Which one would you choose?

[thomas1142]

Ok, I got three prospects that look like what I have been looking for. Which one would you choose and why?

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?listing_id=2190279&s-type=aircraft

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=MOONEY&model=M20J+201&listing_id=2182115&s-type=aircraft

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=MOONEY&model=M20J+201&listing_id=2187403&s-type=aircraft

 

 

[N131MA]

First impression, the 1st one:

1. IO-390 engine, least time SMOH
2. I have the 430W/530W combination as well. Love it! Both can be upgraded w/ ADS-B traffic.
3. Nice cockpit (930, autopilot) and other upgrades (Tanis heater, Powerflow, etc)

My 2 cents...

[bonal]

Such a nice set of choices, all seem to be equal on appearance I agree with 131MA big difference on engine hours and cost are close to the same. But what a nice selection of J's

[dlthig]

1. http://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=MOONEY&model=M20J+201&listing_id=2179200&s-type=aircraft
2. http://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=MOONEY&model=M20J+201&listing_id=2158994&s-type=aircraft

I'd save the money and use it for upgrades and haggle a little more on the price. An additional benefit may be the lower taxes on a lower purchase price. Also, I've watch the second one in Placerville and it's been on the market for at least 6 months. I think there is a service that you can pay for that will track the sale price of aircraft which could give you some bargaining power. As far as the IO-390 goes, there is some information on this site, but the takeaway is that an overhaul will very unpleasant. Good luck.

[ArtVandelay]

I noticed no headrests for the first one, I thought they were standard on Js?

[dlthig]

Also, there is a J for sale on this forum.

[Pritch]

Aviongoo is a great website to see the history of almost all airplane.  I used it extensively when I was looking for my K model.  I used to say that you can tell a lot about a person by just looking in their car.  You can learn a lot about about the person who last owned the plane by googling them and google earth (hint).

Pritch

PS dlthig is right buy a cheaper one, less tax less insurance and upgrade the way you want it.

[cnoe]

Keep in mind that the "one-piece belly mod" often means it was geared up. That may or may not matter to you.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dlthig]

It's a balance, but use every bit of information available to negotiate. Knowledge is power, but doesn't permit theft. Both parties have a best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA), try to separate emotions and the past to look forward to the Zone of Potential Agreement (ZOPA).... Lessons from my negotiations elective at the War College. On the bright side, I did get a great deal on a tempurpedic. Still no Mooney yet.....

[rbridges]

maybe I'm wrong, so someone please correct me, but I've never been a big fan of the IO390.  Seems like it only gives a little more HP for a lot more cost.  Isn't it limited to just a few minutes, and aren't the cylinders a lot more costly than even the IO360?  I like the first plane best based on equipment and times, but I'd be worried the 390 would be more expensive to maintain.

[macosxuser]

3 hours ago, rbridges said:

maybe I'm wrong, so someone please correct me, but I've never been a big fan of the IO390.  Seems like it only gives a little more HP for a lot more cost.  Isn't it limited to just a few minutes, and aren't the cylinders a lot more costly than even the IO360?  I like the first plane best based on equipment and times, but I'd be worried the 390 would be more expensive to maintain.

The 390 is not limited on takeoff power, its 210 max continuous. The IO-390 is cheaper from Lycoming than the IO-360, but cylinders might be more. It's slightly lower compression, but also is certified to the +10/-0 HP output ratings like the Continental 550 is, not the +5/-5% like the older engines, so real HP increase is in 15ish. It can also run on 91/96 if you are into that sort of thing.

[rbridges]

8 hours ago, macosxuser said:

The 390 is not limited on takeoff power, its 210 max continuous. The IO-390 is cheaper from Lycoming than the IO-360, but cylinders might be more. It's slightly lower compression, but also is certified to the +10/-0 HP output ratings like the Continental 550 is, not the +5/-5% like the older engines, so real HP increase is in 15ish. It can also run on 91/96 if you are into that sort of thing.

thanks.  I was going by an older post that mentioned 5 minute takeoff limit and that cylinders were around $4k each.  That was posted a few years ago.  

 

[jetdriven]

9 hours ago, macosxuser said:

The 390 is not limited on takeoff power, its 210 max continuous. The IO-390 is cheaper from Lycoming than the IO-360, but cylinders might be more. It's slightly lower compression, but also is certified to the +10/-0 HP output ratings like the Continental 550 is, not the +5/-5% like the older engines, so real HP increase is in 15ish. It can also run on 91/96 if you are into that sort of thing.

i haven't read anything saying the 390 was not takeoff power limited, it was, last I read, limited to 5 minutes 210 H then 27.2" and 2700 RPM continuous, 200 HP.  So at altitude its, at 75% cruise, only 7.5 HP more..

