Mooney 231 versus 252

[benpilot]

 

If you were to buy a Mooney, would you get a 252 or 231 and why? Or save up for a Mooney Rocket?

 

[KSMooniac]

The 252 will generally cost noticeably more than a 231, and a Rocket seems to be about on par with the 252 right now +/- condition differences.  

 

The bigger question is do you want the higher operational expenses of the Rocket?  The 252 and 231 should be very similar, unless you lose something like the cowl flap motor on the 252 or another similar 252-only item now and then.

[benpilot]

 

How much more expensive is a Rocket to maintain besides the added fuel burn than a 252? Is the 231 as reliable as the 252? I also see a lot of different types of 252 such as Encore, etc. One of the flying clubs locally has a M20F and a 252 that I can get checked out in after I pass my checkride. 

[KSMooniac]

The base 231 did not come with a tuned induction system, intercooler, or automatic wastegate.  It requires more attention from the pilot, and I believe and educated pilot and a good engine monitor system can get lots of service from the 231 powerplant.  The intercooler and wastegate can be added through STCs to make it easier.  The 252 corrected those shortcomings and made it easier to operate successfully.  Keep in mind this was in the days before engine monitors, but nonetheless it is an improved package.  The 252 came along in 1986 IIRC, and continued until c. 1990 (not sure) before slipping out of production until 1997-1998 when the Encore was produced.  The Encore is the final evolution with 220 hp (vs. 210 of the 231/252) and a higher gross weight to increase useful load.  252 models can be converted to Encore status as well for modest cost and the result can be a useful load of ~1000 lbs, which is adequate for a plane that only burns 10-12 GPH.  IMO, an Encore-conversion of a 252 is a tremendous value... Parker W on this site did that conversion on his old plane and you can find details here if you search.

 

You should check out in the F first since the engine is more tolerant of "learning" and then transition to the 252.  I don't know how they choose to operate, but you would be very wise to continue your education post-PPL with the Advanced Pilot Seminars course.  It will pay off in spades once you move into ownership.

 

The Rocket of course burns a lot of fuel relative to the 231 or 252.  The engine may or may not be more costly to overhaul...you'll have to do some price shopping and find out.  There is only one prop approved for the Rocket, and it might be more expensive than the options on the other K's.  Tires, brakes, landing gear donuts will wear out faster than the lighter weight K's.  Most Rockets have extended fuel tanks and these will cost more to reseal IF you have to do it on your watch.  You might or might not.  They are fine conversions, though, and still supported by Rocket Engineering 15+ years after they were pulled from the market.

 

Last but not least, there are a number of "262" conversions, which were done with a Mod Works STC that basically takes an original 231 and converts the firewall-forward stuff to the 252 configuration using factory parts.  For all intents and purposes, they behave just like a 252 except they retain the 12V electrical system instead of the 24V of the 252.  These can be tremendous values today with prices much less than a factory 252 since it has the stigma of a conversion and an airframe a few years older than a 252.  I know of one sorta on the market in CA right now but not advertised.  Original owner, 1979 231 and he had the conversion done sometime in the late 80s or early 90s I believe.  It doesn't sound like he has upgraded his panel, though.

 

There are several good choices...depends on your budget and wish list of course.

[jwilkins]

It all depends on where you are and what you need, and how much money you have.

 

I started out with a 62 C which I bought from a gentleman in Alabama (seriously, an honest and sincere gentleman) . It made a couple trips to AZ and CA with no real issues. I used the AOPA 'suggested mountain crossing routes' pretty carefully when I was flying the C, but never had any issues other than leaving high altitude airports when it was still cool in the AM. The next plane I bought was the '67 F from All American. I REALLY liked my '67 F when I was back East. I did make a couple more trips to CA and AZ in the F and it did OK even on the high and hot days. The F was a wonderful airplane, and was about as fast as my friend's 201. BTW, I see it's now for sale again at All American (N477T). 

 

When I moved to AZ with a home field elevation of around 5K MSL, I traded the F for a 231. I didn't want to put the money into a 252 or Encore until I had some turbo experience.  The turbo is great out here. If I were going to upgrade again I'd look for a 252, just for the improved engine systems and a little more speed. On a hot day departing Prescott with the F I would sometimes look for thermals to climb. The 231 climbs just fine. It needs more attention to engine management than the F, but, with the Merlin AWG it's not hard to manage. The 252 is supposed to be even a tad easier to manage (better AWG) and faster. The albatross for me is the specter of a $50K engine OH with any of the turbos. I'd much rather have the A3B6 overhaul waiting in the wings, but the turbo is worth the potential cost for me, as long as I'm flying out here. 

 

I'd probably look for an Encore before jumping into  a Rocket. It's just my personal bias, but I'd rather have the factory plane than a modified one, even though the specs on the Rocket are really impressive and the owners seem really happy with them.

