Questions about a M20j for sale.

[carusoam]

In that case, single engine turbine has got to be good...  

Need to see what Tom's Turbine Lancair UL is...

Best regards,

-a-

[KLRDMD]

1 hour ago, 201er said:

Insurance is 3x+ as much even with loads of twin time.

No it is not !!! I'm currently paying $2,030 for $125k hull value on my 231 ($16.24/$1000). I just got a quote for $2,676 for a Cessna 340A with a hull value of $150k ($17.84/$1000). That's a pressurized twin. Not pressurized, like a Baron or 310 for the same hull value will be about the same as my 231. I've provided actual data, hard #s. Please stop spreading ridiculous rumors !

[KLRDMD]

1 hour ago, jetdriven said:

Bonanzas about 125$ per hour airplane but a Baron is more like 300$+  those are both with no breakdowns or upgrades.

Simply not true.

[jetdriven]

20 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

Simply not true.

then what are they then? I'd like to see. I  know a mooney M20J is ~34$/hr plus gas. Plus about 8-10k a year. That's no improvements and no breakdowns. A Bonanza is a little higher mostly due to fuel cost. 

Another friend of mine got a great deal on a 340, then he dumped over 100k on maintenance on it in a couple years. That's not improvements  or new engines, just repairs. 

Edited July 30, 2017 by jetdriven

[KLRDMD]

Just now, jetdriven said:

then what are they then? I'd like to see. I  know a mooney M20J is ~34$/hr plus gas. Plus about 8-10k a year. That's no improvements and no breakdowns. A Bonanza is a little higher mostly due to fuel cost. 

For the same hull value, insurance and hangar are identical. Oil changes were the same amount in my turbo single or N/A twin due to 25 versus 50 hour intervals. A Baron will burn 24 GPH for 185 KTAS and will climb out initially at at least 1,500 fpm decreasing to 1,000 fpm at altitude (half tanks, solo and in the winter I routinely initially pegged my VSI of 4,000 fpm in my Colemill Baron). vRef gives roughly $30/hour for engine and airframe reserves on a Mooney 231 and $40/hour on a Cessna 310.

As I have written, real life, there's about a 30% differential. It absolutely in no way approaches even 50%.

[carusoam]

Ken,

any issues, for you, staying current with the twin?

Losing a twin locally, flipped, single engine out with two aboard...

Keeps me thinking...   single turbine.  

Best regards,

-a-

[KLRDMD]

Just now, carusoam said:

any issues, for you, staying current with the twin? Losing a twin locally, flipped, single engine out with two aboard... Keeps me thinking...   single turbine.  

Appropriate recurrent training needs to be part of every competent pilot's plan.

[jetdriven]

13 hours ago, KLRDMD said:

For the same hull value, insurance and hangar are identical. Oil changes were the same amount in my turbo single or N/A twin due to 25 versus 50 hour intervals. A Baron will burn 24 GPH for 185 KTAS and will climb out initially at at least 1,500 fpm decreasing to 1,000 fpm at altitude (half tanks, solo and in the winter I routinely initially pegged my VSI of 4,000 fpm in my Colemill Baron). vRef gives roughly $30/hour for engine and airframe reserves on a Mooney 231 and $40/hour on a Cessna 310.

As I have written, real life, there's about a 30% differential. It absolutely in no way approaches even 50%.

So double the fuel burn, twice as many engines as a Mooney, not to mention the myriad of systems that come with twins such as boots, more expensive props, radar, on and on.   Our 34$/hr rate doesn't include any cost for annuals, which average out around 2k, meanwhile a Baron or 310 is going to be 2-3x that. Usually more than that with repairs. 20$ of that is engines.  Another 14$ for vacuum pumps, tires, spark plugs, mags (500hr), radio depreciation and a couple bucks for paint. And this is a simple airplane.  So jus take that and add another 20$ to that and double the fuel bill, but wait, there's more. We've also sprung 15k for unexpected repairs in the past 5 years,  plus a 34k engine unexpectedly. My Aerostar, 340, and 421 friends have shelled out over 100k each, actually that much in one year, each.   The Aerostar guy sold it and bought a Baron 58. Nice airplane it has more useful and more seats but is no faster than your 231 above 10K and it's a 28gph airplane. It is nice though.  But I'm out 14kfor the year to fly 100 hours and he spends 2-3x that. If you got it, smoke it.  But I can't see how you can add 20$/hr to a 231 and push a Baron through the sky for a year

just in DOC alone a 231 is ~35-40 plus gas, 12 gph that's 83-88$.

