It seems that there are very few used Ovations for sale these days

[THill182]

As an Ovation driver I sometimes look at what the used market is doing. Is it just me or does it seem like there are very few used Ovations for sale these days?

A quick-and-dirty scan yielded about 410 registered M20R's; there are 6 for sale at ASO, 9 at the Controller, and 3 at Trade-a-Plane (all on-line). That is less than 5% of the fleet. 

There are about twice as many Cirri on the registry (non-turbo; best I can figure); but there are tons of used ones for sale. 

Just wondering if anyone else has this impression. And if that is the case, why? (GREAT planes maybe?)

 

[carusoam]

Buy and hold... 

Best regards,

-a-

[Bob_Belville]

For that matter, what model Mooney has very many offered for sale? 

Controller has

• 5 Cs
• 4 Es
• 10 Fs
• 1 G
• 22 Js
• 23 Ks
• 12 Ms
• 9 Rs

I don't know how that compares with the past... when I was shopping 6 years ago I was looking for Es or Fs and there were more but not a lot that were worth looking at. It sure wouldn't hurt my feelings if the market is firming. (I had an exchange a few days ago with a very knowledgeable, and famous around here marketer of used Mooneys who suggested I could list my old E at $99,000. He didn't say I'd get it.)  

[Andy95W]

Controller seems to lean more toward higher-end models, so that seems to be why Js and Ks are so well represented there.  

Barnstormers seems to lean more toward lower-end models, although that may have changed in the past few years.

[HRM]

Owning an aging Mooney is a colossal PITA. You really need to love the maintenance aspect of it as well as the flying.

[MIm20c]

From casually watching the market the Ovations and Bravos have half the number of used models vs a year and a half ago. 

[THill182]

8 hours ago, HRM said:

Owning an aging Mooney is a colossal PITA. You really need to love the maintenance aspect of it as well as the flying.

Well, certainly sometimes feels that way (PITA); all things considered (after owing a few Cessna's, (C172, C182RG), the biggest pain in my case has been the engine which lasts about 1000 hours between TOP's instead of the advertised 2000 (which was no problem for Lyc O320 and O540). That is expensive, but the rest I would say is normal stuff that breaks and in line with published average maintenance estimates.

[Jeff_S]

I've noticed the same thing. There are far fewer Ovations to choose from right now than when I bought mine in '14.  Perhaps it's self-gratification (no, not THAT kind!) but I choose to believe it's because we know we've got such a great airplane that there's no reason to sell! Honestly, for my current mission, there is no other airplane I would buy.

And in corollary, I was pleasantly surprised at this year's Mooney Summit how many Ovations were parked on the lot. I thought it was an outsized representation given their relative numbers in the Mooney fleet.  These birds are really getting flown around.

 

[mooneyflyfast]

The prize for being rare on the used market goes to the S (eagle). None for sale that I have been able to find. 

 

[smccray]

I've been watching as well.  Nearly all of the long bodies have been rare on the market for the last 6 months.  The only thing seemingly common are early Bravos with run out engines.

[Cruiser]

3 hours ago, mooneyflyfast said:

The prize for being rare on the used market goes to the S (eagle). None for sale that I have been able to find. 

 

There were only 65 of these airframes made by Mooney. Some have been lost, it is a rare model. 

Ralph Semb has his 1999 Eagle listed for sale in the last MAPA log, October 2017

[Little Dipper]

I think the Ovation is a very stable platform in IMC conditions and great personal/business traveling machine.   Much faster than going  commercial.   phl-ord-cid.   Throttled back and  burning 11.4 gallons per hour with a tail wind got back home from Cedar Rapids Airport Iowa to Pennridge Airport Pennsylvania in under four hours last week vs. four and a half on the way out.     Over the last several years my thinking was that the market price for the used Ovations was too low compared to other makes and models.  I think price of the Ovation may have hit bottom and has no where to go but up.

Norm

N995K    

[smccray]

Just now, Little Dipper said:

I think price of the Ovation may have hit bottom and has no where to go but up.

Yeah.... not buying it.  Most of the later V-Tail bonanzas and F33s trade in the low $100K range.  Periodically you see the late 80s and early 90s F33s trade north of $200k, but those are highly upgraded, low time, airframes that need a special buyer.  Personally, I think that the bonanzas were aspirational aircraft to pilots who now have the money to buy the airplanes so they don't worry too much about the price.  I don't believe that a bonanza is the dream plane for younger pilots which will hurt the values particularly of the 4 seat bonanzas.  Most of the 4 seat bonanzas end up sitting on the market when they're priced above $150K- and those are still highly upgraded.

To let the cat out of the bag- I've been shopping long body Mooneys trying to find one to buy before the end of the year.

It's a Mooney forum- I get it- but there are a lot of competing airframes out there.  Planes like this are out there: https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/20758819/2003-columbia-300 It's not an Ovation- I know.  But it has 2 doors, and a low time engine under $200K.

