1964-M20E

Scott I'm at Lakefront in New Orleans. I'm sure one Sat or Sun when I'm Flying I can go to LFT and take you for a ride in my 64 M20E.

The reason you get less millage with ethanol is it has a lower BTU content than gasoline (corn base ethanol 84000 BTU, gasoline 125000BTU).

Perfect opportunity to program robots to do most of the manual labor of riveting. There are plenty of closed auto factories with unemployed robots. Besides you can get a fast build RV kit for $30-$40k and with aluminum, being generous at $2 / lb, would only take $3k-5k$ of the airframe cost. The rest is labor profit and transportation. As for the roll cage not a lot of steel and fabrication there. At a reasonable price you could sell more of them. When an aircraft is $400k even a group of people can struggle with purchasing a new one.

Has anyone considered converting the hydraulic flaps to the older style used in the B model with all push rods? Now you do not even have hydraulic leaks to worry about. I flew a B model once before I purchased my E and Iliked the simplicity of the flaps on the B modle not the the hydraulic flaps are that complicated.

Just bought my first plane a 64E in May and I like it. I was told the same thing by Zef (Mooney Land) stay away from pre 65's. He said they used smaller steel tubing in the roll cage pre 65 among other things. Of course I had to specifically inquire why he advised against pre 65's. I like the rounded windows I think they look better. The previous owners upgraded to a standard 6 pack instruments, IFR and Garmin 300, GEM 602 and all other digital avionics. Off topic Mooney should go back and make a basic no frills E or F model with manual everything.

You have a valid point regarding the Feds. I am all for the free market but my thoughts were if the FAA pushes in a single direction then we will not go through a Blue ray / HDDVD type fiasco. Once a single reliable replacement was developed the technology would be open for all manufactures to produce since the Feds sponsored the research. The idea is to have a equally valued replacement that is easy to manufacture. Most GA airports can only support one type of piston fuel whatever it is. The replacement fuel needs to work in all engines with no modification to the engines or fuel systems and needs to be comparably priced to 100LL or lower.

Call your congressman and senator tell them to fund and mandate the FAA to develop an equally or lower cost alternative to 100LL. Bottom line is 100LL is a small portion of refineries output and they are bothered by us requesting it. Kind of like a 1000 people going to Ford and asking them to make pintos. I am an engineer but I’m not a chemical engineer. I do not know why something cannot be done with little changes to the existing processes. Any chemical engineers that work in the refinery business out there that can shed some light on this?

The good news is the old generator belt works fine with the new alt. I thouhgt I might have to pull the prop. The plane power generator is in and hooked up. I did a test run today and it worked fine. I still need to put on the colwing but I'm wating on the flexiable rubber boot between the airfilter box and the throttle body. Also my Money is getting a nose job, new paint, since I had the cowling off. I'll post some pics.

The good news is the old generator belt works fine with the new alt. I thouhgt I might have to pull the prop. The plane power generator is in and hooked up. I did a test run today and it worke fine. I still need to put on the colwing but I'm wating on the flexiable rubber boot between the airfilter box and the throttle body. Also my Money is getting a nose job, new paint, since I had the cowling off. I'll post some pics.

Well I spent the afternoon putting on my Plane Power alternator kit. Still not done. The existing belt on my plane 37"x1/2" is about 1" too short causing the alt to hit the oil line for the prop not good. So i adjusted the alt down about 1/2" and that should work. So I am obtaining a 38x1/2" belt. I had to trim the baffles on the front to allow enough travel for the alt. The alternator is larger diameter than the generator. Still workng on where to install the switch, and light. Anyone need a relativly new zeftronics regulator? along with a core for the generator.

Mind does not have one either.

Where did you get your vents from? I would like to add one to the pilot's side on my 64E model.

Installing the Plane Power alt conversion in my 64E model tomorrow. Will let you know how it goes. My gen quit two weeks ago I changed the burshes only to realize I had two windings that were open two saturdays and a sunday spent on this.

I'd like to see more on this as well. I want to replace my wing tip lights with 3 in 1 LEDs (Nav, position, strobe) and maybe LED tail light with strobe. How can we legally get rid of the rotating beacon (speed brake)?

I'd focus on the regulator and the wires between the two regulators. You may have abad coupling but I'm not sure if that would cause the output of the good alternator to go down.

Thanks I’ll find out if the existing belt will work my new Plane Power alternator kit should arrive tomorrow. I worked it out with my mechanic so that I can install.

I'm no expert but assuming with dual alternators you have dual regulators you have two independent systems with the wire back to the battery being common. You say that when you turn off the left alternator the voltage goes up. When running just on the right alternator is your voltage is maintained above 13.5V? Did you try running just on the left alternator only to see what happens? It may be in the paralleling circuit on the voltage regulators. Double check the settings and jumpers on each regulator if any. Were you experiencing this before the engine work?

Jet-A does not contain lead so it is not affected but that does not help us piston boys.

I would like to get some opinions on the planed phase out of 100LL. Several thoughts: 1. The small amount of lead put in the air by GA is so small compared autos in the 50's and 60's and early 70's it is not enough to worry about and the EPA should just leave us alone 2. Any replacement for 100LL should drop in without modifying our beloved airplanes and should be the same cost or less than 100ll today 3. If the possible replacement cost per gallon is as rumored upwards to $10 that would definitely kill GA. 4. At $10/gal rate for short local flights I think I would time the mags at 18 degrees BTDC and run premium UL buying the expensive stuff only when absolutely necessary. 5. Finally we need to be vocal to our legislators on this issue.

Thanks That was one thing I was concerned with. However, after reading in the maintenance manual how to remove and reinstall the prop does not seem like that big of a deal but if it is not broke don't fix it.

Dave Did you have to replce the belt with the plane power conversion? I'm looking at the conversion on my 64 E model now. My gen gave it up last week MLU to NEW and I have the Zeftronics regulator.