Jump to content

Mooney step up  

78 members have voted

  1. 1. Did you move up some letters in Mooney?

    • Yes, deliberately started earlier model with intent to move up
      6
    • Yes, inadvertently outgrew my older Mooney
      7
    • No, but I deliberately plan to
      4
    • No, I don't plan on it but it could happen
      27
    • No, I actually moved down some letters
      1
    • No, I am happy exactly with what I have
      33


Recommended Posts

Posted

A lot of talk on MSpace about guys reminiscing about the C/E model they had but moved up from. I'm curious just how many of you have moved up some letters in Mooney and why? 

Anyone started with later letters and moved to earlier letters?

Posted
1 minute ago, 201er said:

A lot of talk on MSpace about guys reminiscing about the C/E model they had but moved up from. I'm curious just how many of you have moved up some letters in Mooney and why? Anyone started with later letters and moved to earlier letters?

First: 1967 "C"

Second: 1989 "M"

Third: 1967 "F" (turbo)

Fourth (current): 1985 "K"

I moved up, down and up again (within the Mooney line, I've owned 10 other airplanes in there too). Three of my four, including the last three, have all been turbos.

  • Like 1
Posted

Started with the lowest cost Mooney for affordability while trying to determine how usable an airplane could be in my life.  

The reason for the first plane was to allow the grandkids to know their grandparents.  

I couldn't see two years into the future, nevermind ten years...

 

Since it worked out so well, it was easier to commit real money towards the next one...

Its like being a meatatarian, it takes a commitment.  :)

Go Mooney!  Whichever one meets your mission requirements...

Best regards,

-a-

Posted (edited)

I like my mooney - but I am getting frustrated as it is still in the paint shop - due to runway resurfacing delays!  Of all things.  If it were a helicopter I would have it back by now.

Edited by aviatoreb
Posted

I wanted an E for the longest time. But set myself a strict budget and decided a well equipped C was better than an average E. The reason for the budget was that with a first airplane, I wasn't sure how much I'd actually use it. I was thinking of boats that get used once on Memorial day and once on Labor day and then put away for the winter. But after 400 hours in 3 years, I was convinced I knew how to use an airplane. So then it was a matter of what can I actually afford. And I decided a 252 was the sweet spot for speed and affordability.

By the way @201er, I shot an approach almost to minimums today into KSWF with rapid fire NY ACT in my headset. For a slow talking Texan, it was quite the experience. 

  • Like 7
Posted

I absolutely had no idea how to vote.  First plane- M20C.  Second plane- PA23-250 Aztec.  Third plane- M20C.

Its the perfect airplane- for me.

Posted

I absolutely LOVE my Mooney, but I've always maintained the notion that it's a "compromise" airplane. I rarely fly solo. Almost always I shoot a text off to all my friends to go flying and we all split the cost of gas. So all four seats are filled. Granted we are all around FAA-size (150-190), room gets tight. So far on my two camping trips, I wish I had more room. And doing work inside the cowling compared to a Cherokee 180, it makes the Cherokee look like I could climb in the cowling to change the oil it has so much room.

Sorry guys, my next plane is a Lance :D Same speed as a Mooney, but a shit-load more room (I always fly full seats, I would love to have 2 more).

1323bdca3ea485765ac94208a95702bf.jpg

Hershey bar, straight tail. 300hp. 145-155kts @ 13 or 15gph, respectively. Club seating. Double cargo doors in the back. 1450-1650lbs useful load (before they got weighed down with the fancy stuff in the Saratoga). 94 gals total split between 4 tanks, but simple: the outers drain to the inners, so simple "left/right" selector in the center pedestal.

Speed is awesome, and since we are splitting the cost of gas, I would easily pay the 50% increase in fuel burn to go from squished insides to a carnivorous stretch limo with two baggage compartments. 

Posted
4 hours ago, Raptor05121 said:

...

Hershey bar, straight tail. 300hp. 145-155kts @ 13 or 15gph, respectively. Club seating. Double cargo doors in the back. 1450-1650lbs useful load (before they got weighed down with the fancy stuff in the Saratoga). 94 gals total split between 4 tanks, but simple: the outers drain to the inners, so simple "left/right" selector in the center pedestal.

