M20J vs. M20R comparison

[aviatoreb]

2 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

+/- 10,000 ft.

175 KTAS  at 17,500 ft.

That's quite impressive on 9g

[KLRDMD]

Just now, aviatoreb said:

That's quite impressive on 9g

231s, LOP are quite impressive 

[aviatoreb]

1 minute ago, KLRDMD said:

231s, LOP are quite impressive 

My K is faster....but a hog on fuel compared to that.

[Tx_Aggie]

How similar is the takeoff and landing performance/feel on the K versus the 201? 

[KLRDMD]

1 minute ago, aviatoreb said:

My K is faster....but a hog on fuel compared to that.

I know, I seriously looked at Rockets twice. The first time I bought a Bravo instead and the second time I bought a "stock" 231 instead.

[Tx_Aggie]

Just now, KLRDMD said:

I know, I seriously looked at Rockets twice. The first time I bought a Bravo instead and the second time I bought a "stock" 231 instead.

Interesting, why go from a longbody turbo to a mid body turbo? Fuel consumption alone?

[KLRDMD]

16 minutes ago, Tx_Aggie said:

How similar is the takeoff and landing performance/feel on the K versus the 201? 

The 231 generally has a bit higher gross weight and a bit more HP so they perform similarly at lower density altitudes. The CG is probably a bit more forward on 231s due to the six cylinder engine, longer cowl and since most have three bladed props so the feel is a bit different. I've flown both and prefer the feel of the 231. I don't have comparable POHs to give specific numbers, though.

[KLRDMD]

Just now, Tx_Aggie said:

Interesting, why go from a longbody turbo to a mid body turbo? Fuel consumption alone?

I had eight airplanes between them. From the Bravo I went to my first (of four) twin. I figured if I was going to burn almost 20 GPH in cruise, I wanted a second engine.

[kortopates]

6 minutes ago, Tx_Aggie said:

Interesting, why go from a longbody turbo to a mid body turbo? Fuel consumption alone?

The 252 & Encore was the height of Mooney efficiency! Faster than the 231 and maybe 20 knts slower than the Bravo but the last of the Mooney breed is miserly fuel consumption. For Mooney to remain the fastest single plane they had to give up the fuel efficiency for an abundance of raw HP. The Acclaim though was a big improvement on the Bravo IMO.  

Edited January 9, 2017 by kortopates

[KLRDMD]

2 minutes ago, kortopates said:

The 252 & Encore was the height of Mooney efficiency! Faster than the 231 and maybe 20 knts slower than the Bravo but the last of the Mooney breed is miserly fuel consumption.

Upgraded 231s are "almost" as fast as 252 or Encores on a bit less fuel - but with significantly lower acquisition costs. In my opinion they are the current sweet spot for value in the Mooney line.

[carusoam]

My favorite topic...  Plus, any topic that brings RogerL in for a comment has got to be a worthy one.  

 

(1) A C is nice. Big. And Fast. And efficient...

(2) A J is nicer for some people. Bigger. And Faster. And more efficient.

(3) An R is nicest for some people.  Biggest. And Fastest. And more leather do-dads and control buttons.

(4) An E Is like my beloved C, but better because it's FI allows for more power and higher cruise efficiency.

(5) An F is like a J, but better because it can grow multiple HD color screens on the panel based on the AMUs saved over 26 years. 

(6) A Rocket Engineering modified Mooney is better than an unmodified Mooney for some people.

(7) I haven't met a Mooney I didn't like.  Some are just more worn in than the others... 

(8) I have yet to sample the TC'd or TN'd varieties of Mooney. The NA one's are so addictive already, I would fear going for a ride in a 310hp Acclaim...  That would require intense internal strength and stability.  2kfpm, all the way up...

(9) Select the engine you want to fly, then select the Mooney airframe you want it mounted to...

  - O360

 - IO360

 - TSIO360

 - TSIO520

 - TSIO540

 - IO550

 - TNIO550

 

Go fly M20,

-a-

 

[Tx_Aggie]

14 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

Upgraded 231s are "almost" as fast as 252 or Encores on a bit less fuel - but with significantly lower acquisition costs. In my opinion they are the current sweet spot for value in the Mooney line.

If you ever find yourself out in western Texas, Give me a shout. I'd love to see how the 231 compares as well. I've also noticed the spread in acquisition prices between 252s and modified 231s. Very interesting considering the addition of a wastegate and intercooler for the 231s and what they do for the airplane. 

[KLRDMD]

5 minutes ago, Tx_Aggie said:

If you ever find yourself out in western Texas, Give me a shout. I'd love to see how the 231 compares as well. I've also noticed the spread in acquisition prices between 252s and modified 231s. Very interesting considering the addition of a wastegate and intercooler for the 231s and what they do for the airplane. 

