Jump to content

Why a Mooney?


CMartin

Recommended Posts

Forgot to say, and I'm surprised it hasn't already been brought up, try to find somebody in your area with a J and see if you can get a ride.  That's really the best way to see how it fits.  Sit in the front and the back to check for room.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bob - S50 said:

CMartin,

We have a '78 J.  There is plenty of room on the back seat for an adult.  Leg room will only be tight back there while the front seaters get in.  Once in their seats and moved forward to the normal position, there is plenty of room in the back.  I'm 5'9" and I have to move the seat almost all the way forward to allow me full rudder travel and brake application at the same time.  When my wife and I go on long trips, she sits in the back because she has more room to maneuver back there and she can see better (she's 5'2" and can't see over the glareshield very well up front).

Figure minimum useful load this way for a J.  Your occasional 500nm trip (non-stop) will burn 33 gallons and it will take about 3+30 block to block.  An hour of reserve means you'll want 42 gallons on board at engine start.  Make it easy on yourself and fill to the 50 gallon tabs and you'll land with almost 2 hours of fuel remaining (assuming you run just barely LOP).  That's about 300 lbs of fuel.  Add the weights of your passengers.  If it comes up to 600 lbs that brings the total up to 900.  Then add some allowance for baggage.  Max allowable in the J is 120 lbs.  That's 1020.  So something less than 1020 required.

Our plane's useful load is 970.  If I limited everybody (in this hypothetical case) to 35 lbs of luggage each, I could still put in 45 gallons of fuel, fly non-stop, land with 1+20 fuel on board, be 5 pounds over gross at start, and a pound under gross at liftoff.

You can do the math using your actual passenger weights, but I'm guessing a useful load over 950 will serve you just fine.

I appreciate the run down, the a Mooney is sounding better and better as I go.  It seems to be fast, has a doable fuel burn and will carry the load I need. Thanks!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome aboard CM!

 Bought my first Mooney (M20C) for two reasons...

1) Speed

2) Efficiency

 

I Fell in love with all the other attributes...

 

3) factory built.

4) Room for four.

5) Easily climbs to 12,500’, during O2 free flying.

6) maintenance costs very similar to all other four seat retractable planes.  The engines are the same when it comes to OH.

7) affordable. No more costly than any other four seat, factory built, NA plane that is similar...

 

The more you read, the more you will become familiar with what the Mooney has to offer.

8) Then you can personalize the instrument panel the way you like.  See how many planes have been updated.

 

For an interesting way at looking at the used Mooney market...

I like to go here...   http://www.allamericanaircraft.com/default.htm

go visit and get a feel for the various airframes....

When you get a chance, Update your data in your avatar.  People will remember you better.  This improves the recommendations that you get.  I already forgot what part of the country you intend to fly in...

Best regards,

-a-

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/28/2017 at 4:27 PM, CMartin said:

Most of my time is in  172/182, have some time in a Bonanza as well.  More worried about the comfort up front between the pilot/co-pilot seats.

Let's get down to Brass tacks. How wide are you at the shoulder? How wide is the person that is going to sit next to you, at the shoulder? The person sitting next to you, how much of the decision making process is that person? Did they fly in the Bo with you? Any Mooney will do what you are asking of it. Are you comfortable, is a relative question, not easily answered on a message board. 

I prefer the sports car feel and vibe that the Mooney has that most other GA four place certified's don't. It's personal.

There are reasons Mooney's are more efficient and faster on less horsepower than its competitors. Those same reasons are also the source of popular misconceptions about the plane.

 

It's time for you to find a ride. 

 

 

Edited by Mcstealth
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6' 2"  & 230 fits in all the Mooneys....

Our Yetti flies an F.  Yes, we have a @Yetti.  Our yetti has some other great Mooney skills including machining skills and a commercial sewing machine...

Clearly, the Mooney needs to be a high priority on your list.

You mentioned a fare amount about yourself, but left out your flying partners...

If all four of you are 6’ 2" & 230, and your finance officer sits in the back...

