AOPA: Service work sustaining Mooney

[scottfromiowa]

No, KSMooniac...my comments were directed to Blacknchrome, JimR & GeorgePerry as a clarification to their collective response to my statement that Late Model Mooney's can't compete with Cirrus/Cessna...regarding SALES.  I stand by my comments.  They still make Camaro's and Challenger's (cars) with HUGE HP displacement...and that is the direction that Mooney took in wanting to be the speed leader...why not if you can afford a half a million for an airplance you aren't worried about fuel...in that market segment...BUT I drive a four cylinder turbo that has a six speed and delivers over 30mpg on the highway...because I drive for work and want a car that delivers power and economy...I believe that this is where the 201 shined as well and based on fuel costs a 201 with electronic ignition and upgrades to interior and cowl would deliver speed and economy in a world where both are valued...

Mooney Ovation is the fastest piston powered aircraft...great...and they aren't building planes.  I couldn't justify/afford the expense of a new 172 much less an Ovation so my comments are NOT for me to afford a "new" 201...but maybe I could afford a 10 year old model in my remaining flying life...IF THEY BUILD THEM NOW.

[KSMooniac]

Ok, thanks for the clarification!

If you want the short answer why there aren't many new 200 hp models on the market these days is because the incremental cost going from the IO-360 to the IO-550 is on the order of only $10k for the OEM.  $10k or perhaps $15k with a better prop when you're already at $400-$500k is just a drop in the bucket, and frankly the folks paying for new planes figure they might as well get the more powerful option.  That is why the SR22 : SR20 ratio is huge, and why Lancair never offered an IO-360 version (we had one planned).  That is why the M20J disappeared, and why the replacement M20S didn't last long either.  I don't like the reality either because the J occupies a real sweet spot in the market place...but the modern market has spoken loud and clear and unfortunately most buyers don't think like us! 

[scottfromiowa]

There's the rub.  I don't want a long body Mooney with a big engine out front.  I want a J size airframe with a four cylinder engine that will deliver over 160-170 knots at under 10 gallons an hour.  I believe it is possible.  If litigation was controlled we could build them for under $300k and ten years from now I culd buy one used to enjoy for my retirement years and as Ralphie said "All would be right with the world".

[GeorgePerry]

Quote: scottfromiowa

No, KSMooniac...my comments were directed to Blacknchrome, JimR & GeorgePerry as a clarification to their collective response to my statement that Late Model Mooney's can't compete with Cirrus/Cessna...regarding SALES.  I stand by my comments.  They still make Camaro's and Challenger's (cars) with HUGE HP displacement...and that is the direction that Mooney took in wanting to be the speed leader...why not if you can afford a half a million for an airplance you aren't worried about fuel...in that market segment...BUT I drive a four cylinder turbo that has a six speed and delivers over 30mpg on the highway...because I drive for work and want a car that delivers power and economy...I believe that this is where the 201 shined as well and based on fuel costs a 201 with electronic ignition and upgrades to interior and cowl would deliver speed and economy in a world where both are valued...

Mooney Ovation is the fastest piston powered aircraft...great...and they aren't building planes.  I couldn't justify/afford the expense of a new 172 much less an Ovation so my comments are NOT for me to afford a "new" 201...but maybe I could afford a 10 year old model in my remaining flying life...IF THEY BUILD THEM NOW.

[blacknchrome]

Quote: scottfromiowa

No, KSMooniac...my comments were directed to Blacknchrome, JimR & GeorgePerry as a clarification to their collective response to my statement that Late Model Mooney's can't compete with Cirrus/Cessna...regarding SALES.  I stand by my comments.  They still make Camaro's and Challenger's (cars) with HUGE HP displacement...and that is the direction that Mooney took in wanting to be the speed leader...why not if you can afford a half a million for an airplance you aren't worried about fuel...in that market segment...BUT I drive a four cylinder turbo that has a six speed and delivers over 30mpg on the highway...because I drive for work and want a car that delivers power and economy...I believe that this is where the 201 shined as well and based on fuel costs a 201 with electronic ignition and upgrades to interior and cowl would deliver speed and economy in a world where both are valued...

Mooney Ovation is the fastest piston powered aircraft...great...and they aren't building planes.  I couldn't justify/afford the expense of a new 172 much less an Ovation so my comments are NOT for me to afford a "new" 201...but maybe I could afford a 10 year old model in my remaining flying life...IF THEY BUILD THEM NOW.

[fantom]

Lots of fine ideas about new Mooney products, that have been talked about for ten years over on the Mooney List, which the factory monitors. Due to the economy, the investment requirements, and the otherwise poor outlook for GA in general, what can sustain the Mooney factory?

Between liability protection, the need to certify any new design with the FAA (pricy and time consuming), and the small delta from a 300 HP to a 200 HP engine and an added 18 inches.....back to the topic at hand, sustaining the Mooney factory.