The experimental versions are not. Also, the timing is blank on the data plate.

its the most expensive speed mod ever conceived by man, a new engine, plus that new non-optional Hartzell BA prop (7 or 8K), plus the other conversion stuff. Plus, per the STC docs and stuff, I cannot find anywhere you can install anything but Slick mags, they are a grand each now.  We are changing them at the shop weekly, because of failures. Perhaps if they kill someone when both fail at once, but for now, bolt it on and buy a new one every 300 hours. 

 

Edited July 9, 2016 by jetdriven

[thomas1142]

So from what I am reading, one should stay away from acft with a 390 engine. Is this correct?

 

[rbridges]

3 hours ago, thomas1142 said:

So from what I am reading, one should stay away from acft with a 390 engine. Is this correct?

 

IMO no, besides the cylinders possibly being expensive, I think it's great if it's already on the plane. I don't think I'd pay to have it installed. It's like everything else in aviation, it's much cheaper to buy something already installed. The original purchaser is the one who gets screwed price wise. 

[macosxuser]

On July 9, 2016 at 8:14 AM, jetdriven said:

i haven't read anything saying the 390 was not takeoff power limited, it was, last I read, limited to 5 minutes 210 H then 27.2" and 2700 RPM continuous, 200 HP.  So at altitude its, at 75% cruise, only 7.5 HP more..

The experimental versions are not. Also, the timing is blank on the data plate.

its the most expensive speed mod ever conceived by man, a new engine, plus that new non-optional Hartzell BA prop (7 or 8K), plus the other conversion stuff. Plus, per the STC docs and stuff, I cannot find anywhere you can install anything but Slick mags, they are a grand each now.  We are changing them at the shop weekly, because of failures. Perhaps if they kill someone when both fail at once, but for now, bolt it on and buy a new one every 300 hours. 

 

You haven't read anything? So you are passing off your assumption as fact? The TCDS for the IO-390 (E00006NY) clearly states the HP rating is 210 at 2700 RPM for takeoff AND max continuous. It also states minimum fuel as 100LL (I was wrong). 

 

Cylinders are $3600 each vs. $2200 each.

 

Slick mags are the only ones listed on th TCDS, your experience with their reliability is your own. I have both Slicks and CMI magd go 500 hours regularly without failure.

 

If I was getting a factory engine, it would be the IO-390. I just overhaulled my IO-360-A1A for less than $15k, so obviously, that is a whole different ballgame.

[ArtVandelay]

If I was getting a factory engine, it would be the IO-390. I just overhaulled my IO-360-A1A for less than $15k, so obviously, that is a whole different ballgame.

I'd be interested on hearing more about your O/H. Did you get new cylinders or O/H the old ones? Camshaft new or O/H? What made you do the O/H, TBO or condition? Who did you use?

[jetdriven]

49 minutes ago, macosxuser said:

You haven't read anything? So you are passing off your assumption as fact? The TCDS for the IO-390 (E00006NY) clearly states the HP rating is 210 at 2700 RPM for takeoff AND max continuous. It also states minimum fuel as 100LL (I was wrong). 

 

Cylinders are $3600 each vs. $2200 each.

 

Slick mags are the only ones listed on th TCDS, your experience with their reliability is your own. I have both Slicks and CMI magd go 500 hours regularly without failure.

 

If I was getting a factory engine, it would be the IO-390. I just overhaulled my IO-360-A1A for less than $15k, so obviously, that is a whole different ballgame.

I'm passing off the ICA as fact, but since I'm so stupid, please explain this to me. The TCDS says no power limit, but the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) from Lycoming for the Mooney M20E, M20F and M 20J, says this.   Which makes it part of the airworthiness limitations for the aircraft, which makes it mandatory for all operators, not jut Part 135 etc. Care to explain that, and how I'm such dumbass? 

 Also, also, that IO-390 doesn't come with a prop, so there's that, and the McCauley won't work with the STC.