The Long Bodies are your best choice...

How would you like your LB...

  • Normally Aspirated
  • Turbocharged

-or-

  • TurboNormalized

 

Good quality Long Bodies, below 150 AMU, lately, are hard to come by...  200AMU usually has many amenities and less hours on the engine...

Just having fun, I'm pretty good with spending OPM.  :)

Best regards,

-a-

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank everyone for your thoughts and opinions. Going off everything I learned I truly think a Mooney will be at the top of my list! The payload is in the range of what I will need if not a little better, the speed is awesome, the annuals seem to be lower than expected compared to other complex and the fuel burn is very reasonable!

 

Thanks Again!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CMartin said:

Thank everyone for your thoughts and opinions. Going off everything I learned I truly think a Mooney will be at the top of my list! The payload is in the range of what I will need if not a little better, the speed is awesome, the annuals seem to be lower than expected compared to other complex and the fuel burn is very reasonable!

 

Thanks Again!

Oh oh, he's discovered our secret!  :lol:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/28/2017 at 1:54 PM, CMartin said:

Okay, I choose the Bravo to look at as a base since it seems to be in the upper limit of my initial budget  150K.  I SURE dont need to spend the upper limit if possible. Most of my flying will be with three, but I sure dont want to be limited or overloaded, Im 6'2" 230lbs.  As most of my trips will be in the 300nm range most of the time it would be nice to get over to Denver or the Gulf as well.  I am based in south west Kansas.

 

I can say from owning a M20J, the cabin (and I assume this is common to all M20's) fits tall people quite well.  I'm 5'7", and that is probably the MINIMUM height to be able to reach the rudder pedals with the seat all the way forwards.  If I were any shorter, I'd need pedal extensions.  I think 6'2" would be perfectly comfortable in terms of leg room.  On the other hand, you'd be cramped in the back seat, but I find it quite comfortable

In terms of gas mileage, I recently made a 700 nm trip nonstop on 36 gallons.  Granted I had a nice 15 kt tailwind, but hey:)

Edited by jaylw314
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A compromise for a turbo is the Screamin' Eagle (310hp version) especially if you fly LOP. My Eagle provides 1123 lbs of useful load much more than an Ovation. It carrries 100 gals of fuel and operates at 60% power at 18K so perfect for LOP Op's in the flight levels but economical at the lower altitudes.  I've owned three M20J's and a K as well as other versions. I think the J is a great AC but the IO550 is a much smoother engine. I've come to appreciate it it over the 4 cyl. There are also some features you get with a later airframe which may be important like one piece belly and backup systems. In mine I have dual batteries, twin alternators and a backup vacuum system. At some point that vacuum system will go away providing even more useful load important for anyone with a growing family or children who like to be fed. 

 

Edited by Cris
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Cris said:

operates at 60% power at 18K so perfect for LOP Op's in the flight levels but economical at the lower altitudes.  

60% power at 2700 rpm- I don't hear of many people operating at max RPM in cruise. 60% power at 2550 RPM @ 12k ft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no reason not to run it at that setting (2700 rpm and 18K).  It is rated to do so continuously and is one of the advantages of the Current O3. 

Just because it's rated, doesn't mean it's not better to run at a lower rpm, not at the limit of it's rating specification. If I was hoping to make TBO, I would not at the limits.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This reminds me of LOP vs ROP. Argument. Lot of "opionions" in both directions. Just do a search on this site. With thousands of hours in many Mooney's and hundreds of hours with this Screamin' Eagle it works for me. Seriously, do you really think a 100-150 rpm decrease makes an engine go to TBO. More to the point one would only use 2700 rpm typically at Takeoff which gives you max power and fuel flow (to reduce temps) or at high altitude with less power. Fact is you will be below 60% power at 16-18 K so please tell me why the engine won't get to TBO on the occasion that you go to altitude? Heat is the real issue not RPM although arguably a higher rpm may increase temps but very negligible at 60%.  If you don't intend to use the capabilities of the A/C as defined in the POH why fly that model? BTW I'm not suggesting it be done in a J which seems to be your A/C. Different engine/prop and nowhere near as smooth which might be part of your concern. I offered up a view of an alternative to the OP for his interest in a turbo but without the concerns that some have voiced regarding a turbo. If most of your flights are below 12 K maybe a non turbo is the way to go for the typical mission profile while having the ability to go to the flight levels on occasion. 

