Mooney vs Cirrus

[Alain B]

3 minutes ago, Danb said:

Greg there aren't many fair fights when comparing Mooney's to our competition

It's funny how the Cirrus guys say the exact opposite , until they hitch a ride in a Mooney . Suddenly they get very quiet . 

[goterminal120]

1 hour ago, Yetti said:

In the last year or so Cirrus = 3 stall spin in from the pattern  Mooney = 0 for Texas Airspace.  the last stall spin in was a higher time military pilot.    Something about that wing I don't trust.

That's why it has a parachute. Couldn't pass spin test during certification. It being for your safety crap came from the marketing department.

[n5756k]

Did anyone think he might be running at 65% power. Not everyone flying firewall forward.

N5756K

[kevinw]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

The airframe is fully evolved.  There is not much left.  Reg determine max stall speed for the category and the Mooney isn't going to be able to put more weight in it without either making the plane lighter or modifying the wing. 

I was snooping around the new Mooney page and reading up on the Ovation Ultra. It lists "typical" useful load at 1,130 lbs. Personally I'm a little skeptical of this claim. The Acclaim is listed at 1,000 lbs.

[Jerry 5TJ]

3 minutes ago, kevinw said:

I was snooping around the new Mooney page and reading up on the Ovation Ultra. It lists "typical" useful load at 1,130 lbs. Personally I'm a little skeptical of this claim.

That may be a supportable UL number:

My 2000 Ovation, stripped of its TKS & oxygen systems and sans "options" loaded into avionics bay, would have UL around 1,100 pounds or a tad higher. 

Oh, you want FIKI, O2, and full avionics goodies in your new Ultra?  New UL is 900#.  

[201er]

Cmon guys, it's not fair. You're comparing a 50+ year old wood/metal design to a modern composite.

[carusoam]

2/16/2017 - website is not done yet....

Comparing my Old O to the new one....

1) Where is the engine page?

why no statement of what engine and prop is being used?

Or did I miss it..?

i would expect a mention of Continental's IO550(n) and choice of Hartzel thin or composite TopProp.

Useful load improvements come from weight eliminated from new composite parts and lighter IO550(n) engine. Tens of pounds...

 

2) Pre-owned planes... Warranty of one month and 10 hours? 

The warranty is worn out before you can get Transition Training and get the plane home.... that can't be right.

 

3) compass mounted on the center post?  That spot is good for the vertical light bars of the AOAi.  The compass is used once prior to flight. Current location on the glare shield is still good.

 

4) panel update looks pretty nice.  The keyboard gives the same bump that people don't like about the old throttle quadrants.

 

Best regards,

-a-

 

 

[Zwaustin]

For what it's worth; the other day I rode in a 2015 SR22T platinum G5.... down low it was running about 150 true on 15gph, we didn't go high due to short trip but I asked him what he sees and he responded 170 true typically.... my K model always flew 145-150 true down low on 9 gph LoP and easily 165 true up high on 10-13 gph depending on LoP vs RoP. Yes it was nice because it was a new plane but I didn't like how it felt on take off roll.... seems like the front wheel was shuttering or something and it wasn't that smooth in my opinion. He told me they just addressed the springs at annual. 110k for mooney above or 700k for used G5? Hmmm.... and the G6 is really 879k, wowser. You can buy a hell of a lot of plane for 879k on the used market that is faster and has dual 750's and a G500/600 which is just fine in my opinion, flies faster, carries more and still leaves you with thousands left for fuel. I have also heard (no personal experience) that some new cirrus planes are costing 300-400 per hour to operate (all in) and have high dollar annuals. My mooney cost me 170.10 per hour wet with no expense spared. 

[bonal]

All that and yet Cirrus is about the only succesful single piston seller.  But then as they say checkers sells more than chess.  Honestly if I came accross a financial windfall I would not even think of a Cirrus.  An ultra would be so cool.

[Zwaustin]

A great marketing company indeed. 

[ziggysanchez]

4 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

So you are a rare bird - can you say what was involved in your decision to sell a relatively new Cirrus to buy an old bird like an M20K?  And how you feel about the change now?

I needed the money that was in the Cirrus for our church building fund. When I sold it I had made an agreement with the new owner that would allow me to continue to fly it occasionally. That agreement quickly fell apart after the purchase was complete. A very good friend of mine didn't want me to be without and airplane and with the circumstances being what they were he purchased the K for me. I purchased Don Maxwell's N231JY. I use it primarily to travel for ministry work. That's the short version of the story.

