'77 201 vs early 80's

[panther1400]

Looking for some information about the '77 vs other Mooneys up to about '85 what updates would have to be done to the '77 to make them somewhat equal?  Or is there benifits to the '77 over the ones produced shortly there after?  What do you guys recommend? 

[LFOD]

 

Here you go....

 

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

 

[panther1400]

Is there anything you guys feel that a '77 should be overlooked to go to a newer one?

[231Pilot]

This is not a big deal to many, but I prefer the split/removable rear seats in the 80's Mooneys.  This might have been introduced in '82 (mine is an '82).  I allows me to have more room for bags, easy access to flight bag, and is easily set up for use as a 2 place, 3 place or 4 place aircraft.  Since it is usually just me, or my wife and me, I leave configured as a 2 place unless I know I will be taking passengers.  This is not a big deal, but it is a feature I really like.

[Vref]

From 79 onward (I think) need to check the serial rear seats can have schoulder harness easely installed

Speed restricition when lowering the gear...in early M20J was lower( don't think this can be changed).

Early M20J's  have the airscoop above the fuselage to change this to the NACA tail inlet requires a significant mod

[LFOD]

Quote: 201Pilot

This is not a big deal to many, but I prefer the split/removable rear seats in the 80's Mooneys.  This might have been introduced in '82 (mine is an '82).  I allows me to have more room for bags, easy access to flight bag, and is easily set up for use as a 2 place, 3 place or 4 place aircraft.  Since it is usually just me, or my wife and me, I leave configured as a 2 place unless I know I will be taking passengers.  This is not a big deal, but it is a feature I really like.

[roundout]

Vlo down (and perhaps up, I can't remember) and Vle is lower in the 77 model due to a different actuator and some other gear components, per Ronnie Kallies, formerly of the factory Service Center. The throttle quadrant on the 77 is a Piper style and the newer ones are the same you see in the airplanes through 2009 (though they don't have vernier throttles like the real late model planes do). I much prefer the new style throttle quadrant and higher gear speed but neither is a compelling enough difference to stay away from a good 77 model at a good price. Ask skyatty here on the board. His 77 is one of the nicest Js I've seen and flown. You get used to whatever you fly often. 

[FlyDave]

Also, if you're going to help with maintenance and annuals, the 1984 and later models have the one-piece belly pan (~15 screws to hold it on). It is MUCH nicer than the 3 pans with about 50 screws to remove and re-install on the earlier models.

I'm coming up on annual next month and will be replacing a majority of tinnermans and screws on the belly pans as past "hacks" have not used the correct hardware.

[KSMooniac]

I have a '77 J and it was a stretch for me to get it as I was originally planning for a modified E or F.  At the time, the price delta to the later model J's was quite substantial, so I didn't even seriously consider holding out for a later model and was ecstatic to just get a J!  Nowadays, the delta is smaller so it might be worth holding out for a later model.

Everything posted above is correct, and all of the improvements are very, very nice to have.  I'm slowly upgrading mine, although I won't be able to economically go to the split/removable rear seats.  A folding bench is the 2nd best solution.  My biggest gripe is the damn throttle quadrant...I much prefer the push-pull controls for fidelity and for the extra knee room.  Mooney fixed this in '78.  The fresh air vent on top is a draggy and noisy pop-up scoop vs. the later model buried NACA inlet in the dorsal fin...much more elegant, but very expensive to retrofit and I'm not going to do it.  I have added some of the later aerodynamic improvements and removed my ram air system like the later models.  The 1-pc belly is extremely nice to have, and I will likely do this mod next year.

Other things to consider with the later models...they might have more extensive panels and systems (like HSI, electric trim, King A/P, etc.) that will be heavier and cost more to maintain.  My '77 had a modernized panel with Garmins, STEC, no electric trim, etc. and my useful load is relatively high at 1020 lbs.  The older stuff is heavy, so if useful load is a concern you might opt for earlier models and modern radios, or plan to upgrade the panel as you see fit. 

At the end of the day, only you can put a value on any of the improvements, and bounce that off of any candidate planes you are looking at.  First priority no matter what year should be a great airframe, regular use, and regular maintenance.  After that, I would look at equipment, engine/airframe times, and then cosmetics.  A "cherry" '77 like what I bought would be worth more to me than a ragged-out '84 with the 1-pc belly and removable rear seats.  There is a continuum of value between those two examples that only you can calculate!

[hansel]

Quote: KSMooniac

The 1-pc belly is extremely nice to have, and I will likely do this mod next year.

[panther1400]

When looking at the chronology it talks about the panel and landing light mount being different or changed in 78 does anyone know those changes?

[steelerp]

I bought a '77 after looking at everything from that year to '87.  There was so much junk and over-priced airplanes,  that when I found the 201DF...the year and the radios did not matter.  It was the first 201 that was reasonable priced, no damage, good maint, great paint, good interior and lowtime engine/prop.  I've since had all the radios redone and it comes out of the same shop with an Aspen installed on Friday.  Can't wait!  

I'd focus on quality and forget year.  Know that if everything is right on the airplane, it will not be less then 100k.  If it is, then it will be lacking in one or more areas.

[flyby201]

I have a 77 "J" and when I started my search I was looking a "F" models.  A friend of mine talked me into spending  the extra $$ to get a 201 and told me "you won't regret it".  I haven't!  Now that I've got more equity in it and have paid off both my houses, I've toyed with getting a newer model, but I can't find anything I like better.  My only real gripe with the 77 model is the location of the fuel selector.  What were they thinking???  However, I've run a tank dry at 1000 ft AGL and it's amazing how quickly you can get to it when you really need to.  As far as the trottle quadrant goes... I really like it.  Prior to buying 201HL, all my experience had been in Cessna products (mostly 172's) with the push-pull/vernier, so I was used to the other type.  I guess some of the other stuff would be nice, but none of it would be a deal breaker on a nice 77 model.  Six months after your purchase, I doubt you'll be saying, "I sure wish I had bought that split back seat, or I wish I didn't have that overhead air scoop".  What I'm saying and others have said is, buy a quality, well maintained 201 (whatever the year model) and you won't regret it.

[DaV8or]

A huge difference between the '77 and late model Js is the landing gear actuators. The 77's have the old Dukes model just like the F model did. This actuator is no longer supported by Mooney or anybody else. This means that if you need to fix it, you are looking for old usable salvage parts (very hard to find now $$$$) or you are doing the upgrade to the newer style, costing you upwards of $10,000. If you do buy a '77, make sure the gear is in perfect condition and then be very, very careful with it. I know this because I too have the older gear actuator.

[panther1400]

I don't know how worried a person should be about the motor needing work but if $10k is what it takes to upgrade that could be a deal breaker.

[roundout]

Ugh. That's a lot of money. I didn't realize that nobody supports the old actuator anymore. Both styles of actuators seem pretty reliable, if that makes you feel any better. 

[KSMooniac]

I was told by an MSC expert that the '77 actuator is actually superior to the later models in terms of robustness...FWIW.  I wouldn't let that be a deal-breaker.

[panther1400]

Thats good to know and you guys are right it shouldn't be a deal breaker.