Shadrach Posted March 6, 2017 Report Share Posted March 6, 2017 1 hour ago, Bob_Belville said: Alternator, starter, muffler and fuel servo can all be removed/replaced without removing the lower cowl on my E model. Perhaps they should have riveted it in place rather than make it removable... Is there any maintenace that you can think of that requires removal of the lower cowl? I've done all of those jobs. I misspoke about the gen/alternator, that is removable from the right side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salty Posted March 6, 2017 Report Share Posted March 6, 2017 (edited) I had to remove the lower to replace the starter on my c. It had been a LONG time since it had been off, I fixed up a lot while I was in there. It took me a lot longer than 2 hours to remove with guidance from my a&p, but I knew nothing. A proper mech could do it in 2 easily. Edited March 6, 2017 by salty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Belville Posted March 6, 2017 Report Share Posted March 6, 2017 26 minutes ago, Shadrach said: Is there any maintenace that you can think of that requires removal of the lower cowl? It came off when we removed the engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peevee Posted March 6, 2017 Report Share Posted March 6, 2017 lower cowl on our K comes off in about 15 minutes with two people? Had it off for oil change yesterday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonMuncy Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 Both top and bottom off in about 10 to 15 minutes by myself. Back on takes about 15 to 20 (although I haven't timed myself). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guitarmaster Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 I can't speak to the Jay model, but completely decowling an F model top and bottom could easily take two shop hours for someone that doesn't do it all the time. The top and sides can be done in about 5 to 10 minutes. The lower cowling takes considerably more time. One would need to remove the oil cooler from the cowling, the intake duct, the ram air cable, oil feed for the prop governor must be removed from the engine is threaded through the front cowl cover which is connected to the internal baffle seals. Various drains need to be removed as well as the cowl flaps disconnected. It is indeed true that completely decowling a Mooney engine from the firewall forward is not a quick task. Maybe not two hours for experienced mechanic, but it takes time. I can decowl my '75 F in 45 minutes flat! Of course, the first time was like four hours. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guitarmaster Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 Perhaps they should have riveted it in place rather than make it removable... Is there any maintenace that you can think of that requires removal of the lower cowl? I've done all of those jobs. I misspoke about the gen/alternator, that is removable from the right side. How about inspecting the muffler fur cracks?Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadrach Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Guitarmaster said: How about inspecting the muffler fur cracks? Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk Appearently there is no job that can't be completed with it in place. All the hubbub about the Mooney engine compartment being more challenging to work on in some ways is much ado about nothing. Easy access! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadrach Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 On 3/6/2017 at 5:37 PM, Bob_Belville said: It came off when we removed the engine. Why did he bother? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Fox Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Shadrach said: Appearently there is no job that can't be completed with it in place. All the hubbub about the Mooney engine compartment being more challenging to work on in some ways is much ado about nothing. Easy access! How about 6 seconds.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadrach Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 6 hours ago, Alan Fox said: How about 6 seconds.... Alan, that's not decowled. I'll grant you it offeres quick acces to a significant part of the engine bay and the hinged doors are nice, but it is not decowled. This thread has been an anecdotal study in the capacity of humans to interprit meaning and define words in a statement as they choose with merely a nod toward what the statement actually said. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Fox Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 31 minutes ago, Shadrach said: Alan, that's not decowled. I'll grant you it offeres quick acces to a significant part of the engine bay and the hinged doors are nice, but it is not decowled. This thread has been an anecdotal study in the capacity of humans to interprit meaning and define words in a statement as they choose with merely a nod toward what the statement actually said. Add 2 minutes a side to remove the lower cheeks ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takair Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 The 64s and older have to be the worst for access. As others said, the cowl sides are screwed in. I can change the oil and filter by only removing the side cowls. In fact, I can do most work, including exhaust inspection, alternator replacement, etc through the side cowl. That said, it is a "choose your poison" effort. It does not make it fun either way. I try to keep the bottom cowl on to extend the life of the air inlet boot. They take the most damage during maintenance. Removing the oil cooler every time also sets you up for more frequent potential cracking of the cooler flanges. So, while all of these things are possible, I can appreciate the "stigma" that the Mooney is tightly cowled and more difficult to work on. Would love to have one of the newer two piece cowls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danb Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 Alan you can use the extra time to catch up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 On 3/2/2017 at 9:10 PM, Alan Fox said: For some people its about flying , not how fast they can get there ...... Imagine that , Flying ???????? I don't understand. Can you please explain? