First Time Buyer Living Out West Looking For Advice!

[KLRDMD]

28 minutes ago, mccdeuce said:

You are correct that for the most part he doesn't need a turbo. My J will do just fine for the occasional trip that I need to get to 8k. 

In AZ/NV we *rarely* cruise below 10,000 ft. It is just too bumpy down low and the rocks are too high.

[peevee]

Just now, KLRDMD said:

I've helped two people find and buy turbo Mooneys so far this year. One paid under $70k for a nice 231 and the other paid just a hair over $100k for a nice 252.

This was my experience selling our old k. The k market is pretty flat.

[bonal]

Please keep your voice down I would not want my little C to get any bad ideas 

[Zwaustin]

21 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

I've helped two people find and buy turbo Mooneys so far this year. One paid under $70k for a nice 231 and the other paid just a hair over $100k for a nice 252.

You may have but both those are on the lower end of the market. "Nice" is very, very relative. For example, you don't get tks, aspen 1000 pro, a sub 300 hour engine, Garmin with waas, adsb out, fully coupled auto pilot, mooney service center maintained, great paint and a solid interior for 70k in a 231. Same goes for the 252 price mentioned above. I hate to see someone buying a first plane go cheap and spend more than needed in first year or two of ownership. Plenty of cheap average planes out there but to each his own. 

[Zwaustin]

29 minutes ago, peevee said:

This was my experience selling our old k. The k market is pretty flat.

It can be when they have average appointments and there are plenty of very average planes out there begging to be sold. I sold my 231 in a week for just about full asking after talking to 8 interested parties. Was priced fair but on the upper end of the market at well over 110k.

[KLRDMD]

Just now, Zwaustin said:

You may have but both those are on the lower end of the market. "Nice" is very, very relative. For example, you don't get tks, aspen 1000 pro, a sub 300 hour engine, Garmin with waas, adsb out, fully coupled auto pilot, mooney service center maintained, great paint and a solid interior for 70k in a 231. Same goes for the 252 price mentioned above. I hate to see someone buying a first plane go cheap and spend more than needed in first year or two of ownership. Plenty of cheap average planes out there but to each his own. 

Of course not but both of these are very solid airplanes, with reasonable avionics, no damage history, no corrosion, decent paint and interior, good maintenance history, etc. They both have King autopilots, King HSIs, speed brakes, built in oxygen, automatic waste gates, intercoolers, Garmin 430s. Good solid airplanes. Not top of the line for that purchase price but very reasonable for most buyers.

[gsxrpilot]

@KLRDMD maybe I should have talked to you when I was shopping for a 252. Actually, I'm pretty happy with mine. I could have done without the tank corrosion issue, but there really wasn't anyway to find it without stripping the tanks. I would say I'll reach out to you when I'm looking for the next plane. But as I'm flying a 252 now... this might be my last airplane. 

Or at least I'm spending on upgrades for it, like it is my last plane.

[KLRDMD]

5 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

@KLRDMD maybe I should have talked to you when I was shopping for a 252.

I'm happy to help anyone looking for an airplane. I've mentioned that before and had a handful of people contact me. Mostly it is one PM exchange and I never hear from them again.

[kortopates]

1 hour ago, KLRDMD said:

They both have ... automatic waste gates, ...

Small point, but there is no such think as a automatic wategate on the 231 unless its a 262 conversion with an -MB engine. A pneumatic wastegate is a far cry from an automatic wategate like you had in your Bravo and perhaps others.

But otherwise you are making very excellent points about the utility of turbo for a Vegas based plane; especially during the hot summer when a 200HP NA bird will have a very anemic climb rate. Add in some midday turbulence and its gets painful.

With lots of time in the Arrow,  I would especially drop that aircraft if I lived there for summer time ops. The airplane is a real dog with any DA. Just look in the POH for its gear down ceiling limit to get an idea.   

Edited May 1, 2017 by kortopates

[thinwing]

2 hours ago, KLRDMD said:

In AZ/NV we *rarely* cruise below 10,000 ft. It is just too bumpy down low and the rocks are too high.

My wife insists it's best between 13/15 k...

[TTaylor]

17,500 over Yosemite.