High time engine, but only $176K: https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/21890357/2003-columbia-350

Want a turbo airplane and looking at a Bravo?  My wondering eyes have me looking at this: https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/22087949/2005-columbia-400 10 years newer than the early planes, engine hours are climbing, but has a glass panel and air conditioning.  It's a Columbia 400 so it will probably need cylinders soon if they haven't been done, but apples to apples pricing is attractive.  And it has a/c.

Dare I say it- here's an early SR22 with a run out engine @ $150K: https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/22341385/2002-cirrus-sr22  Not a Mooney and yes, I see the relative benefits of the Mooney over both the Cirrus and the Columbia.

Mooneys are great airplanes, but competition in that class of aircraft is only going to increase.  I'd like to find a long body that makes sense- and by making sense I mean it needs to work using fuzzy aviation logic, not robust financial analytics.

[smccray]

By the way- I offer the above hoping someone will show me the error of my thinking.  I want to be missing something on long body values.

[Bob_Belville]

35 minutes ago, smccray said:

By the way- I offer the above hoping someone will show me the error of my thinking.  I want to be missing something on long body values.

I have never flown in a Cirrus or a Columbia so take my take with a grain of salt.

• I'm not so sure that fixed gear composite designs appeal to the same buyers as those who look first at metal retractables like Bonanzas and Mooneys.
• If variable operating costs are similar, what are the comparative maintenance costs? Airframe longevity and repairability? Will the composite planes be around for 25 years?
• As to comparing prices in Controller, acquisition cost is hardly the biggest consideration, otherwise very capable piston twins would not sell for less than the cost of overhauling their engines.

[mooneyflyfast]

1 hour ago, Cruiser said:

There were only 65 of these airframes made by Mooney. Some have been lost, it is a rare model. 

Ralph Semb has his 1999 Eagle listed for sale in the last MAPA log, October 2017

I see two 1999 Eagles in the mooneypilots classifieds. Both with sketchy info and Ovation like prices. 

[KSMooniac]

I see two 1999 Eagles in the mooneypilots classifieds. Both with sketchy info and Ovation like prices. 

If they've got Screamin Eagle upgrades to Ovation power, IMO they can be valued very similar to an Ovation, or even more in some cases. The Ovations came loaded, but that works against you 20+ years later with more obsolete stuff to replace/maintain, significantly less useful load, etc (in some cases). An Eagle can be upgraded with modern panel goodies and have more payload capability compared to most Ovations. If compared to a GX, the earlier models aren't locked into the G1000 system, so anything is possible going forward with the newer, cheaper, and more capable stuff coming to market now. I'd be looking hard for a Screamin Eagle if I were shopping that market, but I'm not sure I could be patient enough to wait for one of the few to hit the market...

Cirri would not be under my consideration due to the ongoing chute expense, and just in general principle. the very latest generation with great useful load might be able to tempt me in 10+ years, but I doubt it. I'll give them huge props for reducing structural weight as they evolved the design...something Mooney desperately needs to do.

I'd go Columbia if leaving the Mooney world. (I got to help design it long ago so I'm biased)

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[gsengle]

I have a 96 Ovation. Maintenance has been almost exclusively normal wear and tear items. Most years I spend under 4K on maintenance including annual inspection. It’s a near perfect high performance single unless you want a turbo. So fuel efficient, engine runs cool even without cowl flaps. I don’t believe there are any recurring ad’s at all.

If I could change anything would be 100lbs more useful load and a bit stronger landing gear. Other than that, it’s perfect. I’ll do the 310hp stc when the engine needs overhaul. Looks like I’ll comfortably exceed TBO by a fair amount.

May you never see it for sale, I hope to own it many years until I can’t fly it any more. And by then maybe the kids will want it. I do hope scarcity will only help it’s value, the early ones always seem a good value to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[smccray]

53 minutes ago, Bob_Belville said:

I have never flown in a Cirrus or a Columbia so take my take with a grain of salt.

• I'm not so sure that fixed gear composite designs appeal to the same buyers as those who look first at metal retractables like Bonanzas and Mooneys.
• If variable operating costs are similar, what are the comparative maintenance costs? Airframe longevity and repairability? Will the composite planes be around for 25 years?
• As to comparing prices in Controller, acquisition cost is hardly the biggest consideration, otherwise very capable piston twins would not sell for less than the cost of overhauling their engines.

