This is why I upgraded from a "J' to a "K"

[KSMooniac]

I'd suggest you PM Parker Woodruff and let him give you the sales pitch.  He went from a J to a 252, and then converted it to the Encore configuration to get his useful load over 1000 lbs so the payload is roughly equivalent to a lightweight J, and better than many J's.  His K also happens to be for sale at the moment.

 

My take on it is that the Encore can't be beat for economical long XC travel.  The engine won't be as efficient as the J down low because the K has lower compression pistons, but if you travel long distances this will still pencil-out better when averaged as you should be able to get up high more often than not.

[Z W]

At 10,000 feet:

 

160 KTAS @ 11 GPH, about 65% power

175 KTAS @ 13 GPH, about 75% power

 

To sell you on it, you first must understand, the turbo is not about increasing your TAS at the cost of wearing oxygen.  

 

It's about increasing your groundspeed by gaining a 50 knot tailwind in the high teens, turning a 4-hour flight into a 3-hour flight.  It's about cruising in comfort in the teens when there's moderate turbulence to at 12k or below.  It's about taking off out of Jackson Hole,  Sante Fe, Telluride, or other high altitude airports at gross weight on a hot day and climbing at 750-1000 FPM until those 16,000-foot mountains no longer block your horizon.  

 

It's about flying in clear air at 17,000 feet, visually avoiding thunderstorm buildups, instead of being down at 10,000 feet, in the soup, hoping your Nexrad display or Stormscope is giving you accurate information about where those buildups are.  It's about when, at 10,000 feet, you start to pick up unforecasted ice, and you push in the throttle and have 100% engine power to either climb or maintain altitude while you perform a 180 degree turn.

 

Capability, not speed.

 

The downsides?  Some additional maintenance.  Probably largely avoided if you watch your temperatures. There will be an additional cost at overhaul time.  You have to watch more carefully for shock cooling coming down from the teens, and stay ahead of the plane, or you end up too fast and too high.  Not really a problem once you're used to it.

 

Just beware.  Once you've gone turbo, it's hard to go back.

[Piloto]

You can do the same numbers on a non-turbo Ovation.

 

José

[carusoam]

I like the 50kt tailwind option...

Best regards,

-a-

[SkyBound]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.  This is very helpful to a new K owner.  I have really enjoyed my transition from a C to a Turbo and glad that I skipped the J. 

 

What settings do you guys recommend for cruising a 231 with an LB engine, Intercooler and a Merlyn Wastegate?  Do most of you cruise in the 65% or 75% power range?

 

How often do you go into the flight levels vs. staying in the high teens?  I found that the TAS on my airplane is not that much faster at 19,000 vs. 15,000.  Would you only climb to the flight levels if the winds were more favorable?

 

Looking forward to the continued discussion.

 

--Alex

[Z W]

I stay at FL180 or below. I would go to about FL220 to top weather or possibly terrain (Aspen?), but otherwise I do not like being that high for long. This is your useful time of consciousness at those altitudes:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_of_useful_consciousness

 

At FL180, you have 20-30 minutes.  At FL220, you only have 5-10 minutes.  Not worth it to me for just a tailwind.  So far I've never needed to go that high.  If I did, I would be watching my pulse ox closely and being very careful not to crimp or pull on my oxygen hose.

 

Also, most cannulas are only certified to FL180.  To be legal higher means a mask.  My mask is uncomfortable.  Another reason to stay under FL180.

 

I use 65% power a lot of the time. It is a whole lot more economy for only a 10-15 knot speed loss. Sometimes I will go 75% if I am in a hurry or need to use the restroom

[skeptic]

It is a pretty hostile environment above FL180.  If you have a problem with your O2 system you will need to descend immediately, regardless of the weather or terrain below.  My personal opinion is that there is not much reason to cruise above FL180 in an M20K unless you are taking advantage of a spectacular tailwind, or trying to top some really uncomfortable weather.  Just make sure that you are willing to descend back down into that weather in an emergency.

[carusoam]

Anoxia is a terrible thing. By the time it is taking hold, it may affect your ability to know or do something about it, while all the time you will feel good about yourself.

So, when you are feeling good at high altitudes, check you pulseox often.

Have a back up system on board to keep from having to descend into terrible weather below.

More responsibilities to take advantage of more opportunities...

Best regards,

-a-

[Jsavage3]

Hypoxia is what to watch out for...

 

For you K drivers, I have been analyzing M20T flights on flight aware...was just curious as to how high and how fast you guys/gals are going on a given day.  I was surprised to realize that the vast majority of your flights occurred at or below 12,000 feet and the speeds were no faster than I see in my J.

 

Earlier, Zane had some comments for which I completely agree...top the turb, it's nice for mountain airports, grab that strong tailwind, etc...got it, but just how often is one REALLY using a K for what a K was designed for?  I've had my J up to 13,000 and she loved it -- handled it fine.  I strongly suspect that with a portable O2 bottle in hand, 15k or so would not be out of the question...again, for turb avoidance, grab some tailwind, etc.  One lives in the mountains, of course, a K is the only way to go...but it doesn't mean one cannot take a normally-aspirated J into the mountains on occasion, it just means one has to be more cautious...but there are other threads for that topic...

