scottfromiowa

That was a great summation. My "E" is right for my current mission, but I could justify a 201 with a partner and the need for additonal space (dog crates) that the removable rear seats provide...The Controller 201 IS beautiful. If that bird is sitting then the case for NOT building a 201 again is strong as under $200k is delivered here with ALL the bells...obviously if current buyers want Mooney's...and they don't as much as they want the competition...they want the stretched big bore machines. I hope Mooney gets competitive in the re-fab business if indeed this is the key to their viability for survival.

Too much of a temptation to see Mooney Caravan...so I modified my trip to Appleton/Oshkosh for 24th-26th. I am really looking forward to seeing all the Mooney's on Monday! Fly safe everyone, Scott

There's the rub. I don't want a long body Mooney with a big engine out front. I want a J size airframe with a four cylinder engine that will deliver over 160-170 knots at under 10 gallons an hour. I believe it is possible. If litigation was controlled we could build them for under $300k and ten years from now I culd buy one used to enjoy for my retirement years and as Ralphie said "All would be right with the world".

No, KSMooniac...my comments were directed to Blacknchrome, JimR & GeorgePerry as a clarification to their collective response to my statement that Late Model Mooney's can't compete with Cirrus/Cessna...regarding SALES. I stand by my comments. They still make Camaro's and Challenger's (cars) with HUGE HP displacement...and that is the direction that Mooney took in wanting to be the speed leader...why not if you can afford a half a million for an airplance you aren't worried about fuel...in that market segment...BUT I drive a four cylinder turbo that has a six speed and delivers over 30mpg on the highway...because I drive for work and want a car that delivers power and economy...I believe that this is where the 201 shined as well and based on fuel costs a 201 with electronic ignition and upgrades to interior and cowl would deliver speed and economy in a world where both are valued... Mooney Ovation is the fastest piston powered aircraft...great...and they aren't building planes. I couldn't justify/afford the expense of a new 172 much less an Ovation so my comments are NOT for me to afford a "new" 201...but maybe I could afford a 10 year old model in my remaining flying life...IF THEY BUILD THEM NOW.

Run for President/office...and incorporate "Change". The Lycoming verdict is just one example of LONG overdue legislative change.

That would be in sales Mr. B.S. flag...or enlighten me? I love Mooney's would personally much rather have an Ovation or late model Mooney to ANY other certified aircraft. I don't think the majority of current buyers feel that way or there wouldn't be 50 employees sweeping floors and sending out parts...

I shut down at 1500rpm and don't touch a thing. With master on I run electric fuel pump with mixture at idle cut-off to pressureize the fuel line about 3 seconds (address any vapor lock with hot day and warm engine)...worked great last two times I did with plane sitting 15 minutes to a 1/2 hour...The bang/back-fire may be too much fuel? This could possibly damage the muffler/exhaust couldn't it? I don't have this with my E...I don't think this is normal for an I0-360A1A power plant at start.

The VAST majority of Mooney airframes are 201/252 and earlier. The idea of a re-furb program for interior and paint as well as a Lo-Presti type super cowl is an awesome one! Mooney should abandon the "high priced" market and return to its roots providing a super efficent and fast (new cowl and additional mods could significantly increase on the 201 speed) airframe that is smaller...i.e. the 201 with a better done interior to mazimize space. Provide a simple six back Garmin IFR panel and an upgrade for flat panel...for those that want it. Make the new engine/fuel monitors/flow standard. Price the plane where it needs to be to sell! The big long wide body Ovation's are beautiful, but they can't compete with Cirrus/Cessna. We all love our 201's and me my M20E. How long do 1989-early 90's 201's last on market if priced right? There is a demand for this simple speed/efficency and STRONG steel roll cage and gear...Price it right...there IS a market for the Super 201...Build it...or offer cabin panel-refurbishment for a price that will keep 'em coming...

Have fun! Here is my close call to watch out for with a New Mooney. The wings are LONG...compared to the Piper I was flying prior to ownership. I used to come up the hanger access road and turn a little toward the hanger and swing it around. Near catastrophe as I realized what was happening...locked up the brakes and missed hanger door with my wingtip by under 12 inches...can you say Oh $@#%! Moment?! Watch those wings take it slow and gain your comfort level. You have an awesome plane! Have fun with making her yours. Stalls with ball centered are a non-event, but off center and it gets exciting fast. I did that...ONCE. Enjoy your flight...I put a big fat red Cessna master when I re-did my panel. Just call it a battery test :<)

I also have the Laser wing tie down's and combination jack point. They appear more streamlined than OEM and are angled making it easier to get tight for tie down. I am frequently tying down (with cockpit cover-Bruce Custom Cover) while traveling overnight away from home base. I can't imagine removing these for flight...Never any issue with these. I didn't install hub-cpas or tail tie down (sold as kit) returned these for credit from Laser.