I don't get there often but occasionally. Informally and just for fun I help people buy airplanes (I've owned 14 airplanes so have a reasonable clue about these things), making suggestions, pointing out good and bad things about specific airplanes for sale, etc. I'm working with a guy looking at a 231 now. It has an automatic wastegate, intercooler, nice cosmetics, good maintenance, mid-time engine, low airframe time, no damage history, nice avionics, etc . . . for *well* under $100k.

[M016576]

3 hours ago, Tx_Aggie said:

My intent is to share what I've learned. While renting the Ovation, I've been spoiled by great performance. I've really only learned about the 201 through these forums. And while I've heard a lot about their all around ability, I think my mission and flight regime is unique to the usual two main groups: 1) 10,000' and below, non-turbo/201 2) 10,000' and above, turbo. I live in an area 3000' above sea level. In order to get out of the turbulence and not be tossed around like a rag doll, I have to go atleast to 10,000'. But I'm not too committed to hanging around the teens with frequenting the cannulas either. I'm usually between 10-12k on every flight. The Ovation has performed excellently in this window. It is more expensive without a doubt from an acquisition point however. 

Look for a missile.  All the performance of an ovation, more useful load, and much less acquisition cost.  The only thing you're missing is the bigger baggage area.

[carusoam]

Job, if you let all the secrets out....

Post a photo of the VSI just after T/O if you can (or dare).

Prices of Mooney Missiles are going to climb.  

(This is meant to be humor, but the 300hp engine matched to a Mid body Mooney has tremendous capabilities. Funny thing... Actual climb rate most likely exceeds the VSI's capability) 

Best regards,

-a-

[StevenL757]

34 minutes ago, Tx_Aggie said:

If you ever find yourself out in western Texas, Give me a shout. I'd love to see how the 231 compares as well. I've also noticed the spread in acquisition prices between 252s and modified 231s. Very interesting considering the addition of a wastegate and intercooler for the 231s and what they do for the airplane. 

Matt, you've heard many views so far, and you'll hear more, but a purchase decision really boils down to three things...your individual mission as you highlighted earlier, ego, and the size of your wallet.

I've flown the J, the Ovation, and the Acclaim, and loved all of them for different reasons.  I settled on the Ovation because it most-closely matched my mission profile.  I didn't want the added maintenance costs of maintaining a turbo.  The N/A 310HP capabilities of the Ovation3 get me above and around most weather.  The FiKi capability and having no vacuum systems further add to redundancy.  The long body handles extremely well and stable...in cruise, the controls feel as though they are set in concrete.  Having flown 40+ types over 31 years, it's clearly the best single-engine IFR platform I've flown.  I still get butterflies when I'm on the way to my hangar, and can't believe I own something like this.  I usually fly to KHYI in July for my annuals, so don't hesitate to PM me if I can be of any help, or if you'd like to meet up.

Steve

[Tx_Aggie]

26 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Job, if you let all the secrets out....

Post a photo of the VSI just after T/O if you can (or dare).

Prices of Mooney Missiles are going to climb.  

(This is meant to be humor, but the 300hp engine matched to a Mid body Mooney has tremendous capabilities. Funny thing... Actual climb rate most likely exceeds the VSI's capability) 

Best regards,

-a-

Of the few Missiles I've seen out there for sale, it seems as if most stick around the market for quite some time before the listing disappears. I assume they get sold?  I like the extra useful load on both the missile and the eagle conversion. I think Mooney would do well if they were to offer a production line of the screaming eagle with ~1130 lbs useful load. That extra 130 lbs goes a long way for bags and people. My 2 cents. 

[Jeff_S]

Loved my J. Love my Ovation even more due to the extra power, speed and interior space. (Yeah, the G1000 is also awesome...but I don't want to gloat!)

The IO-550 gives rise to one of my favorite sayings: There is no replacement for displacement.

A friend and fellow MooneySpacer, airline pilot and owner of a super tricked out J flew in my Ovation and he got the bug. He went really large, and traded his J with Richard at Premier for a very late Model Acclaim S. I can't wait to ride in it!

[carusoam]

Missiles and Rockets fall into a category of being modified.  This somewhat makes them not for everyone.

If your Firebird is a Formula, or your Buick is known as a grand national, then your NA M20J is a Missile.

If you are all in and your Buick is a GN-X,  than clearly your M20K should be a Rocket.

Rocket Engineering is a special aftermarket engineering group.  The work they do is so complete, it later gets purchased and produced by the Mooney corporation...  complete with all the proper FAA STC paperwork.