 

If I were still back East going between upstate NY, MA, and New England areas, I'd be very happy with the F, or a 201/ J.

 

I really don't need my long range tanks very often, but having an extra 10 gallons aboard makes me happy.

 

You are fantastically lucky that you have both an F and K available to try out. 

[John Pleisse]

You're going to lose 100 lbs useful load with the 252 compared to a legacy 231. If I were to spend all that money on a 252 or Rocket, I'd get a 90's vintage Bravo. Also, turbo F's are a great value, even run-out. All of the parts are readily available. Great value under $60k.

[FAST FLIGHT OPTIONS LLC]

A 231with mods is going to be the best bang for your buck. When I was looking at the 231/252 I went with the 231 which was 60k cheaper then the closest comparable 252 and my 231 had a higher useful load. Sure the 252 is faster but not 60k faster. I operate a 231 with the old GB engine no mods (waste gate or intercooler) and for what it's worth don't have engine operating problems. What I do have is a JPI EDM 900. I wasn't interested in the Rocket due to the stigmata associated with the modification. Reputable MSC once said if strapping that high a HP engine on that airframe was a good idea Mooney would have done it. Owners do seem happy with them though. If I move up it would most likely be to a Bravo I think

[KSMooniac]

The price differences amongst all the models has shrunk dramatically in this crappy economy, so today's buyer has a pretty good spectrum to shop in without major price differences.  I remember 6 years ago when a 252 couldn't hardly be found for under $200k, but today they're starting to dip into the low- to mid-100k range, and seemingly nice 231's can be had for $100k or less.  

 

Adding a JPI or equivalent to any Mooney and learning how to use it is the best advice for any Mooney owner too.

[benpilot]

 

Cool thanks guys this is very helpful. After I pass my checkride, next month I will get checked out in the Mooney at KPAO to get some real experience and make the decision. I like the Bravo as well. Really under 200k is my budget. I also like Bonanzas but for the money, a Mooney may be less expensive and provide better performance for long missions from the west coast to east coast, and Central/South America. As a short guy, the rudder pedal extension is a must for me to be comfortable as well as good avionics like a Garmin 530W. I've heard that avionics are really expensive and time consuming to add to a plane so its better to buy one with the modern stack as much as possible. 

[David Mazer]

Reputable MSC once said if strapping that high a HP engine on that airframe was a good idea Mooney would have done it.

Mooney did.  The Bravo has a 270 hp engine and the Acclaim is 280 hp.  Okay, the Rocket is 305 hp but it is very similar.  Truth be told, the big engine requires careful planning on descents and penetration of clouds since the airframe has the same Vne and Va.

 

There is a 252 on the ramp with my Rocket and his maintenance is higher than mine.  My fuel burn is generally higher but so is my speed.  You won't really go wrong with a 231, 252, Encore, Rocket, or Bravo if this version of Mooney fits your mission.  They are all very good airplanes.  Find the one that has the closest specs to what you want and can afford (avionics, engine time, condition, TKS, etc), get a good inspection, plan on a couple years of fixing stuff and enjoy buying a plane at the low point of the market (boy I hope its the low point!).

[FAST FLIGHT OPTIONS LLC]

They actually didn't. At least not until they stretched the airframe. As the story was told to me there was some concern with control surface flutter and other related issues which could have resulted from putting such a high powered engine on the mid-body

[David Mazer]

The guys at Rocket felt those speculations were primarily to dampen interest in their product and, apparently, unfounded.  Mooney was, again according to the Rocket guys, very angry at the FAA for allowing Rocket to get the STC since it created a plane with which they couldn't compete, at the time.

[benpilot]

I've read in Aviation Consumer that the 231 had engine cooling issues similar to that in the Piper Turbo Arrows which concerns me. This was fixed in the 252. What's amazing is how good of a bargain used Bravos and older Ovations are now. Few years before the Acclaim came out the Bravo sold new for 500k!

I'm curious about the Mooney 20S screaming eagles. Are these good planes to consider as well? I like the extra space in the longer body Mooneys compared to that in the 201 which is quite a bit smaller inside. A few of my friends are very tall big guys so taking jut one or two big guys is the limit in a Mooney but most time it's just me and a friend.

[gjkirsch]

As others have noted, the price spread between the 231 and 252 has shrunk.  There are some other differences that justify the spread and if you can do it, the 252 is probably now a better value (in my opinion!).  The differences include:

 

24Volt

dual alternators (most)

back up electric driven vacuum (most)

speed brakes (not originally standard in the 231)

one piece belly (not in all 231's)

reclining rear seats (not in all 231's)

intercooler

lower MP for same HP (36 VS 40)

higher critical altitude (24,000 versus 14,000)

typically a better autopilot (many with preselect)

better air induction system to reduce risk of icing up (my 231 iced up)

 

Of course others will argue that you can find some of these on 231's.  I owned 2 different 231's and flew a number of 252's before I bought a Bravo and to me, the 252 was far superior with much easier engine management.  