You Bet! I plan to fly up to Appleton (have a friend living there) and take in Oshkosh on 7/26. I am really excited about the possibility of an FW-190 in the warbird area as I have only seen on You Tube video's and in museums. I have always gone on weekend to catch extended warbird show, but want to see a bunch of Mooney's (and drivers) BEFORE they depart so doing it early this year. I hope all have clear sky for flying to and from and camping and enjoying the spectacle. A short flight from CID. I first went with my father (who was an early Eagle Wingman/EAA member and Confederate Air Force supporter). We used to sleep in the back of a VW stationwagon back in the 70's! Good memories. Have fun making some of your own at AirVenture!

O.K. Chris. Totally different than my wires that are light gauge and lightly shielded. Good luck sorting it out. Post a note to your solution.

My wires were connected, but one of the wires was broken inside the sheath...

With respect...my failure to past peak temp was IDENTICAL to what you discuss...I would start with checking the wire BEFORE I went to probe/gauge/indicator failure. My fix was easy and INEXPENSIVE. Based on your oil pressure being in the green and cylinder temps being fine...and NOT being low on oil...

The probe is NOT down in the oil pan. It is right below mags if I remember correctly. Trace back the wires out of the firewall. I believe it is two wires (relatively light gauge) wrapped in plastic sheath. Scott You only need to remove the top cowl to expose the wires/probe location. Probe/wires are on firewall side of engine. Scott

I had the same thing happen in my M20E several months ago during a trip to Hot Springs, Arkansas. I had an oil temp gauge in six pack "pegged". I did a pre-cautionary landing although the cylinder temps and oil pressure were fine. Gauge would zero when off and then jump back up with master on. Was NOT the probe, although I ordered a new probe just in case. Was the failure of one of the wires from the probe going back to the gauge. A simple repair of the wire and all was well. Hope this is your problem too. Good luck, Scott

I get it. I UNDERSTAND. However understanding and liking are a whole different animal.

I hope GAMI's mystery non-lead additive is a home run solution. I look forward to hearing more about it. Iowa has many idle or low producing ethanol facilities/infrastructure that could probably be vamped into switch grass production to reduce the "ramp up" volume costs. Both seem to offer promise as an alternative FOR ALL.

O.K., I can see why you would make the statement regarding the I0-360 engine NOT running on 94 No lead based on your statement that compressions are the same as the larger engine in the test. I'm getting tired of: 1. Paying excessively higher fuel prices for 100Low Lead...IF I don't need it. 2. Being threatened by the government that MY FUEL is going to be pulled...over and over and over again... 3. The government, Fuel Manufacturers, Refiners, and private industry NOT coming to a concensus on a replacement for 100 Low Lead and continuing to threaten... 4. Lack of information on the IO-360 and other NON-over 200HP high performance engines testing on MoGas or other substitute that would eliminate lead. This puppet on a string is tired of it...

Can you refer me to some info to back up your statement KSMooniac? I want to learn facts based on proven testing and they seem to be in short supply relative to IO360 and 94 no lead.

Or the current apparent push for 94 No Lead...100 Low Lead...without the lead. The concern, as I have read, is the big higher compression engines/big engines would have issues. I would definitely like to know how the I0-360 runs on 94 No Lead. Wouldn't the price come down based on the elimination of this expensive additive? Win for the environment and majority of general aviation that does NOT require the lead, but pays the premium out of necessity.

In the green is keen...then it's all about fuel flow and speed for a given setting. Do you want to get there fast or economical...or a combination of the two...so optimal for speed or fuel flow while still operating (cylinder temps) oil temp in green as listed on your six pack.

My POH has tables for engine at different altitudes fuel burn, HP, Speed etc. I copied and laminated (on my kneeboard) I look forward to comparing with fuel flow monitor to match numbers (fuel burn/MP/RPM) and see where this is regarding leaning i.e. 50 degrees rich of peak, 100, peak etc. I don't believe the EGT (then single probe is listed) much less a more accurate muti-robe reading. Have fun!

Flew yesterday with my Accu-Trac for the first time. Left and right turn with unit worked perfectly with nice entry and exit when returned to neutral. The unit tracked well using the GPS just steady track of destination without wandering and overcorrecting back. I think this will be a nice addition in cruise on two hour flights. FYI there is a nice complete unit on ebay right now...On a side note I replaced a TKM COM radio with a used (yellow tagged) KX155. The installation along with the Accu-Trac had a revision on my center stack with trays repositioned...On my flight I had no transponder or Com from the Garmin, sigh...just me or does anybody else repair/upgrade and have a resultant need to fix squaks created from said upgrade? I know it's all part of aircraft ownership...

Walk away or get price as if engine is run out. I made wrong decision. Don't repeat my mistake. Buy it right or walk. That said I TOTALLY AGREE with danb35's comments.