Speed is awesome, and since we are splitting the cost of gas, I would easily pay the 50% increase in fuel burn to go from squished insides to a carnivorous stretch limo with two baggage compartments. 

Years ago I had a friend with a T-tail Lance that he rented to a limited number of pilots, maybe it was just me. I logged over 200 hours in it, mostly while owning a Mooney. I recall that it was not much fun to fly but comfortable enough. Sometimes you just need a station wagon. I would not say the speed is awesome, it's a little slower than a 200 HP Mooney on 50% more fuel.

Posted
Just now, Bob_Belville said:

no

Why not?  Many people say Piper copied Mooney and improved it.  

Clarence

Posted

In 1985 bought a 1977 J

In 1988 bought a 1988 J

In 2006 bought a 2005 Bravo 

Moved from plane to plane on impulse, if I'm in line at the market I'm the one to but the snickers bar.

 

 

  • Like 3
Posted
1 hour ago, M20Doc said:

Why not?  Many people say Piper copied Mooney and improved it.  

Clarence

Haven't met those folks yet 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, M20Doc said:

Why not?  Many people say Piper copied Mooney and improved it.  

Clarence

Many people?  I want citations or it doesn't count.

Posted

I fly an M20c and I love it. Better mileage than most cars on the road, and doing it going 160 miles an hour!  Moreover, just about all the systems are stone simple, so there really isn't that much to break.  I love mine, and need little else.

  • Like 3
Posted

My Mooney C is a point to point airplane covering kids/grandkids in the SE.  A faster Mooney might save me a few minutes at a significant increase in cost.

For other missions, no Mooney woud suffice since they are not aerobatic.  I own an experimental that fills that slot.

I'm happy with my C.

  • Like 3
Posted

Just wondering why your curious. As for me it would take a significant jump in performance to move up like a 252 or a Bravo both are way out of my financial league. We are very happy with our C as it performs our mission quite well thank you.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Bob_Belville said:

Years ago I had a friend with a T-tail Lance that he rented to a limited number of pilots, maybe it was just me. I logged over 200 hours in it, mostly while owning a Mooney. I recall that it was not much fun to fly but comfortable enough. Sometimes you just need a station wagon. I would not say the speed is awesome, it's a little slower than a 200 HP Mooney on 50% more fuel.

C to F speed, an extra 150 lb or so of "stuff," and for only Bravo fuel!  ;)

Edited by Hank
  • Like 2
Posted (edited)

I went from a 1967 M20F to a 1983 M20J Missile 300.

148 knots to 185+

Both have  over 1000 lbs useful load.

Missile has more speed, autopilot, moving map waas GPS, six pack, HSI, better paint and interior, fully feathering prop, extended range tanks.

F was 148-152 depending on Ram air and temp all out.

The Missile is 190 if I want to burn up the engine - 191 is the best I've seen flat out for a cardinal direction speed run and average check.  Around 20 GPH.  That will burn up the engine.

Both are best between 7000 and 9000 or so.  The Missile is much better fuel burn wise at altitude.  Higher is better.

I normally fly between 170 and 180 true for 11.5-15 GPH depending on altitude to keep the aircraft more economical.

My F was a 4-10 year first aircraft.  Did not know what I'd upgrade to when I bought it.  Looks at what upgrading would cost in year 3 vs the final value so I sold the F and upgraded with what I'd spend on the upgrade costs and got a baby Ovation in the Missile.  Climbs better because it's lighter.

 

I was not sure what brand I'd upgrade to but the intent was to upgrade.  My 4-10 year plan lasted 3 years.  It's been 6 in the Missile now.

I miss the light tough of the F, the manual gear and flaps (though I like the electric gear and flaps of the Missile), the fuel burn, lower engine and insurance costs.

Next aircraft will be pressurized and I'll keep the Missile.

-Seth

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Seth
  • Like 1
Posted

I'd love to have club seating and pressurization and the same or close to the same speed. Oh, and deice boots. That's all I ask for. Anyone got a spare million?

  • Like 2

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.