Edited by Cris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing to consider, I believe the recording tach will show significantly more tach hours @ 2700 rpm. My tach is based on 2400 rpm as cruise. If you cruise at 2700 the tach time will be 12.5% higher than the clock time. That means you'll reach TBO, 2000 tach hours, with only 1778 hours of clock time. (I think I'm right about that, and I'm ignore non-cruise hours.)    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bob_Belville said:

One thing to consider, I believe the recording tach will show significantly more tach hours @ 2700 rpm. My tach is based on 2400 rpm as cruise. If you cruise at 2700 the tach time will be 12.5% higher than the clock time. That means you'll reach TBO, 2000 tach hours, with only 1778 hours of clock time. (I think I'm right about that, and I'm ignore non-cruise hours.)    

Your point is well taken but in the case of the Screamin' Eagle 310 HP STC a Horizon P1000 tach replaces the factory version. From the Horizon Tach manual is this: Engine Hours Clock: Accurate to less than 1 hour error in 2000 hours.  Records real time when engine RPM is greater than 800. And of course one is not typically flying 2700 rpm but only as needed to attain the % of power desired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Cris said:

Your point is well taken but in the case of the Screamin' Eagle 310 HP STC a Horizon P1000 tach replaces the factory version. From the Horizon Tach manual is this: Engine Hours Clock: Accurate to less than 1 hour error in 2000 hours.  Records real time when engine RPM is greater than 800. And of course one is not typically flying 2700 rpm but only as needed to attain the % of power desired.

Interesting. My JPI EDM 930 keeps 2 times. Tach is based on 2400RPM and Hobbs. The Hobbs runs faster than the Tach I suppose that's because the Hobbs includes ground time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Bob_Belville said:

One thing to consider, I believe the recording tach will show significantly more tach hours @ 2700 rpm. My tach is based on 2400 rpm as cruise. If you cruise at 2700 the tach time will be 12.5% higher than the clock time. That means you'll reach TBO, 2000 tach hours, with only 1778 hours of clock time. (I think I'm right about that, and I'm ignore non-cruise hours.)    

That crossed my mind, too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
On 7/28/2017 at 8:02 PM, Oldguy said:

Welcome aboard!

I am the owner of an '84 J. As far as comfort goes, I am 6'5" and about 220 (on a good day). It is not uncommon for me to have four adults in the plane and make a two hour flight. I conservatively plan my flights for 150 kts. cruise and 9.5 gph at 7000/8000'. Currently my engine has ~1600 hours on it and appears to be running well. I plan on it making TBO and will keep flying it beyond if it and the oil analysis tell me I can. All four of my annuals were under $3K with the last replacing an ignition cap and wires.

For me, the J is the sweet spot. I came from a 172 and love the flexibility my Mooney gives me. The wife and I can hop in it and be at the beach in less than an hour and a hlaf or up in Chattanooga in less than an hour. We have family in Texas near Houston and in South and North Carolina. With the exception of carrying four to Texas, all of our flights are easily done non-stop. I am fortunate to live 5 minutes from my airport which also happens to have a Mooney trained mechanic on-site. I do my own oil changes and minor maintenance and fly between 85 and 120 hours a year.

Insurance is not bad. I have an IR and attend the MAPA Safety Foundation PPP training every two years. Keeps the insurance in line and is a blast meeting other Mooney pilots.

Final note: I bought my plane from a guy who was moving up to a Bonanza so he could carry 6 pax. That was his only reason to let it go (grandchildren). I called and got the plane about 5 days before the prior owner called to see if they could buy it back. 

That says a lot right there!!! Thanks for sharing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.