Cessna Columbia 400 versus Mooney Bravo

[manoflamancha]

So I'm at local FBO looking to get checked out by a CFI in their Mooney 252 and had a friendly chat with a young pup CFI who kept arguing that Cessna Corvallis 400 is better than older Mooney Bravo. I said sure if you wanna spend 250-400K on a used airplane but I'll save 100K and rather buy a first gen Mooney Bravo. He was saying how expensive retracts are to maintain and how old the Mooney planes look compared to the fixed gear Cessna 400. Basically this kid was trash talking against Mooney! I laughed and said I'll take the Bravo and save. Come to find out this club wants 260/hr to rent the Mooney 252 and 500 hours total time.

[philiplane]

You have to run a Corvalis pretty hard to make the airspeed numbers, and that will eat cylinders every 600-800 hours. If you run it LOP it's no faster than a Cirrus Turbo, and slower than a Bravo. Other negatives: Small fleet size means parts are expensive, tiny back seat, poor visibility out the windows, a side stick that slaps your wrist when checking mags (the switch is right behind the stick, you need to use your left hand to firmly hold the stick while you reach around with your right, DUH), doors that are a trick to close, wobbly ground handling due to the narrow gear track, wingtips that do not come off if damaged (the wing is two pieces top and bottom glued together) so hangar rash is horribly expensive... I'll stop there for now and catch my breath....

[Danb]

Philip, agreed I happen to have one of the newer Bravos and for some reason I get about 5-7 knots better than book. On more than one occasion atc has moved a 400 for faster moving Mooney traffic..I get the feeling some controllers have Mooneys because I get those types of statements occasionally esp for Cirrus and Barons go figure..When at 18000 feet B,s are hard to outperform unless your fortunate enough to have an Acclaim.

[manoflamancha]

Indeed between Bravos, Rockets, 252 and Ovations few can touch the Mooney. Plus I'm not sold on composite plastic aircraft like Cirrus and the Cessna 400 in terms of durability. Buying a well maintained high performance Mooney leaves a lot of cash left over to pay for fuel and training.

[aviatoreb]

So I'm at local FBO looking to get checked out by a CFI in their Mooney 252 and had a friendly chat with a young pup CFI who kept arguing that Cessna Corvallis 400 is better than older Mooney Bravo. I said sure if you wanna spend 250-400K on a used airplane but I'll save 100K and rather buy a first gen Mooney Bravo. He was saying how expensive retracts are to maintain and how old the Mooney planes look compared to the fixed gear Cessna 400. Basically this kid was trash talking against Mooney! 

 

That's cute....  I remember in high school arguing with other kids which was better - the Ferrari, Porche, Lotus, etc.  As if we knew.  It was fun.  Now I drive a Subaru.  Its better for the snowy winters we get up here.  Subaru WRX STI.  Cheaper than a Ferrari but still fun.

 

If cost counts, the Bravo kicks the snot out of a Columbia 400.  Its faster AND cheaper to acquire by a lot and cheaper to maintain.  Everyone thinks the new airplanes will be cheaper by analogy to a car owing to less required maintenance.  But in a well kept legacy 20 year old airplane, maintenance frequency is not all that different from a 5 year old airplane.  But in the newer carbon-glass planes, it seems that every little part costs many fold more than the same thing on the 20 year old airplane.  I had a Diamond Da40 and for this reason it was more expensive than my Mooney Rocket - not including fuel.  Even the landing gear was more expensive (knock on wood - so far) on my fixed gear DA40 than my Mooney rocket. It twice burnt out bearings (just a design flaw) and they were unbelievably expensive to replace.

 

Now if we are spending the same money as a Columbia 400, then it is only fair to compare it to a same year/cost budget Mooney.  It is FASTER than a Columbia at all power settings and I bet it is cheaper to maintain (assuming).

 

Or if cost is an object, bring a Mooney rocket to the plate and watch it walk away from the Columbia.

 

 Come to find out this club wants 260/hr to rent the Mooney 252 and 500 hours total time.

 

That sounds right.