 

So here we go...the K has higher purchase price, higher mx costs, burns more fuel, generally has lower useful load, etc -- it comes down to one's mission, sure, but for a J driver considering taking the leap into a K, is it really worth it in the long run.  I've heard folks say, "once they've had the K, they won't go back to the J"...  Now that that can of worms is open, I'll be happy to hear your feedback.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Jsavage3

[DonMuncy]

Having a turbo is like having on-board weather. Ninety-five percent of the time, it makes absolutely no difference (or actually, when you count in costs, as Jsavage3 points out, a negative value), but when you really need it, it is invaluable.

[Z W]

90% of my flights could probably be completed in a $25k Cessna 150 with a VOR/GS radio and a few extra days off work. It is all relative. Pick your price point and have fun. If your price point could include a turbo, do it. You only live once, and I will bet you never regret it. My best flying memories are up over 12k. Ground speeds, weather avoidance, mountain flying. But then, if you like your J, by all means, keep it. It probably can make 100% of the same trips as a K. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[fantom]

I think some of us take umbrage at the title of this thread.

 

A turbo Mooney is a fine plane, and in my estimation it's different than a J or any other Mooney for that matter, not an upgrade. Every model has it's pro's and con's, and one's typical mission profile is usually the deciding factor.

 

But if it makes you turbo drivers feel better that it's an upgrade no problem, but if you really wanted an upgrade you should of gotten a TBM-850.

[Parker_Woodruff]

The turbo will spoil you.  Operated correctly, it will not require that much extra maintenance.  It will give you significantly more capability and more options in your travel.

 

I live at near sea level and still see significant advantage in time to climb, cruise speed, and getting up to smooth air and cooler temps in the summer.

[fantom]

The turbo will spoil you.

....and what will your next plane be?

[Riq]

I have a turbo normalizer on my C and I really enjoy the utility and power it adds when needed. 

 

I feel like I have the best of both worlds being I can never use it if I want, or crank it on when needed. Plus, its a  super reliable engine.

[Earl]

I agree with Parker.  You will feel the turbo kick in when you are departing and it is especially useful on those hot days in the summer when density altitude is an issue.  Quicker climbs means sooner to cool temps and low-power settings.  I usually fly in the low teens and while that doesn't take full advantage of tailwinds when heading east it works for me and gets me above the haze in the summer.

[Parker_Woodruff]

....and what will your next plane be?

 

...hopefully it'll be a job flying someone else's TBM.

[jackn]

My wife says there are 'niceties and there are necessities'. A new kitchen in her mind is a necessity, a new panel would be mine.

[fantom]

...hopefully it'll be a job flying someone else's TBM.

 

I like that kind of thinking!

[bumper]

I've had my '87 J since '91. It's still is my first Mooney. I lived at sea level back then and looked for a normally aspirated plane. Now I fly out of Minden, NV, 4730'. We've been to 16K with not a lot of climb left. Regularly go to the lower teens crossing the Sierra. There are times a turbo would be nice, but for my flying, the J is efficient, has low maintenance cost, and has been solidly dependable.

 

I did give her a brand new A3B6 and PowerFlow exhaust, both of which bumped TAS up a few knots. I'm convinced all the engine parts will arrive at or beyond TBO together. . . something I've heard is not so likely to happen with the jugs on Continentals.

 

I'll be keeping my "downgrade" J I reckon.

[aaronk25]

If there are big tail winds up high I run my J upto 17k or 18k. Only a couple hundred Fpm climb but if I can make the J cross the ground at 200kts ill do it.

Keep in mind at 2700 rpms 80 ROP it still trues at 150kts, a far cry from 190kts.

I only do it by myself as at gross it would take forever and pax would have to use a bathroom before we got up there.

Takes about 30 mins to get there with full fuel and me. I only go that high if I know I'm gonna stay there for 3 plus hours.

[benpilot]

If I end up buying a Mooney, it will either be a 252, Bravo TLS, or Ovation. If I win the lottery then an Acclaim Type S and jet.

[Jsavage3]

Regarding the 252's mx costs, can any owner's report that they took their engine to TBO without replacing any cylinders?  

Typically, I'm a 65% power & 50 ROP kinda guy when it comes to running my J's engine and it's very efficient (about 9.5 GPH) and reasonably fast (157 to 161 KTAS) at those settings.  If one were to always run their 252 at 65% power (about 24" MP and 2500 RPM) and 50 rich of TIT in the low to mid teens, how likely or unlikely would it be for their engine to not require any new cylinders prior to TBO?

How about the turbocharger?  Is there a TBO for that?

I'm still looking...

 

[Zwaustin]

I recently bought a K and have put about 40 hours on it in a month and a half. Cant say enough good things about the plane so far. Been to Arizona and back to Texas in just under four hours each way. Bunch of local flights. So far so good. Best TAS I have seen yet is 178KTS at 17000 ft with no tail wind. Looking forward to many more trips and faster speeds with better winds. 

[Shadrach]

...I offer the following pictures as proof of the awsome performance of the older turbo Mooneys. 

 

205KTS @ 13K on 10 GPH.  I made it from Memphis, TN to Jacksonville, FL in just over 3 hours and it cost me about 100 bucks in fuel. Tons more leg room then in coach and the snacks were free   Delta doesn't even come close to touching that!

 

 

 

That is awesome. I can't wait to upgrade!

Oh wait... Box stock 67F! 

Level:

In descent:

 

Seriously though, I would love to have a turbo!!!

Edited September 17, 2015 by Shadrach