[gsxrpilot]

And here's Yosemite from FL210 at 235kts. It's good to be up high.

[Bob - S50]

My $0.02 worth.

I've got a J and had no problem getting up to 11500' when I needed it.  The MEA's between Las Vegas and LA/San Diego are 10,000' or less.  If you are VFR you'll be able to go even lower.  If you get a turbo and plan to cruise above 12,500' are you and your passengers willing to suck on oxygen while you do that?  While the turbo will get you to altitude quicker, is it worth the extra expense and reduced payload?  There are planes other than Mooney and Piper to consider:

Bonanza.  Potentially faster but at a higher burn rate so not quite as economical but still very good.  Just watch the CG.  Before you buy one, ask to see the W&B, then run a few sample loadings to make sure you will be able to fly.  Many have aft CG issues.  10 ktas faster than the J?

Comanche.  Bigger payload but a bit slower than the Mooney at the same fuel flow.  Or faster at a higher fuel flow.

182RG.  About the same speed as the Mooney but at a higher fuel flow.  More weight carrying capacity.  Famous Cessna gear issues.  O-470 (no fuel injection) so you may not be able to run LOP and you'll have to worry about carb ice.

Cardinal RG.  Slower still.  Famous Cessna gear issues.  Easy entry/exit.  Nice for sightseeing.  I think it is one of the prettiest airplanes flying.  High wing blocks your view into a turn though.  Possible forward CG issues.  10 - 15 ktas slower than the J.  About 5 slower than an E or F.

Piper Arrow.  Even slower than the Cardinal.  About 5 slower than the Cardinal, 15 - 20 slower than the J.

Rockwell Commander 112.  Slowest of the bunch but a large cabin.  I believe the airframe also has a hourly lifetime limit.  About 5 slower than the Arrow.

For your money I think you could get a pretty nicely equipped J or a very nicely equipped E or F.  I just wouldn't want one of the E or F aircraft unless it had a new panel with a standard 6 pack layout (just a personal preference).  For trips of 300 miles, 10 knots will only cost you 10 minutes and bragging rights.

[thinwing]

12 hours ago, bonal said:

Please keep your voice down I would not want my little C to get any bad ideas 

Very photogenic....of course not taken this year !Looks like your right down in the dirt and those little puffy clouds say bouncy ride.

[KLRDMD]

11 minutes ago, Bob - S50 said:

I've got a J and had no problem getting up to 11500' when I needed it. 

Of course a J *can* get to 11,500 ft, when you need it. In NV, he'll need it on almost every flight though.

I've noticed the people recommending normally aspirated mostly live at sea level and only once in a while go above 8,000 ft.

It is a different thing entirely taking off in 115º heat with a DA of 6,000 ft while you're still on the runway. At just over pattern altitude, your normally aspirated airplane is already losing performance. I know I don't want to be climbing over the mountains in 115º heat clawing myself up at 300 fpm. Give me a turbo and 1,000 fpm climb to where the air is cool and smooth.

YES, a normally aspirated airplane *can* do this mission, no one is arguing that. But a turbo is really most appropriate. And the OP's budget allows a turbo - let the man buy what he needs instead of recommending what you fly. Just because what you own is the best airplane for you doesn't mean it is the best airplane for him.

[thinwing]

1 hour ago, gsxrpilot said:

And here's Yosemite from FL210 at 235kts. It's good to be up high.

Lidat...I have had that routing west to east so many times...

[KLRDMD]

10 hours ago, kortopates said:

Small point, but there is no such think as a automatic wategate on the 231 unless its a 262 conversion with an -MB engine. A pneumatic wastegate is a far cry from an automatic wategate like you had in your Bravo and perhaps others.

 I did notice that the "automatic waste gate" (obviously after market) on the 231 didn't behave as I anticipated it would. I've had a Bravo as you recall and also my P337 had an automatic waste gate from the factory. My Seneca III did not have one nor does my current 231. My "F" model Mooney had a RayJay manual turbo.

Would you review what's available for our Mooneys and how each is different ?

[Bob - S50]

7 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

I've noticed the people recommending normally aspirated mostly live at sea level and only once in a while go above 8,000 ft.

