Z W

I did notice it says it's for the -550's, but my check valves look a lot like the ones in the diagram, and you get the idea. The M0 "troubleshooting" section for oil leaking from the turbo for all engines (8-10.2) references the -550 valve inspection by section number (6-4.21), so there's some reason to consider it as applicable guidance on other engines as well, I would think.

Also, here are the relevant portions of M0. Turbo Oil Check Valve Inspection - From M0.pdf M0 Instructions on Turbo Oil Leak.pdf

No. I ended up overhauling the turbo, but because we discovered its housing had worn and gotten loose, not because of the leaking oil. I'm pretty sure the only way for oil to get into the turbo housing while the plane is parked is through the check valves. There is an oil scavenger pump inside the turbo that pumps oil back uphill to the engine. If it is worn or failed, you could see oil pooling in the turbo and coming out the housing or tailpipe. But, according to the guys at Main Turbo, that very rarely happens, and when it does, you have giant clouds of black smoke and lots of oil coming out the tailpipe while the engine is running. It wouldn't make it leak while parked, because while parked, the scavenger pump isn't running anyways. Here's a picture of my check valves - they are the red pieces held in adele clamps. The brown lines coming out are the oil lines going to the turbo (left side, downhill) and then up to the engine on the right.

The AD allows for inspection and re-use of the clamp until July 17. There's a procedure in the AD for it that involves looking at it with 10x magnification, and as long as there are no cracks and as long as the band's inner parts do not touch when tightened to the proper torque spec, it can be placed back in service. This inspection becomes required after 500 hours in service so maybe your A&P is a little confused on what "timed out" means. I've attached the AD. I previously talked with some A&P's who said they are in fact inspecting and reusing clamps that pass, since new ones are not available. AD_2023-09-09-compressed.pdf

Sorry to hear that. Go to continental.aero and verify the part number you need for your particular engine serial number. Order one from Airpower.com. They show backordered but are shipping them as they get them from Boeing, who makes them. Took me 4 months to get one but I got it this month. Call RAM aircraft and see if they will sell you one of theirs. Consult your A&P to make sure they will install it. There may be issues with their PMA, which may or may not include the TSIO-360-GB/LB/MB/SB, depending on who you ask, though it's approved for the other models of the TSIO-360 used in the Piper Seneca. They may also be sold out again. Be prepared to spend $850/1300 for whatever you get. Hope you get one soon.

When we first got the plane, we followed the POH and ran 75% power (28" and 2500 RPM usually) and peak TIT as it suggests for a short time. No signs of detonation and I really don't think it's unsafe, but the TITs would be right near 1650, sometimes requiring adding mixture to stay under that, and the CHTs would be pushing 400 even with the cowl flaps mostly open. Most of the internet seems to believe those temperatures are not good for turbo and cylinder longevity. It seems to be the best setting for speed, fuel burn, and range, giving roughly 140 KIAS at 11.5 GPH, which may be why the marketing department at Mooney wanted it that way to sell more airplanes. Now I often run the same setting but add about 2 GPH, doing about the same speeds but TITs under 1600 and CHT's under 380. I know from experience this is far away from any setting that will cause detonation, the decreased CHTs are an indication that the internal cylinder pressures are well below peak conditions, and this should be a reasonable way to run the cylinders and turbo. Sometimes, depending on outside air temp and altitudes or some other factors I don't fully understand, I can lean down closer to 12.5 GPH while staying within these temperature limits, if I want a little more economy or range. The extra 2-ish GPH paid at the pump is hopefully a tradeoff for increased cylinder and turbo life, and the plane has so much range it's easy to just add enough fuel to plan 13.5 GPH block on just about every flight. If I need more economy, it's easy to just reduce MP a couple inches to 26 or so or remove 100 RPM to 2400 and get the fuel flow down around 10 GPH, and then run closer to peak TIT with a cool turbo and cylinders. But you do lose about 10 knots of speed. I detect roughness at all LOP power settings I've tried and so don't use them. It's slight but there. I've wondered sometimes if different pilots are more or less sensitive to that, and if I flew in someone else's plane who prefers LOP, if I would detect roughness they do not. I have not done the GAMI test nor installed GAMIs. I may do the test sometime for education's sake, but the plane is already so efficient it seems like a fair amount of hassle and cost for minimal gain.

