Search the Community

Hey Guys, Does anyone have a good Foreflight performance profile for an M20F that they could share? I just downgraded my Foreflight from Performance Plus to Pro Plus and lost my performance profile as a result. Any help would be appreciated.

Hi, Any performance specialists? I'm interested to understand the takeoff performance differences in the J model. Apart form some aerodynamic improvements the sizeable disparity between the attached 1977 and 1996 issued POH in takeoff performance I attribute to A) regulator imposing increased factoring / buffer inbuilt as time went on and/or the 'speed at 50ft'. I note the stall speeds in both books listed as 57kt in takeoff config (Flap 15 deg), yet the speed at 50ft in the 1977 book only 71kts and in the 1996 book 76kts . The lower margin above stall speed will achieve better numbers for takeoff distance I understand but I'm not certain its the only factor at play here in the differences. 71 kts is 24.56% margin above stall and 76 kts is 33.33% margin above 1G stall. Takeoff Safety speed for light aircraft I believe has to be at least 20 percent above stall speed?? Was there an FAA change at some stage on this? Are the 1977 figures allowed to be used... certainly not providing as much margin as later book data in the real world.

I would like to create a couple of different profiles for use with ForeFlight. 75% Power and Economy Cruise ... Cruising Altitude of 9000 feet. Can you share some of your Profiles? Thank you.

I love Mooney but I’m not a big fan of the performance charts in the (copy of a copy of a copy) POH. Does anybody know if there are excell files/apps/... for a M20K 252 that can be used for performance calculation/W&B ? Thanks !

My partner and I own a 1978 J model and in a couple of years (maybe sooner depending on flying times) we will need to overhaul our io360 A3B6D and prop. My question to all out there is : what would performance gains be verses dollars spent for upgrading to a 210 hp io390 non turbo, also with adding a power flow exhaust system (which will be needed at time of overhaul)? We currently have every LoPresti speed mod on the aircraft now and we cruise at 153 kts @ a planned 10gph (exact is 9.7) 50 degrees ROP

Hi Guys, M20F Cruise Performance Capture.xlsx Here is a spreadsheet I used to capture performance vs the MAPA M20F stock evaluation( see link at bottom of posting). If you want to compare your ride vs a stock F fly the 3 GPS boxes, get the OAT, fill the data and post for comparison. I will post mine (data is at home) for comparison. This is also good to do pre-rigging change for comparison basis. When you are flying the GPS box, a steady hand or even better an auto-pilot with altitude hold is your friend. Also, note separate cells to capture RAM air OFF vs ON. Link to MAPA M20F evaluation: M20F_Evaluation_Report.html

In my 1979 M20J I don't notice much difference, if any, with my ram air on or off. I read an article somewhere where the pilot of the J model said he doesn't ever bother using ram air even in high altitudes because it didn't make a difference. Do you find this to be true? If it is making a difference in your plane, what is difference in speed mph?

I am interested in any Pireps on the installation of a Lycoming IO-390 in a vintage Mooney.

I thought it was very simple. Rocket is the fastest plane out there under $200K, therefore I wanted a Rocket. However, after reading some Bravo posts and talking to some self-proclaimed Mooney experts, I'm also considering the Bravo. The typical mission is 1-2 persons, little baggage, 400-1200nm flights, get there as fast as possible burning 20 gph or less, and not be afraid of ice in the winter. Here's how this judge's scoresheet looks so far: 1. Rocket seems to be 5-15 knots faster at typical cruise altitudes, and can be honestly said to cruise faster than 200 knots at 12,000 and above. 3 points to Rocket 2. Bravo has a longer cabin. 1 point to Bravo 3. Bravo has FIKI, Rocket only has non-FIKI TKS. 1 point to Bravo 4. Bravo is factory (so hopefully good support), Rocket is after-market. 1 point to Bravo 5. Bravo has newer airframes and often nicer panels. 1 point to Bravo 5. Bravo has 2000-hr TBO ($50K overhaul), Rocket has 1600-hr TBO ($42K overhaul). Tossup 6. Useful loads all seem to hover between 825 and 1000 lb. Tossup 7. Reliability and dispatchability (is that a word?). Tossup This gives an ever-so-slight edge to the Bravo, but I'm not sure I agree with my own scoring system. I'd like to hear from some of you who have flown both aircraft and can offer some additional deciding factors, or tell me I'm way off regarding my analysis so far.