 

Since purchasing the K on October 27th 2016 I have flown it for over 100 hours and have enjoyed it very much. I like the flight characteristics better than the Cirrus. I like the room in the Cirrus better than the K. The Cirrus was a very easy airplane to fly. People stall and spin Cirrus airplanes for the same reason they do any other airplane. Uncoordinated flight at too high of an angle of attack. Takeoffs in the Cirrus were easier. Landing the Mooney seems easier to me. I never have had trouble controlling the speed of either airplane. Pull power back and point the nose up and they both slow down fairly quickly. When I do buy a new airplane it will be a difficult choice between a Mooney or a Cirrus. Not have their pluses and minuses. 

 

Sorry if if there are lots of mispellings. I am trying to respond from my phone and I have fat fingers. Lol.

[SkepticalJohn]

Did anyone think he might be running at 65% power. Not everyone flying firewall forward.
N5756K

I think a lot of people are missing the intension of my original post. I wasn't really looking for a debate, just sharing an experience.

We weren't traveling the the speeds we were traveling because of a speed limit. We had both decided our own power settings - my setting was at 75%. I don't know his power setting and it doesn't matter. It was not a race or competition of any nature - I sure hope he wasn't firewalled. Assuming the Cirrus pilot is reasonable pilot, he chose his power setting for some reason; manufacturers recommendation, better fuel economy for the pocketbook or for a long leg without fuel stop, slowing down to wait for weather ahead to clear, to be gentle on his engine, or maybe that's just what it cruises at, who knows. Regardless, he chose his power setting and I chose mine without the intension of "racing" anyone. I'd call that a "normal cruise situation". Before someone chimes in with the max range airspeed/slow cruise for the Cirrus, with my 106 gallons I could've kept my cruise speed for 1350NM and had 45 minute reserve.

Is the Cirrus a nice plane? You bet!
Could he have saved a half a million dollars and enjoyed better performance with a K? Yes, it was demonstrated that day.
If I was given, for free, either the Cirrus or my K with the understanding that I could never sell it (washing resell value out of the equation) which would I pick? The K.

My point was we were both cruising along in planes with VERY different price tags and the (relatively) cheap plane was eating the expensive plane's lunch. The K would've met his needs for less money or I could've spent a lot more money for less performance - you pick.

Scenario: if there were no speed limits on the highway, Bob paid $695k for a Ferrari, Joe paid $100k for a Ford, both cars are only used to travel to/from work. Bob's car goes 150mph on his way to work, getting 10mpg. Joe's car goes 170mph while getting 15mpg. Joe is winning. The Ferrari dealership is too...

[Shadrach]

3 hours ago, goterminal120 said:

That's why it has a parachute. Couldn't pass spin test during certification. It being for your safety crap came from the marketing department.

The Cirrus airframe spins and recovers just fine.  It passed spin testing to attain JAA certification in Europe. They were able to leverage the chute installation to get a waiver from the FAA. This was done to speed the certification process and not due to some deficiency in the airframe...  I wish people (especially Mooney pilots) would stop parroting this nonsense.

[bradp]

Seems like the best value for a Mooney with similar weather capabilities to the cirrus would be the M or the Ovation...

There may be some UL savings yet in the airframe.  Titanium gear and use of composites in the fuselage may gain some UL.  

[bonal]

you may have not wanted to start a debate but thats what often happens around here

[Shadrach]

3 minutes ago, bradp said:

Seems like the best value for a Mooney with similar weather capabilities to the cirrus would be the M or the Ovation...

There may be some UL savings yet in the airframe.  Titanium gear and use of composites in the fuselage may gain some UL.  

That might be feasible as Ti prices drop, but it will add costs well beyond that of raw material.   

[201er]

11 minutes ago, bonal said:

you may have not wanted to start a debate but thats what often happens around here

And the dentist hasn't even gotten off from work yet

[kevinw]

3 hours ago, carusoam said:

why no statement of what engine and prop is being used?

PROPULSION 

Engine	Continental IO-550-G
Horsepower	310 hp
Engine TBO	2,200 hrs
Propeller	Hartzell Scimitar Three-Blade

From the website under Propulsion...

[aviatoreb]

1 hour ago, SkepticalJohn said:

 

I think a lot of people are missing the intension of my original post. I wasn't really looking for a debate, just sharing an experience.