 

So my thoughts in response-

• Appeal- depends on what you're buying- if it's a collector piece compared to a traveling machine.  I'm interested in traveling machines.  Never mind that the columbia aircraft are newer, lower time, and better equipped panels compared to the Mooney.  Either way- the market says more than my words on a web forum, but this is my struggle when evaluating a purchase.
• Variable Cost- I have a hard time believing that the variable cost is going to be dramatically different between different makes adjusted for the individual systems involved.  Turbos would be an added cost compared to a non-turbo airplane; retractable gear, parachutes- all examples of added cost if the airframe is so equipped.  Differences between planes isn't completely irrelevant, but I doubt that it's a major issue.  I heard the criticisms on airframe longevity and repairability a few years go but I haven't heard it recently- personally I reject most of this concern as a scare tactic.  I think it's a consideration, but composites in aviation are here to stay.  I do like the steal roll cage in the Mooney.
• Acquisition Cost- No doubt the operating cost are a significantly more important factor than the acquisition cost.  However, in this instance the Mooney community has to say the operating cost of a Mooney is significantly below the operating cost of XYZ brand.  Do we really want to take the position that a Mooney is significantly less expensive to operate than a Columbia?  Similar big bore engines, but the Mooney has higher cost associated with gear maintenance and wet wings.  The Columbia has issues as well, but most of those factors aren't related to the airframe, rather the systems (oxygen, speed brakes, etc.) many of which would be similar to the Mooney.  I can't answer this question of which is higher, but I have a hard time believing that the overall cost is going to be materially different.  If the Mooney is cheaper- why?  I do believe that the Columbia 350/400 are the best comp to Mooney aircraft.

 

[Niko182]

from what ive seen ovations seem to be a great platform considering affordability, performance, and comfort. columbia/cessna can be comfortable, but when I was at the small demo show that was hosted, I got to actually, sit in a cessna TTX, mooney acclaim ultra, Beachcraft G36, and a TBM 930. The mooney in my opinion was by far the most comfortable. Im tall and skinny at 6 3 and 150 lbs. but when i got in the Cessna, it just felt awkward, also including that it has no room in the back seats. beachcraft was nice too, but I personally liked the acclaim, also tried sitting in the back, with the front seat in the position i fly in and there was more space in the back then in the front.

maintenance wise, from what I looked up, cessna's are a lot to maintain(i mean carbon fiber cessna's). when I was doing the original comparisons, between the corvalis/columbia and the mooney I found out a lot of owners had put a lot of money maintaining their corvalis'. I have no doubt that the TTX, 400, 350 and 300 are great airplanes, but I feel like people just get more out of a mooney.

The ovation is an affordable plane, relatively speaking to it's class of aircraft (NA high performance single engine aircraft), and extremely fast and extremely efficient, and I consider it one of the most comfortable planes I've been in. the list of planes that can take a 620 lbs family, over 700 nautical miles while still having vfr reserve, in about 4ish hours, in comfort isn't very big.

That's at least why i believe barely any are for sale. The plane truly is remarkable. My opinion has always been that cirrus', are the plane for the wife. It's has a chute, so she let him buy it. Mooney's are the plane for the pilot. No wonder barely any people are selling ovations. they're so damn good.

but then again, i don't own one so i could be completely wrong. i'm just going off what other people say and my minimal experience with the ovation.

 

[Jeff_S]

Attempting to economically justify any airplane purchase for personal travel is doomed to failure.  I think trying to compare costs between different airframes is also a pointless exercise. You don't buy an airplane because its costs are lower. You buy it because it speaks to you in some way that others don't, and those are not all tangible things.  Some folks like the simplicity of fixed gear, and some like the low drag and looks of retractable.  Some folks like the security of a parachute, and some think it's the Pussification of the American Aviationscape!  Nobody wins these arguments.

But to get back to the original poster's thought, the fact is that there are very few Ovations on the market these days, which was not the case three years ago when I bought mine. And simple law of supply and demand would suggest that with less inventory, prices could go higher.  It all depends on how much people want to jump into the Mooney way of life. But again, no one should be buying an airplane hoping it will appreciate in value...rather, you buy it to appreciate ITS value to you!

[Niko182]

4 hours ago, Cruiser said:

There were only 65 of these airframes made by Mooney. Some have been lost, it is a rare model. 

Ralph Semb has his 1999 Eagle listed for sale in the last MAPA log, October 2017

 

2 hours ago, mooneyflyfast said:

I see two 1999 Eagles in the mooneypilots classifieds. Both with sketchy info and Ovation like prices. 

can you guys post the links to the eagles you found. I'm looking on mooneypilots and can't seem to find anything.

Edited November 13, 2017 by Niko182

[mike_elliott]

51 minutes ago, Niko182 said:

rom what ive seen ovations seem to be a great platform considering affordability, performance, and comfort. columbia/cessna can be comfortable, but when I was at the small demo show that was hosted, I got to actually, sit in a cessna TTX, mooney acclaim ultra, Beachcraft G36, and a TBM 930. The mooney in my opinion was by far the most comfortable.

Im 6' and 220#, the TBM fits me just fine

 

[Niko182]

oops. forgot that i included the tbm. it was the most comfortable, and you can have it for a mere 4.2 million dollars.

[aviatoreb]

Just now, mike_elliott said:

Im 6' and 220#, the TBM fits me just fine

 

I'm 6'4'' and 220#...the TBM fits me too. But the TBM930 fits me the best. Certainly better than the 850 or the dinky ol' 700.  The 910 is nice but I get carpal tunnel syndrome trying to manipulate the inferior avionics.  I wonder if I could get a doctor to write me a perscription for a TBM930?