I live in the Seattle area and cross the Cascades quite frequently.  My favorite cruising altitudes are between 6500' and 10,500'.  I've also flown out of Longmont, CO (field elevation of 5055') a couple times in June and had no problem getting airborne, even when heavy.  I've even stopped for gas at Rock Springs, WY (field elevation of 6765') for gas in late May and the only problem was the wind.  Hey, if a Cessna 150 can do it, so can I.

Climb rate will also depend on weight.  An E, F, or J with two souls and 40 gallons of fuel will be hundreds of pounds below gross and will climb much better than one at max gross. 

The OP can buy what he wants.  Many of us are just pointing out that while a turbo might be nice, he certainly does not need it.

[KLRDMD]

1 minute ago, Bob - S50 said:

Many of us are just pointing out that while a turbo might be nice, he certainly does not need it.

He doesn't *need* an airplane at all. Since he *wants* an airplane why not buy the one that is most appropriate for him ? A turbo is a lot more than just *nice* living in the desert southwest. It adds significant comfort and safety.

[gsxrpilot]

I've flown a C out of Phoenix and out of Seattle... there's a huge difference. In the desert southwest, you're gonna want a turbo, or you're just not gonna fly 6 months of the year. While it can be done, it's just a miserable experience.

[gsengle]

He is talking about Utah. Lowest MEAs I see are 11,5? Many up around 13?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oldguy]

So I love my J, but as someone pointed out, those of us living closer to sea level in flatter areas of the country like the 8,000 to 10,000 altitudes for our NA planes. At least I do.

Someone also pointed out the oxygen need at the higher altitudes. I am not sure about the number of J's with oxygen, but is seems almost every K I see has it as part of the list of items built into the plane. Unless the OP wants to lug around a portable tank for those trips where he might need/want to get over some bad air or weather, a built-in system would seem to be preferable. A K would also seem to fit in the price range he set in his post.

As for low-time, I am one of those who started out in my Mooney with slightly over 125 hours. It took about 10 hours of transition training, but with the Mooney, I had the opportunity to fly more so the hours added up fairly quickly. I will also be going to my second MAPA Safety Foundation PPP this year (I recommend this for new Mooney pilots).

I am slightly biased, but I think the Mooney, and likely the K model, will suit your mission better than the other options you listed. Good luck in finding your plane, and keep us informed of your search. We love to spend OPM!

[SkyDweller]

Thanks again!

Most people have absolutely no idea how hot and humid it gets in the Mojave Desert in the summer!  And, like KLRDMD so aptly pointed out, "the rocks are high too".  Maintenance for a K looks like it will be substantially more money according to the linked article below, but performance looks considerably better as well...especially in the area I would need it the most; climbs.  I'd hate to spend $100K on a J and have it perform like a dog over the desert. If I lived almost anywhere else in the country, the J would be a no-brainer.
http://www.mooneypilots.com/mapalog/M20K231 Eval Files/M20K231_Eval.htm

[peevee]

1 hour ago, gsxrpilot said:

I've flown a C out of Phoenix and out of Seattle... there's a huge difference. In the desert southwest, you're gonna want a turbo, or you're just not gonna fly 6 months of the year. While it can be done, it's just a miserable experience.

I love the "I did it one time so it's fine" argument from the na guys.

[Oldguy]

8 minutes ago, SkyDweller said:

Thanks again!

Most people have absolutely no idea how hot and humid it gets in the Mojave Desert in the summer!  And, like KLRDMD so aptly pointed out, "the rocks are high too".  Maintenance for a K looks like it will be substantially more money according to the linked article below, but performance looks considerably better as well...especially in the area I would need it the most; climbs.  I'd hate to spend $100K on a J and have it perform like a dog over the desert. If I lived almost anywhere else in the country, the J would be a no-brainer.
http://www.mooneypilots.com/mapalog/M20K231 Eval Files/M20K231_Eval.htm

I would not go so far as to say it would be the same as a J, but until you get into the turbo and engine parts replacements, it can be very similar according to my K-flier friends. A good pre-purchase inspection (PPI) might limit the initial annual cost and help you plan for some future expenses.

Also, throw out some of the equipment/features/avionics you would like to see on your plane. One of us may know of one coming up for sale or already on the market fitting your wish list.