 

Gordon

[jlunseth]

^{The 231 is really a great airplane.  A ton of range and usually very good useful load, and a miser on fuel even ROP.  Good airspeed.  (I have one).  That said, the 252 is the superior aircraft in for IFR.  It has many redundant systems, such as dual alternators, dual vacuum pumps, and FIKI TKS can be added, which is not the case with the 231.} 

 

^{Most (but not all) of the 231's have had the Merlyn wastegate and an intercooler added, which gives them a critical altitude in the 22k range.  I routinely fly in the flight levels with no issues, and it is usually a pretty nice spot to fly, good weather, good view of any convective activity, smooth air.  Most 231's have also had the alt air modification, that closes the alt air door automatically in the event of air filter blockage, which can happen in ice crystal clouds in the flight levels.  The door closes and the engine then runs fine, no issues.  The 252 has the same system.}

[benpilot]

 

Thanks guys, sounds like the 252 or Bravo would be the perfect choice of a Mooney. Unless I like the Ovation or Eagle better. 

[BigTex]

Skynewbie, If I remember correctly, you're still working on your pilot's license. just curious... Why are you looking at aircraft that are so far out of your skill level? I personally feel you'd be better served with a non-turbo, non-high performance model. You'll be more than satisfied with the performance of a C/E/F/J. After logging a few hundred hours, then look at upgrading to a higher performance Mooney.

[David Mazer]

I like the extra space in the longer body Mooneys compared to that in the 201 which is quite a bit smaller inside. A few of my friends are very tall big guys so taking jut one or two big guys is the limit in a Mooney but most time it's just me and a friend.

 

I believe all the extra space is in the baggage compartment and not in the rear seating area.  If your looking for more backseat leg room, the long body isn't better than the mid body, if I recall properly.

[benpilot]

 

I will probably have a few hundred hours by the time I buy a plane. I take my checkride next month and I have 150 hours in Cessna and Pipers. I've been working on my weak points and no rush to buy a 252 or Bravo today. Next step is get checked out in the Mooney 20F and log 50 hours in it with experience and IFR rating.

[jlunseth]

If you are going to get a commercial rating after your IFR, and most of your flying has been learning, then my suggestion would be to either wait until you get the commercial or buy a normally aspirated, like an F or J, and use that through your commercial.  It is possible to do a commercial rating in a turbo Mooney (I am doing mine right now) but engine management is a little trickier.  You probably come out of it with better throttle skills, but it takes more practice just to learn how to use the throttle and keep the engine warm, or cool, depending on the maneuver.

[TWinter]

I'll give a you smokin' price on a nice E model..Mark's Missile has been in my crosshair for quite sometime. Not sure my banker would have the same vision about Mark's plane, but what a nice bird. Now that I have my E done the way I want it we always seem to be looking for the next level..Just me or pilots in general?..LOL 

[benpilot]

 

Thanks guys I will take the advice into consideration. I've enjoyed flying the 201J and Rocket so once I see how many folks I take flying after getting my license it will help firm up the decision. Since I am single, most likely just me and a buddy about 90% of the time. Otherwise a plane like a Bonanza A36 would be the best one to get rather than a Mooney. 

[RJBrown]

The Rocket is the best Mooney ever flown. Outperforms the rest of the Mooney products in every way. Bravos are the most embarrassing plane to compare because they get smoked in every way. At least with the 231/252 you can brag about gas mileage. The Rocket power package comes straight out of the Cessna 340 and costs the same as the other Ks to maintain and less than a Bravo.

The only plane that comes close is the Acclaim at 5 times the price.

I just sold the MSE. Once the new house and hanger are built on Pegasus Airpark I will buy another Rocket. After screwing up and buying a J I won't make that mistake again. Rocket is the best Mooney ever. After being out performed in every category at least the Bravo can brag about rear legroom.

[Smroot]

Sounds like this blog has transitioned into training and experience.  I have over 1000hrs, half complex/HP, and am looking at a few 252s.  While I think I won't have much difficulty making the transition to a turbo I would love to take a training course to make sure I'm operating the aircraft correctly at various power settings.  I've been referred to Flight Training Inc with Trey Hughs in TX but it seems to have shut down.  Does anyone know of a similar operation? 

[fantom]

The Rocket is the best Mooney ever flown..

Damn....I'm soooooo glad that's settled You left out two words in your opinion, RJ....

 

FOR YOU.....

 

The best model is mission, individual, location, and budget specific, among many other variables.

 

If for you it's a Rocket, great, but that doesn't make you a total idiot for buying an MSE, any more than it makes anyone of the thousands of other Mooney drivers uninformed for owning their rides.

 

Suggesting otherwise is, IMHO, just self serving silliness.