[BillC]

That's cute....  I remember in high school arguing with other kids which was better - the Ferrari, Porche, Lotus, etc.

Wow Erik. You must have gone to a nice High school. We argued about Ford versus Chevy. lol

[Marauder]

My brother-in-law owns a Columbia 400. What a maintenance hog... In 1000 hours, he has gone through one full set of cylinders and a couple of more for good measure. The problems started around 400 hours and kept going. Maybe the Cessna version is more refined, but it gotta believe it has the basic same problems.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[carusoam]

You mean the F350 is not the Ferrari 308’s big brother?

What powers the Columbia 400?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_400

They say a TSIO550... And call it TC'd not TN'd...

310 hp...

That may explain the extra cylinder use?

-a-

[jetdriven]

Cirrus is no different. You get good airspeed but the only way to offset that drag from the fixed gear is run >80% power which will wear down cylinders and engines like crazy.

[aviatoreb]

Cirrus is no different. You get good airspeed but the only way to offset that drag from the fixed gear is run >80% power which will wear down cylinders and engines like crazy.

 

And a Mooney can be pushed >80% and boy will it go fast(er).

[manoflamancha]

Or you can fly a Mooney at 55% power save on fuel and fly as fast as those new expensive plastic airplanes

[aviatoreb]

 

I grew up in the DC area - went to one of the better public schools in the area.  I would say that none of us drove an exotic super car - but that wouldn't be quite true.  At my "lunch table" there was one kid who was a diplomat kids son and reputed to be royalty.   He had a brand new German speck - ready for the autobahn - 911 turbo.  Story was he got stopped on the Dulles access road doing over a hundred. They saw the Diplomatic plates and let him go.  Later he was caught at the same speed trap going in the other direction doing 150.  This time they hauled him in, until his embassy and dad bailed him out again on diplomatic immunity.  Was it true?  I don't know - but we have told that story ever since.  Nice kid - rich - very very rich, but nutty.

 

I rode the bus until my senior year when I bought a datsun B210 with 250,000 miles on it from my grandpa's dental delivery business for $400.  Good thing is you couldn't get a speeding ticket in that thing no matter how hard you pushed it.

 

Ford vs Chevy: Ford - http://www.autoblog.com/2013/08/16/galpin-ford-gtr1-supercar-monterey-2013/

[manoflamancha]

Well I could either buy a Ferrari or a fast Mooney. The Mooney wins easy choice in my book. Plus I already have a fast car that's paid for and cannot use the full speed. A Mooney on the other hand well now I can really use the speed!

[Cruiser]

A friend flew me in his Socata Trinidad to pick up my M20J at Willmar. On the way home we loosely flew together. At 9500' both of us were WOT, he asks me over the ship to ship frequency what RPM I was using. I replied 2250. All I heard back was silence. Finally I asked what his RPM was, he stammered out 2500 and asked me fuel flow. I replied it was about 8.6 gph.

He was astounded and told me to have it checked it had to be wrong. He was burning around 12.5. Finally he said he would have to look harder at a Mooney for his next plane.

[jetdriven]

You can't beat the drag of a Mooney. Horsepower helps but at the cost of fuel burn. We have gone 196.6 MPH with our 201. After paint, new windshield, rebuilt flap hinge covers, and blade VOR antennas 201 seems like a possibility. That's 16.5 GPH 95% power near sea level. A Bonanza can do that too but not at that fuel flow.

[manoflamancha]

Socata makes nice comfortable but slow planes with high fuel burn. If I needed two doors and had to fly more than two people then I'd consider it. But Mooney does more with less and support is much better for parts and service. Plus used Trinidads are expensive for a slow 150 kt aircraft. A used Ovation or Bravo burns almost same fuel rate as a TB21 Socata and costs the same price to purchase but flies higher and way faster. Nothing against Socata but they are slow for a high performance retract. Still I'd take either over a Cessna 182.