Mine was painted but the paint has peeled, for whatever reason, only on that piece. I've always thought it was from the exhaust heat. It's only visible when lying on the floor so not a huge deal.

My recollection is the M20C would climb pretty comfortably to 10k and cruise there pretty well. To get to 12k, you had to accelerate for a while, then climb a few hundred feet, then repeat. It didn't want to sustain a climb. And once you were up there, true airspeed really decayed to where it was much slower. A big driver in switching to the turbo we have now was a trip across Texas and New Mexico on a hot day with moderate turbulence up to 12,500 feet in the C model. I couldn't get higher, and I thought my wife was going to open the door and jump out. The density altitude may well have been 15k or more. I took the C model to Sante Fe which you can access without getting too high, and Denver, but was never comfortable heading through true mountain areas. A few hundred feet per minute of downdraft and you're unable to climb at all. Not a good feeling when trying to cross a mountain pass. Turbo vs. non-turbo is a whole different topic with lots of threads here. I'm in the turbo camp. But, your cost numbers are a little outdated. I spent $13k overhauling a M20K turbo this year. Mine was completely worn out and they couldn't re-use any parts, so that's about a worst case scenario in 2025 numbers, but that's what it cost. Spread over 20 years and almost 1400 hours, it's not an unreasonable cost, but that's what it was. I should have done a preventative overhaul at 1,000 hours and it probably would have been much cheaper. I'd still rather have it than not.

The spot welded clamp part number for the TSIO-360-MB was 653337. It is now superseded by this new riveted clamp, 670105, in the Continental parts catalog. I tried to buy a new 653337 and they were also unavailable anywhere. I even put in an order on Air Power for one and they emailed and said it was discontinued and they weren't going to sell them any more and never charged me for it. This is what my old spot-welded V-band clamp looks like, for reference.

When I picked my plane up from annual at Maxwell last summer, I met with Don and Paul both who answered all of my questions and couldn't have been kinder or more responsive. I did a thorough inspection of the plane on their ramp which they encouraged. We had a discussion about how it's surprising how many pilots roll in, grab the keys, and blast off without even looking the plane over, sometimes at night or into IMC. We then had a discussion that occasionally my panel was throwing an alert for high fuel pressure during full power climbs over about 15,000 feet which was not a problem but annoying. Paul pulled one of their avionics guys out of the shop who adjusted the settings for the alert while I waited. This was after I had paid for the annual, and they didn't charge me any more. On the way home, my gear warning was sounding at much higher manifold pressure than it should (something like 22 inches). I called Don, asked if they had changed it, and he said no, but then took the time to look up and send me the parts diagram for where the switch was. I started looking at it (which required a mirror and flashlight) and found it attached by old, loose, and non-standard hardware that had clearly been there for years. Probably got bumped during annual. Got it all fixed and re-adjusted. Don didn't charge me anything for his help. Several months later, I had oil leaking out of my turbo and was having trouble sourcing a V-band clamp. I called and talked to Don who unfortunately didn't have any clamps to sell me, but was gracious with his time and expertise and didn't charge me anything for the conversation. Sorry you had a bad experience. Just relaying mine in the last 12 months. I've been very happy with them and am glad they're there help me keep my plane flying.

This is apparently what a $850 exhaust clamp looks like. Posting because when trying to figure out if I had a riveted clamp or not, I never was able to find a picture of one for my part number, though it was pretty obvious mine was spot welded once I got the cowling off and figured out where it was. At least it's a nice looking clamp and comes in a nice box... I hope you all get yours soon.

All sounds like a good plan. Since you mentioned wanting to get higher - My M20C really didn't like to climb much above 10,000 feet of density altitude. I was not comfortable doing a lot of mountain flying with it. The carbureted engine really notices the lack of air. It sounds like it would do better than your Cherokee 140, but if regular mountain trips are in your future, you might look for an M20E model, which I've heard with the extra 20 horsepower and fuel injection, performs much better at altitude. Sometimes they come up available for comparable money to the M20C's.