We weren't traveling the the speeds we were traveling because of a speed limit. We had both decided our own power settings - my setting was at 75%. I don't know his power setting and it doesn't matter. It was not a race or competition of any nature - I sure hope he wasn't firewalled. Assuming the Cirrus pilot is reasonable pilot, he chose his power setting for some reason; manufacturers recommendation, better fuel economy for the pocketbook or for a long leg without fuel stop, slowing down to wait for weather ahead to clear, to be gentle on his engine, or maybe that's just what it cruises at, who knows. Regardless, he chose his power setting and I chose mine without the intension of "racing" anyone. I'd call that a "normal cruise situation". Before someone chimes in with the max range airspeed/slow cruise for the Cirrus, with my 106 gallons I could've kept my cruise speed for 1350NM and had 45 minute reserve.

Is the Cirrus a nice plane? You bet!
Could he have saved a half a million dollars and enjoyed better performance with a K? Yes, it was demonstrated that day.
If I was given, for free, either the Cirrus or my K with the understanding that I could never sell it (washing resell value out of the equation) which would I pick? The K.

My point was we were both cruising along in planes with VERY different price tags and the (relatively) cheap plane was eating the expensive plane's lunch. The K would've met his needs for less money or I could've spent a lot more money for less performance - you pick.

Scenario: if there were no speed limits on the highway, Bob paid $695k for a Ferrari, Joe paid $100k for a Ford, both cars are only used to travel to/from work. Bob's car goes 150mph on his way to work, getting 10mpg. Joe's car goes 170mph while getting 15mpg. Joe is winning. The Ferrari dealership is too...

 

Was that Joe the Plumber Ford?

[aviatoreb]

4 hours ago, goterminal120 said:

That's why it has a parachute. Couldn't pass spin test during certification. It being for your safety crap came from the marketing department.

Not passing the spin test meant it didn't need to demonstrate spin recovery since the chute it the plan B instead.  But whether a plane is spin recoverable or not is not relevant if you spin anything at pattern altitude.

If a Cirrus were more prone to a spin - which I have no idea if it is or isn't, that would be another thing than demonstrating spin recovery that the chute allowed them to skip.

[aviatoreb]

2 hours ago, ziggysanchez said:

I needed the money that was in the Cirrus for our church building fund. When I sold it I had made an agreement with the new owner that would allow me to continue to fly it occasionally. That agreement quickly fell apart after the purchase was complete. A very good friend of mine didn't want me to be without and airplane and with the circumstances being what they were he purchased the K for me. I purchased Don Maxwell's N231JY. I use it primarily to travel for ministry work. That's the short version of the story.

 

Since purchasing the K on October 27th 2016 I have flown it for over 100 hours and have enjoyed it very much. I like the flight characteristics better than the Cirrus. I like the room in the Cirrus better than the K. The Cirrus was a very easy airplane to fly. People stall and spin Cirrus airplanes for the same reason they do any other airplane. Uncoordinated flight at too high of an angle of attack. Takeoffs in the Cirrus were easier. Landing the Mooney seems easier to me. I never have had trouble controlling the speed of either airplane. Pull power back and point the nose up and they both slow down fairly quickly. When I do buy a new airplane it will be a difficult choice between a Mooney or a Cirrus. Not have their pluses and minuses. 

 

Sorry if if there are lots of mispellings. I am trying to respond from my phone and I have fat fingers. Lol.

That's a cool story.  So may I summarize?  You traded in the Cirrus for an M20K and a Church!

[AH-1 Cobra Pilot]

4 hours ago, Zwaustin said:

For what it's worth; the other day I rode in a 2015 SR22T platinum G5....

This one is slightly older, but a bargain in comparison:  http://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=MOONEY&model=ACCLAIM+TYPE+S&listing_id=2197288&s-type=aircraft

You should get a discount on the sales price for leaving the advertising in place.  The only thing I cannot figure out is why you would have A/C but not TKS ice protection?

[Danb]

Notice the UL. 870

[Samurai Husky]

As a SR22 owner i should probably say something.

Something.....

 

[Robert C.]

1 hour ago, aviatoreb said:

Not passing the spin test meant it didn't need to demonstrate spin recovery since the chute it the plan B instead.  But whether a plane is spin recoverable or not is not relevant if you spin anything at pattern altitude.

If a Cirrus were more prone to a spin - which I have no idea if it is or isn't, that would be another thing than demonstrating spin recovery that the chute allowed them to skip.

I'm with Erik on this one. It is important to not keep perpetuating unsubstantiated and disproven rumors. The Cirrus could pass the spin test just fine and was regularly spun during certification. They sensibly chose not to spend the time and dollars to get the spin cert given the technical and marketing advantage of the chute.  'nough said.