Further, we've changed enough Slick mags at the shop with burned points, melted rotors, melted breaker point lift cams, and burned coils to be really hesitant to keep installing them.  Probably 3 dozen this year, how many Bendix, or even Eismann mags in that time frame? ZERO.  One particular customer, picked up his Cherokee 235 that had a new Slick mag installed on the left side, but the 172 they brought wouldn't start, its Slick mag failed and they had to leave it.  Ive had plenty of people say they're fine but nobody ever said they were better than Bendix... would you want this shit in your airplane? This mag was off a Cherokee 140, with 300 hours on it. the rotor metal piece melted loose and trashed the cap and rotor, filed the whole mag with carbon dust.  No problem, its just a grand every 200-30 hours, if not twice that.  These boards are full of dozens of people with the same problems. stranded, often as well. 

 

 

Edited July 10, 2016 by jetdriven

[macosxuser]

1 hour ago, teejayevans said:

 

 

I'd be interested on hearing more about your O/H. Did you get new cylinders or O/H the old ones? Camshaft new or O/H? What made you do the O/H, TBO or condition? Who did you use?

Overhaulled steel cylinders, new cam, reground lifters. New CMI mag kit, serviceable on the fuel injection system, fuel pump. Reused starter. Engine was 1000 SMOH, but two propstrikes in the last 100 hrs was outside of my comfort zone.

 

I know nothing about the STC for the Mooney, M20J or E/F regarding the IO-390. I do know that the STC Lycoming got for the Cardinal RG does not limit horsepower and includes the McCauley two blade prop as an option (same prop as some of the 201's I believe). If the engine is limited in the Mooney airframe, it most likely is due to overheating constraints in the airframe when they did the climb tests.  The prop/engine/airframe combination testing is expensive, so perhaps whoever developed the STC for the Mooney only certified the prop they had. The STC is only as good as the work put into development.

 

In the course of developing an STC for another aircraft, I learned that Harzell will provide vibration data for any combination they have tested. McCauley will not. That might have been a factor as well.

[jetdriven]

Point is you're in here spouting off stuff like a little professor, which may sound good on a Cardinal RG but you don't seem to know anything about this application in a Mooney airframe.

  Opinion as fact?  Only from you.  

Read the STC before giving IO-390 advice for Mooneys next time.  I certainly did, and after learning thoroughly about the whole thing, I decided to keep my ten grand extra and forego the extra max 7.5 HP in cruise.  Good day sir. 

Edited July 10, 2016 by jetdriven

[N131MA]

So far I learned from the IO-390 discussion:

• Limited to 210 HP max t/o power to max 5 min. I am trying to understand the practical relevance: Above 2000ft pressure altitude no limitations (MP will be less than 27) but 7.5HP more than the IO-360. Full power t/o climbs won't take more than 5 min to get one above 2000ft. Practical limitation: no "balls to the walls" below 2000ft pressure altitude?
• IO-390 is more expensive to overhaul. Cylinders are $1.4k more per jug - today. No one knows vendors and prices in 5-10 years from now.
• Price/performance ratio for the 360 -> 390 upgrade is not attractive. For buying a used aircraft w/ IO-390 not relevant.
• In general, Slick mags are perceived as less reliable than Bendix mags.

Thanks for the insides!

[thomas1142]

So now, I am more confused than when this started.

Why would anyone want to "upgrade" to a 390 if all the previous issues are of concern?

Original question still stands, which of the three and why (skip the 390 issue).

 

Edited July 11, 2016 by thomas1142

[jetdriven]

I'd buy the first one without a doubt, provided it has been flown regularly.  A roller cam engine won't fail like a flat tappet engine will. The other two have much more hours SMOH, are -D engines, and are the same price.   You can fix the paint for ten grand at Hawk, but a bad cam is going to be 25K.  I wouldn't put a 390 on an airplane, but I wouldnt let it stop me from buying one. 

Edited July 11, 2016 by jetdriven

[HJ Aggie]

I have been on the hunt for a good Mooney for a few months now.  I have owned a J-Model in the past and cannot give up my love affair with the Mooney.  I have a purchase pending on a mid-time M20F with elec. gear that the previous owner did not fly much.  Put a 0 SNEW  IO-390 and a new Harzell 3-blade.  Of all the talk about the 390, does anyone have actual performance and cost (fuel and maintenance) experience with this upgrade.  I love the -360 but wondering if I'm walking into a nightmare here. Thanks

Edited November 19, 2016 by HJ Aggie

[Hank]

There was a write up in the MAPALOG two,or three years ago by someone who put an IO-390 in at overhaul. I don't recall the details, it's not an approved install in my plane.