Chaparral vs Super 21

[xcrmckenna]

I am looking to buy my first airplane and budget willing I plan on a having the new baby be a M20E. What is the difference between these two models, or are they the same but different years?

[Bob_Belville]

The M20E was originally known as the Super 21 (1964). It became the Chaparrel in 1968.

 

The most significant change to the E was to the gear which was manual for a few years before becoming electric.

 

http://www.mooneyevents.com/chrono.htm

[KSMooniac]

I just went to go get the link Bob posted.  

 

Mainly it was marketing changing the name.  Some of the other changes were common across the Mooney line as time went along.  I think the biggest difference might be with the '64 to '65 or '66 model years.  I think the '64 had different ailerons, and maybe a crank-down entry step vs. pneumatic/automatic.   Earlier models were all manual gear, and I think in '69 electric became standard.  They also changed to the (stupid) throttle quadrant instead of push-pull controls, but the instrument panel layout became mostly standard with a canted 6-pack arrangement vs. the shotgun layout of the earlier models.

 

Performance will be pretty much the same for any E, with some variation due to rigging and prop selection.

[Bob_Belville]

Performance Super 21 and Chaparral (pre 74) 

www.risingup.com/planespecs/info/airplane354.shtml

 

Mooney M-20-E Super 21 Chaparral - Performance Data

Horsepower: 200 Gross Weight: 2575 lbs

Top Speed: 171 kts Empty Weight: 1575 lbs

Cruise Speed: 163 kts Fuel Capacity: 52 gal

Stall Speed (dirty): 50 kts Range: 601 nm  

Takeoff                                                       Landing

Ground Roll: 760 ft                           Ground Roll 595 ft

Over 50 ft obstacle: 1300 ft            Over 50 ft obstacle: 1365 ft  

Rate Of Climb: 1110 fpm   Ceiling: 18800 ft

 

Chaparral (74 and later)

www.risingup.com/planespecs/info/airplane350.shtml

Mooney M-20-E Chaparral (1974 and later) - Performance Data

Horsepower: 200 Gross Weight: 2575 lbs

Top Speed: 165 kts Empty Weight: 1600 lbs

Cruise Speed: 160 kts Fuel Capacity: 52 gal

Stall Speed (dirty): 50 kts Range: 601 nm  

Takeoff                                                            Landing

Ground Roll: 760 ft                           Ground Roll 595 ft

Over 50 ft obstacle: 1550 ft            Over 50 ft obstacle: 1550 ft  

Rate Of Climb: 1125 fpm   Ceiling: 21200 ft  

There might be a little hyperbole in these numbers. 

[xcrmckenna]

Bob, and KS. Thank you for the data and the information. Do both models have the power boost? Or just on the super 21, is that why it has a little faster top speed and lower ceiling? Or are there other changes that effected that data. And do either of you know in what year mooney was able to bump up the Vno speeds of the E? I have read that the early 64's had a cruise speed above the Va but was raised in later years but haven't found what year they did. Thanks again for letting me pick your brains.

[KSMooniac]

Both should have the "power boost" option, also known as ram air.  It was good for ~ 1" extra MAP at altitude on the pre-J Mooneys.  The J also had it, but the induction system is better and the ram air is almost ineffective.  I removed mine completely.  It is great on the E/F models with the only downside being a somewhat delicate and very expensive seal between the cowl and the induction box.

 

All Mooney cruise speeds are above Va typically as far as I know.  Maybe you're thinking of the top of the green arc?  I don't know if E's got that bumped or not.  The only practical limitation to that as far as I understand it is that you can get way up in the yellow during power-on descents, which isn't great on bumpy summer days.  I had a buddy with an E and we flew together a few times... our performance was pretty even on a trip until the descent, and then I could walk away from him a bit.  He climbed faster and got a head start on cruise, but I could very slowly catch up.  He had to reduce power in the descent.

 

I think the most prolific model year for E's is '66.  If I were shopping for one, I would avoid the '64 since I don't think it had the PC system.  You can add the economical Brittain autopilot components to the PC system, but you have to scrounge those up since they're not in production.  However, if a '64 has a more modern autopilot installed then it would be very worthy of consideration.  I think there might be some limitations on autopilot installations with the '64 due to different ailerons, but I can't remember for sure.  My opinion only.  

 

Aside from all that, the main advice to buy the best airframe you can find is still the most important.  After that, look for regular and recent use and maintenance.  There are numerous threads here about shopping and buying, what to look for, how to prioritize options, etc. so use the search function for that advice.

[Cfidave]

For what it's worth, I think Mooney went to square back windows in 65. ( from teardrop ). In 66 I think they made the center pedestal continue up to the instrument panel, hiding the connecting rods for the flaps.

[Bob_Belville]

Bob, and KS. Thank you for the data and the information. Do both models have the power boost? Or just on the super 21, is that why it has a little faster top speed and lower ceiling? Or are there other changes that effected that data. And do either of you know in what year mooney was able to bump up the Vno speeds of the E? I have read that the early 64's had a cruise speed above the Va but was raised in later years but haven't found what year they did. Thanks again for letting me pick your brains.

I think all Es had ram air. I have a '66 with a PowerFlow Systems tuned exhaust. Ram air adds 0.9" MAP. I think I remember a boost of more than an inch with my first '66E.

 

I think the difference in performance in the above is mostly the work of the marketing departments. The later Es, in an economy move, went to a fixed step instead if the retracting one. That had to cost a couple of knots.

 

High power cruise is in the yellow arc. And certainly descent is as close to red line as you care to fly. Most experienced E pilots would have a fairly liberal definition of smooth air.  (I have never had anyone cite any technical changes in support of higher Vno, Vne for Js. Of course there might be more involved than I know.) 

[KSMooniac]

I think the corrugated elevator skins vs. the smooth ones on the pre-J planes are the major component for the higher green arc speeds.  Not sure what else might have changed.

[DrBill]

I'd say my 65 back windows are squared off !

 

[M20F]

I chose a 67F in part for space but there are a couple things that will hold true on the E of the same year. It was the last year for awhile that the wing was flush riveted which looks nice and adds speed, manual gear which is light and cheap to maintain if you grease it (and almost failure proof), and hydraulic flaps which again are cheap to maintain and almost failure proof. The Mooneys after 67 up to the J just got heavier, slower, and more expensive to maintain from what I can see.

If it weren't for the need of back seat room I would have gone for the E which is 2 passengers is your requirement, no better plane out there IMHO.