't get a fair comparison on BeechTalk but ask questions on both sites and digest the information provided and see what's right for you.

Did some transition training today for a friend into his Ovation.

Nope. I live in a (relatively) free state that doesn't tax us until we bleed.

Mine was a 55. Mike (in the videos) was getting similar speeds on fuel flows as to what I got with mine in his B55. Those airplane will do those speeds on that fuel burn.

Yes I have. $0.00.

Sounds like your neighbor has a slow Baron. Here is 180 KTAS on 21 GPH and 175KTAS on 18 GPH. These are not my videos but another B55 owner.

I received this quote in June of this year. I think it is high. GFC-500 Roll/Pitch/Trim/Yaw $14,370.00 G5 AI $2,525.00 Labor $13,000.00 Supplies/Misc $2,900.00 TOTAL. $32,795.00 + TAX/FRT

I bought my Bravo from Don Maxwell (he represented the widow, the owner died of cancer) and Don had maintained it since new so I believe the rigging and everything else was done right.

That’s great for you but I couldn’t. My Bravo wouldn’t run lean of peak at all and I had TKS which also costs some speed. That fuel flow would have my temperatures unacceptably high.

Below 10,000 ft. I would get about 180 KTAS in the Baron and 175 KTAS in the Bravo at a typical cruise altitude for me of 7,500 ft.

A guy at my Airpark is getting ready to sell his G model; he's moving to a Comanche. I did his transition training a couple of years ago. Right now I have some basic specs and the owner's contact information I can share if interested.

Insignificant. In my Bravo I burned 19.4 gallons per hour in cruise. That’s what it took to keep things cool enough. In my Baron, I cruised at 10 gallons per hour per side so 20 gallons per hour total. The Baron, is faster than the Bravo below 10,000 feet which is 95% of my flying. It also has a useful load of twice what the Bravo has.

I felt better in icing (light, never have been in moderate or worse) in my Colemill Baron just with alcohol props than I did in my known ice TKS Bravo. There's just something to be said for a second engine and 600 HP total versus one engine and 270 HP.

That would be on the runway at my airpark. Add in factors that account for dentisty altitude and I'm often over 5,000 ft.

That has been said for so many things. Once you've had FIKI (or TKS) you won't go back to an airplane without it. Once you've had a turbo you won't go back to normally aspirated. Once you've had a twin you won't go back to a single. Once you've had pressurization you won't go back to a non-pressurized airplane. Bah. Next month I should have my 19th airplane. Piper Cherokee 140 (unpressurized normally aspirated single) Mooney M20C (unpressurized normally aspirated single) Cirrus SR22 (unpressurized normally aspirated single) Cessna 152 [to teach in] (unpressurized normally aspirated single) Mooney Bravo M20M (unpressurized turbocharged single FIKI) Piper Seneca III (unpressurized turbocharged twin) Mooney M20F [Ray-Jay] (unpressurized turbocharged single) Beech B55 Colemill Baron (unpressurized normally aspirated twin) Cessna 182 (unpressurized normally aspirated single) Piper Twin Comanche (unpressurized normally aspirated twin) Lancair 320 (unpressurized normally aspirated single) Cessna P337 (pressurized turbocharged twin) Cessna 182 (unpressurized normally aspirated single) Mooney 231 M20K (unpressurized turbocharged single) Beech B55 Baron (unpressurized normally aspirated twin) Beech S35 Bonanza (unpressurized normally aspirated single) Cessna P337 (pressurized turbocharged twin) Cessna 310Q (unpressurized normally aspirated twin) (unpressurized normally aspirated single)