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsxrpilot Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 The cowl on my '64 C was a bitch to remove. And there were screws to replace every time it came off. With the 252, the top cowl takes 30 seconds and the bottom takes 2 minutes... if you have help... Of course this only affects/benefits my mechanic. And I like my mechanic, and so it's good to be nice to him/her. But the difficulty or ease of getting under the cowl really doesn't affect me.... except for the added time/cost... but with all the costs involved in this little hobby, I think it adds up to a rounding error and no more In the end, I like flying a slick, fast, efficient, airplane. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris_adams Posted March 7, 2017 Report Share Posted March 7, 2017 11 hours ago, Alan Fox said: How about 6 seconds.... One of my favorite things of the Bo's...wish I had better viability of the entire engine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Pavinich Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Our M20J well I better include M20F and E models as well since this may be applicable food for thought question for them as well. As it stands our M20J / M20F / and M20E with the 200 HP engine are not high performance since the FAA changed the regulation to read you must have OVER 200 HP --- meaning 201 horse power or greater to meet the classification. My question is let take the following scenario: You have the 200HP engine and add-on modifications are installed and the engine is now producing more than 200HP --- would that count? To be a smart butt, in theory, you should only need to produce 200.1 HP since it is greater than 200HP. So the question is if the engine is producing more than 200HP based on add-on / modifications does it now meat the FAA classification for high performance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooniac15u Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 17 minutes ago, Mark Pavinich said: Our M20J well I better include M20F and E models as well since this may be applicable food for thought question for them as well. As it stands our M20J / M20F / and M20E with the 200 HP engine are not high performance since the FAA changed the regulation to read you must have OVER 200 HP --- meaning 201 horse power or greater to meet the classification. My question is let take the following scenario: You have the 200HP engine and add-on modifications are installed and the engine is now producing more than 200HP --- would that count? To be a smart butt, in theory, you should only need to produce 200.1 HP since it is greater than 200HP. So the question is if the engine is producing more than 200HP based on add-on / modifications does it now meat the FAA classification for high performance? What sort of modification would make our IO-360's produce more than 200HP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtVandelay Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 What sort of modification would make our IO-360's produce more than 200HP? Power flow exhaust and io-390 come to mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooniac15u Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Just now, teejayevans said: Power flow exhaust and io-390 come to mind. Power Flow exhaust doesn't increase the HP of the engine it only allows you to take advantage of a higher percentage of the horsepower. The IO-390 is a different engine. Swapping out the engine is not a modification of the IO-360. Switching to the IO-390 is fundamentally no different than doing the Missile conversion. It requires an STC and makes it a high performance aircraft. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted March 9, 2017 Report Share Posted March 9, 2017 (edited) Since you are stating FAA rules... use the 200hp rating to avoid needing the additional high power training. On the other hand, on the really cold days when the density altitude is below SL, you are producing a lot more than 201 hp... Still no additional training required... High power Complex Back in the day they were one add-on... A modern 300hp engine mounted on a Mooney isn't much different than the older 200hp engine. There are some issues to be aware of. A good day of transition training covers these things. Accidentally having too much HP takes a similar amount of knowledge as not having enough HP. Knowing your density altitude performance numbers is important for both... How the government and engine builders and marketing organizations rate the HP of an engine is interesting. Best regards, -a- Edited March 9, 2017 by carusoam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HRM Posted March 9, 2017 Report Share Posted March 9, 2017 On 3/6/2017 at 9:34 AM, AndyFromCB said: I'm sorry Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted March 9, 2017 Report Share Posted March 9, 2017 Seems more like there should be special transition training for too little horsepower as much as too much horsepower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted March 9, 2017 Report Share Posted March 9, 2017 (edited) 6 hours ago, aviatoreb said: Seems more like there should be special transition training for too little horsepower. . . This is generally referred to as "the tailwheel endorsement." Edited March 9, 2017 by Hank 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.