Just got an email from Air Power - my 670105 Clamp ordered 12/27/2024 shipped today. Their website currently shows 3 in stock. @Ragsf15e

My old one had been repaired with what looked like liquid firesleeve: https://www.abthermal.com/firesleeve-open-end-liquid-dip-paste-sealant-rtv-contamination-protection.html It might also have just been orange RTV. It didn't look great, but may have been functional for a while. It had been worked down into the cloth material and seemed to be a decent patch. Sorry to hear the boot has become hard to get. I did talk to the parts department directly at Mooney about it before I got mine. He told me they had some (4 I think?) in stock at the time but that I had to order it through a MSC. You could try calling them direct and see if you get a different answer today.

When I needed one a couple years ago, Maxwell was able to order it from Mooney. He direct shipped it to me, and then I put it in a box in the plane to take to him to install during annual. I'd recommend putting your order in now. My old one had been patched, re-patched, and added on to over the years. It's a unique 252 part and can't be obtained anywhere else.

I happened to be looking at my Savvy reports yesterday for the last 12 months. It says my oil temps are about average for M20Ks in their system at 163 dF. They definitely get a lot lower in the winter months. It has always given me the note that they "are not high enough to purge the engine of moisture." For whatever that's worth. I believe my probe is at the base of the oil cooler. This is a TSIO-360-MB2B with a G500Txi EIS. I'll verify the probe location next time I have the cowl off.

Have you tried increasing the manifold pressure and mixture at the same time you increase the prop to full forward? Or are you leaving manifold pressure low while trying to achieve max RPM? I think I would try that (simulated go-around power settings) at several different altitudes to see if it makes any difference, to help diagnose.

Didn't need to. Worked fine out of the box. I've had to bleed other hydraulic jacks in the past though and have never had a problem doing that either.

Update - Received the Franklin 500lb hydraulic lift from Harbor Freight. Tested it out today. Worked absolutely great. The angle it lifts the cowl at was perfect. Made reinstalling it alone probably easier than with a helper that's never done it before. I used a moving blanket on the table for padding. Not nearly as elegant or cool as the one @JimK made, but I'm not much of a woodworker. And another rolling table to have around the hangar may come in handy for other jobs. Link to the lift table: https://www.harborfreight.com/automotive/lifts-cranes-stands/hydraulic-lifts-carts/500-lb-capacity-hydraulic-table-cart-70726.html

I happened to be flying today and checked. I was showing 16" MP at 1000 RPM idle. FYI.

Yes, related to a poor repair of the air filter housing, which had cracked.

Most 252's do 160-165 KTAS and 11-13 GPH at 12,000. Pinecone's seems to run 15 knots faster on 20% less fuel than everyone else's.

I believe this is the standard practice, using a shop vac to pressurize. At one point chasing a low MP issue we did this and the A&P said he found several leaks around the intake. We replaced all the intake connecting rubber hoses at a reasonable cost. It made no difference. All of yours should have been replaced 200 hours ago at overhaul though.

Does the 310 HP require excessive right rudder on takeoff, such that it feels unstable or dangerous on takeoff? Sometimes I like the idea of an extra 100HP over what I've got in a 262. But I've wondered how that really feels on essentially the same airframe. And at 38 GPH take off / climb and 20GPH in cruise I feel like I would often be flying around with range anxiety, or be effectively limited to 2-hour legs unless flying solo and light.

At this point, I'm just happy when any shop will agree to work on the plane. Currently been down three months getting a turbo rebuilt and then chasing oil leaks on reinstall. Last year, after waiting a year for a 430W to GTN650 install slot, that took about 2 months too. I redid the carpet myself after that just because I didn't want the plane to disappear into a shop again for a month for it. It's not pro level but good enough for who it's for and I got it done in a weekend. The maintenance situation is getting very bad and I think it will get worse before it gets better. Seems like every time I get the plane back, it's almost time for another annual which also somehow takes a month or more. The shops all are doing their best and have always had good reasons. They can't get enough good labor and it takes forever to get the parts they need. I've never complained about a single bill and bring the checkbook when I come to pick up the plane. Sorry that doesn't help you but thought I'd let you know you're not alone.