[Awful_Charlie]

Although the TB20 might not be quite as efficient on fuel in the cruise, do bear in mind it has a payload that will make any Mooney look pathetic! 1400 lbs in a Mooney anyone? If you look at all the various "4" seat retractables, the variation in MPG is not actually as great as you might expect when flown at similar low speeds, but for sure the differences at high speed cruise will be larger.

 

When I was looking to upgrade from my old Arrow I put together a scoring matrix on things I thought were relevant to me and known - at the time it was "pre-loved" Bravo vs. new Cirrus G3 vs. new Columbia 400. Despite the significant cost advantage of the Mooney, the Cirrus was only marginally behind in my case. With the knowledge that has subsequently appeared, I'm glad I made the decision I did, but we should be careful not to get caught in the confirmation bias and reinforcement theory

[co2bruce]

My mechanic is an authorized Cessna Service Center also and the 400 is a lot more expensive to maintain. A lot of time limited parts, and parts are very expensive.

[aviatoreb]

Although the TB20 might not be quite as efficient on fuel in the cruise, do bear in mind it has a payload that will make any Mooney look pathetic! 1400 lbs in a Mooney anyone? If you look at all the various "4" seat retractables, the variation in MPG is not actually as great as you might expect when flown at similar low speeds, but for sure the differences at high speed cruise will be larger.

 

When I was looking to upgrade from my old Arrow I put together a scoring matrix on things I thought were relevant to me and known - at the time it was "pre-loved" Bravo vs. new Cirrus G3 vs. new Columbia 400. Despite the significant cost advantage of the Mooney, the Cirrus was only marginally behind in my case. With the knowledge that has subsequently appeared, I'm glad I made the decision I did, but we should be careful not to get caught in the confirmation bias and reinforcement theory

 

That is cute - "pre loved".

[AndyFromCB]

If you're going to go the Cessna 400 route, just go all out an buy a Lancair IV-P, twice the speed for the same money ;-) Just pray the engine don't quit and never, ever get below 100knots indicated unless over the numbers, at 50 feet. And it doesn't hurt of have David Morss as a copilot. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0txEC0Rhdg

 

I love that instant pitch up to slow the engine down and stop it from tearing off the mounts. Guy is like a machine.

[orionflt]

Marauder can tell you about his IV-P ride,  I will say if you want to go the IV-P route get the training. It is a great plane to fly and a lot faster then the Mooney but it will kill you if you are not paying attention. Most lancair accidents are pilot error and in most of those cases the pilots refused the recommended training. 

 

Brian

[Danb]

I go to Webers MSC who also is an authorized Cessna 400 svc Ctr. I spoke with Dorn one day re. How much I liked the 400 Asked other questions the gist of the story he basically said stay away from those planes the Bravo. Ovations etc are clearly better planes especially on the cost and amount of maintenance is involved. He said they found not do anything our Mooneys do. Never gave it another thought until today.

[manoflamancha]

I'd still take a fast Mooney over a Lancair until I had over 1000 hours and my advanced ratings. The Lancair Propjet is pretty cool plane though and would have Dave Morss train me on it.

[MB65E]

Dave Morris is Awesome! I'd recommend him to anyone needing DAR services, Test flights, or dual instruction. I've flown with him several times and have great respect for his experience.

The Evolution does have some cool systems on it. The pressurization is automated and the PT6 is incredible up front. It's also about the easiest airplane I've ever flown. Not so much with the IVP prop jet....

-Matt

[orionflt]

Dave Morris is Awesome! I'd recommend him to anyone needing DAR services, Test flights, or dual instruction. I've flown with him several times and have great respect for his experience.

The Evolution does have some cool systems on it. The pressurization is automated and the PT6 is incredible up front. It's also about the easiest airplane I've ever flown. Not so much with the IVP prop jet....

-Matt

Matt, they designed the EVO to be as easy to fly as most single engine trainers, in fact it may be even easier to fly then the Mooney. the problem is not flying it, it is affording it. at 1.3m you get a lot of great bells and whistles plus altitude comfort and speed, surprisingly the miles per gallon is relatively close to  the mooney's. Lancair designed the EVO with the idea of getting the most performance out of an airplane a novice could handle.

 

Brian