Their latest Mooney project chain is the Missile engine being updated and put into both the Ovation and the Eagle.  The 310 hp engine in the O became the Standing O and O3.  The Rocket's engine (I believe) is in the last K, 252.

Since the laws of physics define Climb capability as excess hp. The Missile, O3 and the others get off the ground quickly, in short distances and or are carrying a few pounds extra load.  (Check the details on these, each airframe has different limitations).

I am only a PP, not a tech guru or mechanic.

Best regards,

-a-

 

[M016576]

1 hour ago, carusoam said:

Job, if you let all the secrets out....

Post a photo of the VSI just after T/O if you can (or dare).

Prices of Mooney Missiles are going to climb.  

(This is meant to be humor, but the 300hp engine matched to a Mid body Mooney has tremendous capabilities. Funny thing... Actual climb rate most likely exceeds the VSI's capability) 

Best regards,

-a-

I don't have any pictures of a full bore, sustained climb in the missile.... but if this storm ever passes, that will be a great excuse to go flying! 

ive got an aspen, so I don't think I could exceed the VSI even in the F-15C

[carusoam]

If the Aspen had a voice like Siri or Alexa, I bet she would get pretty funny during a light weight climb.

-a-

[thinwing]

6 hours ago, Piloto said:

Actually this trip was to the UK. An Ovation with LR tanks (130 gallons total) has a range of over 2,000nm non stop. This was done with no ferry tanks and plenty of fuel left. The only thing missing was the pilot relief tube. But I manage with one gallon cans.

José

Wow...that's a lot of relief!

[Hank]

41 minutes ago, Jeff_S said:

Loved my J. Love my Ovation even more due to the extra power, speed and interior space. (Yeah, the G1000 is also awesome...but I don't want to gloat!)

The IO-550 gives rise to one of my favorite sayings: There is no replacement for displacement.

A friend and fellow MooneySpacer, airline pilot and owner of a super tricked out J flew in my Ovation and he got the bug. He went really large, and traded his J with Richard at Premier for a very late Model Acclaim S. I can't wait to ride in it!

Big Daddy Don Garlits! Check his museum the next time you're driving I-75 in north Florida, it has all the displacement you can handle.

I get decent climb rates with my 3-blade Hartzell, but wouldn't mind upgrading to a Missile. It's just not going to happen in the near future . . . The extra 5-6 gph may not be a good trade for the extra speed, just depends on now much extra speed there is . . .

[carusoam]

Need to climb up to the thin air to get some of the efficiency back.

I think that would be the equivalent of flying at the same KIAS, but at a higher altitude.

airspeed beats the efficiency down... a function of airspeed squared.

Flying up high at Carson's (spell check on Mr. Carsen, please...?) speed, indicated, has got to be good.  Efficient plus highish  groundspeed...

Thinking out loud,

-a-

[donkaye, MCFI]

My Mooney Musings

I've flown and taught in almost all the Mooney models extensively (over 8,600 hours of my 10,600 hour total).  

Once you've extensively flown the speed of the turbos you just don't want any less.  

I know all about LOP and just prefer to fly fast ROP.  I don't particularly care about fuel flow, but I do care about fuel prices, so will plan my flights for minimum cost of fuel.

I prefer to fly the mid teens for smoothness of the flight.  I don't like masks, but don't mind the conserving nasal canulas at all.  Under 10K, especially in Arizona and Wyoming leads to a bumpy ride in the summertime due to thermal turbulence.  

I prefer glass, just not the limitations Mooney has placed on the G1000, so I don't think I would ever buy a G1000 airplane.  

The Acclaim's extra speed isn't worth the extra money paid for the airplane, although if someone wants to buy one, I'll teach them how to fly it properly.  

If you fly an airplane the way it should be flown with grace and smoothness, you won't notice the difference in flight in control responsiveness between all models of Mooneys.  The long bodies are heavier and give a smoother ride in turbulence.  It does take some time to master their landings after flying the short body Mooneys.  

The turbo long bodies are more expensive to own so expect to always be fixing something on them,  In fact expect to always be fixing something on ANY airplane you buy.  

Fuel burn on the long bodies are much greater than the short bodies.  If you care about fuel burns, don't buy a long body.  

There is much more space in the long bodies, and useful loads can be increased if you remove the back seats.  I usually fly with no back seats and have weight and balances for both configurations.

There hasn't been one Mooney from the A Model to the TN that I have flown or taught in that I would rather have than my own.

There is also no other single engine piston airplane that I would own other than a Mooney.

Mooney Instructor and Bravo Owner for 24 years and counting.