310 or Baron .that twice the gas and 60$ for airplane time.  That's 156$ before insurance hangar or a single hour of labor. That can't be cheaper. 

Edited July 30, 2017 by jetdriven

[N201MKTurbo]

13 hours ago, KLRDMD said:

No, they aren't.  I've owned four twins and ten singles over 2,000+ hours and 20+ years of flying so I have more than a little direct, long term knowledge of the issue. 

I change oil at 25 hours on my turbo singles (almost all of my singles have been turbo, and will be turbos) and 50 hours on normally aspirated engines (most of my twins are normally aspirated). That's a wash. My twins fit in the same hangar as I've kept my singles. That's a wash. Insurance is based almost exclusively on hull value at this point in my flying career. That's a wash. Twins burn more fuel in climb and cruise, true, but they also climb at a MUCH greater rate and cruise faster so the fuel per given trip is about 30% more. Normally aspirated engines, even two of them aren't tremendously more to overhaul than one turbo single. I've never paid a landing fee in my life and while it may be true that overnight fees are 50% higher in a twin, we're talking $15/night versus $10/night - not breaking the bank there.

Since I've actually been there and done that with both singles and twins, I feel confident in my 30% differential - at least for singles and twins that I've actually owned and flown.

The 310 they have been working on down there burns 26 GPH to do 185 KTS. That isn't significantly faster than your 231 at more than twice the fuel burn. It was cheap to buy because they are so uneconomical.

I thought you loved your Mooney?

[Alan Fox]

17 hours ago, carusoam said:

In that case, single engine turbine has got to be good...  

Need to see what Tom's Turbine Lancair UL is...

Best regards,

-a-

the rule of thumb is turboprops run about ten times more to operate than pistons , and jets ten times that of turboprops.....  I see the costs involved in the maintenance of turboprops , but have no direct on the jets , but it sounds about right

 

[KLRDMD]

5 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I thought you loved your Mooney?

I do, I just don't love the 892 lb useful load. I may keep it and make it work, or I may get something else with greater useful load. Sorting through the options . . .

[carusoam]

Acclaim...

All Mooney...

All Power...

All altitude...

Decent UL compared to the Ks

But Easy to overload with options.  AC, FIKI, built in O2.

Lots of space for instruments and color screens...

Plenty of fancy seating...

Best regards,

-a-

[Guest paulie]

A friend had a Cherokee 6 but just had to have a twin, bought a Aztec. Regretted it within a month. To me the ultimate would be a single turboprop. Nothing like a turbine when the weather goes south.

[KLRDMD]

11 hours ago, paulie said:

A friend had a Cherokee 6 but just had to have a twin, bought a Aztec. Regretted it within a month. To me the ultimate would be a single turboprop. Nothing like a turbine when the weather goes south.

If you have a spare three quarters of million dollars laying around for purchase price for a low end one and $100k/year to operate it, I agree SETPs are great.

[kevinw]

On 7/29/2017 at 5:01 PM, KLRDMD said:

That's the reason I'm kinda, sorta looking at twins again. The useful load limitations has been an issue too many times. 

co2bruce has his '99 Screaming Eagle for sale. He's asking $165K and it has a UL of 1142. This has to be the highest UL in a Mooney I've ever come across. Not a turbo, of course, but may be worth considering.

[KLRDMD]

24 minutes ago, kevinw said:

co2bruce has his '99 Screaming Eagle for sale. He's asking $165K and it has a UL of 1142. This has to be the highest UL in a Mooney I've ever come across. Not a turbo, of course, but may be worth considering.

No question that's a great airplane. It is in the back of my mind. "True cruise at 185 kts at 8000 on 17gps. Great useful load." I assume he means GPH  

For another 7 GPH I can have a second engine and another 400-500 lb useful load and a purchase price $40,000-50,000 less.