Why a Mooney?

[jaylw314]

I'm still working on an RV-10, and I'm hoping the DeltaHawk turbo diesel comes out before I'm ready to do the engine.  At the rate they're going and I'm going, it seems like we'll be neck-and-neck 20 years from now...

[CMartin]

On 1/28/2018 at 7:47 PM, Kris_Adams said:

@CMartin so what did you decide?  You still looking?

I have spent countless hours looking at different aircraft.  I have even tried to convince myself to just purchase a well equipped 172, but I just keep coming back to the M20J 201 or 205's. Unless I am missing something, there really isn't a significant cost difference. 

I love the lines and the look of the Mooneys, the speed is perfect and the operating cost compared to other complex/retractable seems to be much lower.

I keep looking at my missions and most of my flights will be in the 250nm range with a lot of 100nm trips.

 

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but am I over doing my mission with a Mooney (250nm trips)? Would it be more practical to have a 180HP 172, Grumman Tiger, Cherokee 180 etc..

 

Looking to make my decision and start shopping.

[Danb]

No your not, any nonturbo Mooney fits your bill perfectly.

[Oldguy]

1 hour ago, CMartin said:

I have spent countless hours looking at different aircraft.  I have even tried to convince myself to just purchase a well equipped 172, but I just keep coming back to the M20J 201 or 205's. Unless I am missing something, there really isn't a significant cost difference. 

I love the lines and the look of the Mooneys, the speed is perfect and the operating cost compared to other complex/retractable seems to be much lower.

I keep looking at my missions and most of my flights will be in the 250nm range with a lot of 100nm trips.

 

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but am I over doing my mission with a Mooney (250nm trips)? Would it be more practical to have a 180HP 172, Grumman Tiger, Cherokee 180 etc..

 

Looking to make my decision and start shopping.

Start shopping for a NA Mooney. Your OP also listed the occasional 500 NM trip. Your 172 or Cherokee would be ~ 4 hours - in still air. Your Mooney (C, E, F, J) would be quicker, burn about the same (or less) fuel, and - more importantly - it would be a Mooney. 

All kidding aside, the Mooney will allow you to stretch your legs farther once you have it. And by farther, it may be out and back the same day versus an overnight stay. We do Thanksgiving at the in-laws, about 225 NM each way, out and back in a total of less than 3 hours.

You have done the due diligence checking on maintenance (not really that bad), interior cabin space (adequate for even 4 adults), and other speeds and feeds. The hardest part of getting your Mooney will be finding the right one for you. Start the search now. Because if you read this site regularly, you have seen others starting their search recently as well. But do not get in a rush and snag the first one you find. Your goal is to avoid the list @gsxrpilot has. (story for another day)

Best of luck, and good hunting!

[KSMooniac]

Once you get a Mooney, you'll find yourself flying much farther since it becomes much easier. I love that I can reach either coast from Kansas in an easy day, unless there is widespread ice along the route. All with a modest 4 cylinder non-turbo J. .

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[Yooper Rocketman]

8 hours ago, jlunseth said:

How do you get around the "VFR only" restriction.  Seems to me there can be no flying in the flight levels (above 18k).

It's all in your operating limitations.  Mine are 28,000'.  You can't get that high flying VFR!

Experimentals have never been restricted from IFR Operations in the U.S. UNLESS the builder limited their plane while certifying it.  As long as you have instruments installed required for IFR Operations, there's no issue whatsoever.  

Tom

[Wayne Cease]

5 hours ago, CMartin said:

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but am I over doing my mission with a Mooney (250nm trips)? Would it be more practical to have a 180HP 172, Grumman Tiger, Cherokee 180 etc...

 

4 hours ago, Oldguy said:

Start shopping for a NA Mooney. Your OP also listed the occasional 500 NM trip. Your 172 or Cherokee would be ~ 4 hours - in still air. Your Mooney (C, E, F, J) would be quicker, burn about the same (or less) fuel, and - more importantly - it would be a Mooney. 

All kidding aside, the Mooney will allow you to stretch your legs farther once you have it. And by farther, it may be out and back the same day versus an overnight stay. We do Thanksgiving at the in-laws, about 225 NM each way, out and back in a total of less than 3 hours.

 

^This.