They have the skill set, the factory panache and the people, do due major refurbs better than anyone else and for a competitive price. But they don't....why? What they do offer is price very high, delivery times and quality have had mixed results, and so the volume isn't there. Whomever is, and has been, calling the signals just doesn't have the foresight to make the right decisions, IMHO.

IMHO, without a serious and price competitive (not top of the curve but near the middle) refurb business, Mooney isn't going to make it for much longer. Take in planes for sale, spruce them up, and sell them, maybe on consignment, and do good refurbs for the current market.

Someone at the top of the food chain in Kerrville needs to take the blinders off, and soon!

[scottfromiowa]

That was a great summation.  My "E" is right for my current mission, but I could justify a 201 with a partner and the need for additonal space (dog crates) that the removable rear seats provide...The Controller 201 IS beautiful.  If that bird is sitting then the case for NOT building a 201 again is strong as under $200k is delivered here with ALL the bells...obviously if current buyers want Mooney's...and they don't as much as they want the competition...they want the stretched big bore machines.  I hope Mooney gets competitive in the re-fab business if indeed this is the key to their viability for survival.

[GeorgePerry]

Quote: fantom

Someone at the top of the food chain in Kerrville needs to take the blinders off, and soon!

[Jeff_S]

I've stayed out of this argument but enjoyed the speculation. As a new J owner I appreciate that many people see the same benefits that brought me to mine. And I feel pretty lucky that I found one in the price range I was willing to afford that was already outfitted with a great avionics package and full-featured A/P. Sure, I could go glass if I wanted to spend the dough, but my mission doesn't really need it.

But looking at the market overall, I did glance at the $195K model All American has. It's priced competitively (according to the scale that THEY have set, but which does seem reasonable) and yet it's sat there since I started looking last October. And I know of another late-model J MSE ('97 or thereabouts) here in the Atlanta area that I also looked at. I've seen the price drop on that one by $20K since last Fall as well. So it begs the question of what is the more desirable plane for someone looking for a new-ish model in the $175-$225K range.  There are a lot of SR22s that are starting to fit right in that segment of the market.

[DaV8or]

So if they can't build the planes they had been building, can't develope new ones and can't refurbish the old ones, then I say they should just keep cranking out parts, work on new and advanced STCs for the old planes and consider redesigning and turning the 201 into a homebuilt kit. Maybe and I really mean maybe, consider redesigning the old M10 Cadet into an LSA.

[Geoff]

Dave, I agree.  How about a diesel STC for the older planes using Deltahawk/other engines?  I think LoPresti is pursuing this on the SR20.

[DaV8or]

Quote: Geoff

Dave, I agree.  How about a diesel STC for the older planes using Deltahawk/other engines?  I think LoPresti is pursuing this on the SR20.

[Magnum]

Continental made a deal for the SMA Diesel, it should come to market in 2011. It has 230 hp, so it would be great for the 201. It is flying in the Cessna 182 right now, but they still have problems with high altitude restarts. Hope they'll get it fixed.

http://www.smaengines.com/?lang=en

[Geoff]

One problem with the SMA/Connie is weight.  The thing weighs 432 lbs while the Lyc io-360 only weighs 300 lbs.  This cuts into payload pretty heavily.  I would have to think a long time about giving up 132 lbs of payload.

[Magnum]

Quote: Geoff

One problem with the SMA/Connie is weight.  The thing weighs 432 lbs while the Lyc io-360 only weighs 300 lbs.  This cuts into payload pretty heavily.  I would have to think a long time about giving up 132 lbs of payload.

[KSMooniac]

It wouldn't be 132 lb hit as the additional weight would have to be balanced aft of the CG as well...perhaps with only another 50 lbs in the tail?  Even with the lower fuel consumption, it would really cripple a Mooney.

[Geoff]

I got the attached reply from Deltahawk on my inquiry regarding an STC for the M20E/F/J/K...This could be a potential opportunity for the Factory to pursue if they were so inclined. 

 

 

Hi,

We have talked to people about engine mount and firewall forward kit for the Mooney but no one has committed to that project. We hope that by the time we complete our FAA certification of the engine in 2011, there will be a completed STC for several aircraft including the 172, PA28 and Mooney.

Thank you for your interest in DeltaHawk engines. If you have further questions, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Rip Edmundson

DeltaHawk Engines, Inc.

Racine, Wisconsin USA

 

 

rip@deltahawkengines.com

 

[KSMooniac]

I will plan to talk to DeltaHawk at OSH this year...I have dreams of working myself into a composite fab business and wading into that pool with some fun Mooney projects is a great first step for me.  Doing a cowl is of course likely the biggest STC hurdle after they get approved.  Engine mounts are gonna be pretty easy...

[Magnum]

Quote: KSMooniac

It wouldn't be 132 lb hit as the additional weight would have to be balanced aft of the CG as well...perhaps with only another 50 lbs in the tail?  Even with the lower fuel consumption, it would really cripple a Mooney.

[carusoam]

Magnus,

Its not so bad,  Another 24V battery will fit back there nicely....(M20R style....)

-a-