Realistic buying expectations

[Bob - S50]

10 hours ago, Firebird2xc said:

It would appear I need to cowboy up and follow your example.

Or find a partner or two.  We love our J.  It's perfect for us.  And we live on the left coast!

[Bob_Belville]

11 hours ago, Firebird2xc said:

I zeroed in on the J model because it's the fastest, most efficient thing around at the given hourly burn rate.  Stepping back to an F cuts performance enough (in my opinion) to make other similarly priced airplanes much more competitive.  I stopped short of a K model because I've read the turbo system in the 231 has a reputation, the 252 is well outside my budget, and my mission doesn't warrant the turbo anyways.

... you're not wrong about the range of values... but if I cut the extremes and venn diagram the rest it gives me an approximate aiming point.  

The J has several nice improvement vs. Es and Fs but the speed difference is not very great. All 3 have the Lycoming IO360 though a lot of Js have the dual mags which it not usually considered a plus. Es that have been aerodynamically cleaned up should be within 5-10 ktas of older Js though the cabin is less roomy, Fs on average are only slightly slower the Es and usually have a greater useful load than Es or Js. With comparable panels, engine time, paint/interior Es and Fs will be priced considerably below the Js  - $20,000 or much more. 

[jaylw314]

15 hours ago, Firebird2xc said:

It would appear I need to cowboy up and follow your example.

Just so you know, the range I mentioned was for someone looking for a 201 with IFR GPS, autopilot with altitude, engine monitor and no damage history.  Those are all high demand items and that makes good planes hard to find among the lemons--the good ones just don't stay on the market long.  I ended up finding one with all that but ended up only finding one with a factory remanufactured motor once I looked in the $120k range.  If it was a mid-time engine, I probably could have spent $90-100k, but there just weren't any in that range on the market. 

201's are popular for a reason

[KLRDMD]

17 hours ago, Firebird2xc said:

I zeroed in on the J model because it's the fastest, most efficient thing around at the given hourly burn rate.  Stepping back to an F cuts performance enough (in my opinion) to make other similarly priced airplanes much more competitive.  I stopped short of a K model because I've read the turbo system in the 231 has a reputation, the 252 is well outside my budget, and my mission doesn't warrant the turbo anyways.

I'm curious as to what reputation the turbo system has in the 231 ?

Personally I would not even look at a 231 with a -GB engine. 231s with the -LB engine are much better and most have intercoolers now too. I'm not convinced the automatic waste gate that can be added to a 231 is all that beneficial, though. Even at 10,000 ft the 231 outperforms the 201 and in Florida, 10,000 ft gets you out of the heat and bumps. It doesn't take that long to get there and I would imagine there is significantly less traffic at 10,000 ft in Florida than down low. Not to mention the turbo helps in any high density altitude takeoffs which does not have to be just MSL, temperature also plays a role.

You would probably find that you appreciate the K over the J should you decide to go that route. Don't rule them out quite yet.

[Firebird2xc]

18 hours ago, teejayevans said:

you live in Florida, so a turbo is not required.

I couldn't find a J with what I wanted (Im really picky), so I bought the 2nd lowest J on the market, high engine time and the avionics while not entirely broken, all had their issues: radio and jpi had broken display segments, KNS80 overheated, fuel flow knobs were broken). I upgraded, plan on keeping the plane for a long time so losing half my investment if I turn around and sell is not an issue. There was some deferred maintenance that had to be done (landing pucks, gear actuator, mags etc). I did the opposite of what is normally recommended, but it worked for me. But I knew what I wanted, it sounds like you're not really sure, I would spend more time looking until you know what you want:  Buy high, buy low...are you going to finance it, will it be hangered, flying to west coast or just around southeast...etc? As I said before you should go to controller, TAP, etc at least weekly and check every plane, make notes of you like, what you need, what you don't...until then I would save my $...you'll need it.

I would go to http://www.macdonaldaircraft.com/aircraft.htm

He is at your home airport, and has a couple of Mooneys, go take a look. You may decide you really want a $125K airplane...even if you cannot afford it today you'll know what you want.  And if you can afford to buy a $75K airplane today, you will be able to afford the $125K airplane a couple of years from now because you will be saving money you would have spent on the $75K airplane.

Good advice.  I think I better know what I actually do want- I think I just made the mistake that some of the planes listed were an accurate representation of good airplanes when they were not.  I just needed a moment to adjust my thinking and come to terms with the idea of what must be spent to actually get what I want.

[Firebird2xc]

9 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

Just so you know, the range I mentioned was for someone looking for a 201 with IFR GPS, autopilot with altitude, engine monitor and no damage history.  Those are all high demand items and that makes good planes hard to find among the lemons--the good ones just don't stay on the market long.  I ended up finding one with all that but ended up only finding one with a factory remanufactured motor once I looked in the $120k range.  If it was a mid-time engine, I probably could have spent $90-100k, but there just weren't any in that range on the market. 

201's are popular for a reason

Thank you for clarifying.  I think and a good mid-time J at the range you mentioned seems pretty reasonable.  I'll have to just be a little more patient.

[Firebird2xc]

8 hours ago, KLRDMD said:

I'm curious as to what reputation the turbo system has in the 231 ?

Personally I would not even look at a 231 with a -GB engine. 231s with the -LB engine are much better and most have intercoolers now too. I'm not convinced the automatic waste gate that can be added to a 231 is all that beneficial, though. Even at 10,000 ft the 231 outperforms the 201 and in Florida, 10,000 ft gets you out of the heat and bumps. It doesn't take that long to get there and I would imagine there is significantly less traffic at 10,000 ft in Florida than down low. Not to mention the turbo helps in any high density altitude takeoffs which does not have to be just MSL, temperature also plays a role.

You would probably find that you appreciate the K over the J should you decide to go that route. Don't rule them out quite yet.

Good points all around and you're right- it's not the turbo that had issues so much as the -GB engine.  I read somewhere to avoid them.

I guess I won't rule out K models yet- I'll just have to do the CBA for the extra maintenance costs and fuel burn.

[carusoam]

Only going to 12.5k'?

IO550s rule! 

If going turbo, I would want to fly closer to 20k'

My usual flight is too short for that long of a climb....

Picking the right plane is easier after you have one for a few years...

Getting to Ken's level of buying/selling experience may take more than one purchase...

Best regards,

-a-

[Firebird2xc]

16 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Only going to 12.5k'?

IO550s rule! 

If going turbo, I would want to fly closer to 20k'

My usual flight is too short for that long of a climb....

Picking the right plane is easier after you have one for a few years...

Getting to Ken's level of buying/selling experience may take more than one purchase...

Best regards,

-a-

I'll probably never file for higher than 11,000 or 12,000 unless weather dictates the need.

Other than initial climb performance I'd likely not benefit much from a turbo, but I'm not going to dismiss it without doing the research.  As it stands a well equipped J model is all the plane I'll likely need.