Speed is options.  Not only range or not having to stop as John points out.  It's also a way around weather.  A few years ago we went to see our niece graduation from the University of Wisconsin; we live in Atlanta.  I was flying a SR22 at the time, which cruised at 170 kts.  Well, as we got to the date cold weather came in and there was ice potential over most of Illinois and even snow between Rockford and Chicago, DIRECTLY IN OUR FLIGHT PATH!    I found a route going to St Louis, the up just west of Illinois then turning east to Madison.  We basically flew around the state of Illinois.  It was over a 100 nm deviation from the route we would have taken without the weather.  No big deal at 170 kts, that was only about 35-40 more minutes.  Yawn.

Speed means running to the beach for the day with my youngest daughter is just a fun thing to do.  We don't have to get up early and we're back for dinner.

We went to a college bowl game a few years ago, for the game.  We left after breakfast, flew to Tampa International (from Atlanta), because the game was at the Tampa Bay Buccaneer's stadium which is in walking distance from the FBO at TPA.  We had lunch at the game and flew home afterwards.  We had dinner at home at our regular dinner time.  

Speed means that not stopping for a bathroom break is possible.  Or with two 2-2:30 legs means you are a long way from home. 

Speed means having options.

Happy plane shopping!

 

[jonhop]

8 hours ago, CMartin said:

I have spent countless hours looking at different aircraft.  I have even tried to convince myself to just purchase a well equipped 172, but I just keep coming back to the M20J 201 or 205's. Unless I am missing something, there really isn't a significant cost difference. 

I love the lines and the look of the Mooneys, the speed is perfect and the operating cost compared to other complex/retractable seems to be much lower.

I keep looking at my missions and most of my flights will be in the 250nm range with a lot of 100nm trips.

 

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but am I over doing my mission with a Mooney (250nm trips)? Would it be more practical to have a 180HP 172, Grumman Tiger, Cherokee 180 etc..

 

Looking to make my decision and start shopping.

In my search, after flying your practical choices the decision boiled down to the Tiger and the Mooney after I flew in each airplane. I enjoy the 20kts speed advantage of my J over the AA5B. Have you flown all of your possible choices? 

[carusoam]

I traveled down that path where the road divides in a yellow wood... being only one pilot, I could not fly all three and be one pilot...

• piper
• cessna
• mooney

Long I stood At the time, and looked at all three as long as I could....   They all cost about the same (used) for the four seat, with a normally aspirated engine.

Two are big brand names. One is a bit specialized...

I looked through one’s logs as deeply as I could, including starting a PPI...

Then I took the other... As just as fair... and having perhaps, the better claim... speed, efficiency, and a bit of safety thrown in....

I shall be telling this with a sigh... somewhere ages and ages hence... Three roads diverged in a wood... And I,

I chose the Victor highway less traveled by....  And, it has made all the difference!

 

If Robert Frost was a pilot, He would have flown a Mooney!  

(Adapted from his poem ‘The Road Less Traveled By’)  

If you only know one poem in life, this would be a good one.....

Best regards,

-a-

[CMartin]

14 hours ago, Wayne Cease said:

 

^This.

Speed is options.  Not only range or not having to stop as John points out.  It's also a way around weather.  A few years ago we went to see our niece graduation from the University of Wisconsin; we live in Atlanta.  I was flying a SR22 at the time, which cruised at 170 kts.  Well, as we got to the date cold weather came in and there was ice potential over most of Illinois and even snow between Rockford and Chicago, DIRECTLY IN OUR FLIGHT PATH!    I found a route going to St Louis, the up just west of Illinois then turning east to Madison.  We basically flew around the state of Illinois.  It was over a 100 nm deviation from the route we would have taken without the weather.  No big deal at 170 kts, that was only about 35-40 more minutes.  Yawn.

Speed means running to the beach for the day with my youngest daughter is just a fun thing to do.  We don't have to get up early and we're back for dinner.

We went to a college bowl game a few years ago, for the game.  We left after breakfast, flew to Tampa International (from Atlanta), because the game was at the Tampa Bay Buccaneer's stadium which is in walking distance from the FBO at TPA.  We had lunch at the game and flew home afterwards.  We had dinner at home at our regular dinner time.  

Speed means that not stopping for a bathroom break is possible.  Or with two 2-2:30 legs means you are a long way from home. 

Speed means having options.

Happy plane shopping!

 

That makes a lot of since!!!! Thanks for taking the time and sharing some examples!

[CMartin]

12 hours ago, jonhop said:

In my search, after flying your practical choices the decision boiled down to the Tiger and the Mooney after I flew in each airplane. I enjoy the 20kts speed advantage of my J over the AA5B. Have you flown all of your possible choices? 

I have not flown the Tiger nor the Mooney. 

[gsxrpilot]

Yep speed + efficiency  is good. 4:56 - 1,154 miles - 56 of 76 gal used.