Jump to content

Looking to Buy an Eagle or Early Ovation?


Mike@Loves

Recommended Posts

For your mission I’d look for the best available plane with 310hp and 130 gallon tanks.  You will probably have to replace all the cylinders and the starter adapter eventually but you might get 2.2-2.7k hours out of the engine before overhaul.  That’s only $5 per hour for the above consumables or about 1gph of fuel burn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am biased,  but think a 252 or Encore with Monroy tanks would suit you well.  My Encore ( 105 gallons total useable ) flying between 15  & 20 K feet should be able to make that 1000 mile hop on 75 to 80 gallons in no wind.     

There are several very knowledgeable  K model owners on this forum. @kortopates  @gsxrpilot @Parker_Woodruff @jlunseth and others.  They should have some real world examples. 

Bill

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might consider the 252, esp. the Encore if you can find one.  Good useful load.  I have some success operating my 231 LOP, get good speeds and LOP the fuel flow is 11.1-.3 .  Speed would depend on altitude, say 160 at 12k, maybe 165 kts.  However, I don’t have much success operating LOP above 12-16 k depending on OAT.  The 252 I think, can do that, it has a better turbo set up and better cooling.  

WInds aloft are a fickle thing.  We sometimes get tailwinds in the low flight levels in the range of 75 kts. to over 100 going west to east in the winter.  In the summer, and down in more southern latitudes like FL, there will still be a west to east tailwind, but not nearly what we see up here.  You need to sip O2 to fly up there, of course.  

18k is not a very useful altitude, at least not in the continental US.  Class A starts at 18, and it is rare that ATC will assign 18 because of the possible conflict with VFR aircraft flying to the local altimeter setting.  If they do, they might only let you be there for awhile.  Generally, 16 is as high as you can go on a west-east course unless you are able and willing to go to 20.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go Acclaim! (Best Mooney so far)

Go Ovation! (Best Mooney I ever owned) :)

Go Bravo! (Great for high altitude flight over oceans)

Go Eagle! (Best UL of all LBs)

The key features that are hard to measure...

310 hp is great for T/O and climbing...

TN and 310hp is great for continued climb through high altitudes...

The Eagles can be updated to match most of the key features, read the update list carefully....

Keep an eye out for the usual 2020 ADSB requirements, modern ELTs and things like that.

Some LBs come with FIKI, A/C, and built in O2.  Nicer if you can find these already in the plane.

i am a big fan of the O...

100 gallons of 100LL can cover the distance from NJ to Florida.  Be aware of your WnB...

130 gallons of 100LL will go further.  Really know your WnB...

UL will be just over 1000 LBs.

The original instrument panels in all of these planes are aged, but not terrible... many will have updates to include WAAS GPS.

Expect a wide price range.  Some people have spent 50-100 amu modernizing instrument panels... a factory reman engine and new prop is well over 60amu.

The one quirky thing I like about my O... The electric rudder trim.  The ball can be centered in the climb, the descent, any time I want...

Go O!

Best regards,

-a-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The primary reasons  to consider an Eagle over an Ovation is useful load and simplicity. Typically the Eagle will be well over 1100 lbs-1122 in my case with the 280/310 STC. Some were initially upgraded to 280hp like mine. The 280 to 310hp added about $5k for me to upgrade. That upgrade also gives you 100 gals of fuel. It also allows for 60% power at 18K. Most if not all of these Eagles have had panal upgrades or can be easily upgraded to get the latest and greatest. Want glass think Dynon. Want low maintenance then minimize the options on the A/C you purchase. The Stec 30 is perfectly adequate particularly if you add GPSS. It is also relatively bullet proof compared to the KFC225 or similar. It does not capture GS but that is a non issue for me. A low time airframe also means low time on all the systems like radios, servos etc which can be an advantage. Mine was a low time A/F and now has 625 hrs TT. I’ve overhauled one cylinder as a result of a burnt valve which probably occurred before  the G2 engine monitor was installed. Outside of that it has been inspected by Mooney experts and has had very few maintenance issues.  This particular Eagle came with most of the nice to have features like Leather, upgraded panal, speed brakes, metallic paint stripes etc. My point being if you want high useful load and simplicity consider the Eagle. If you are good with the useful load and extensive options of the Ovation go in that direction. 

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

I looked very seriously at an Eagle but have been very happy with my decision to get a 252. Speed, performance and economy are great. The useful load is not. But with an Encore conversion and a general cleaning up of the panel and the airframe and I'll have UL in the 1100 range. 

ROP at 10,000 is 170 kts TAS. I can also fly LOP and have done so as high as FL230 without any issues. A recent flight east with a big tailwind had me loafing along at FL230, 9.5 gph and 230 knots over the ground.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/21/2017 at 8:25 AM, gsxrpilot said:

I looked very seriously at an Eagle but have been very happy with my decision to get a 252. Speed, performance and economy are great. The useful load is not. But with an Encore conversion and a general cleaning up of the panel and the airframe and I'll have UL in the 1100 range. 

ROP at 10,000 is 170 kts TAS. I can also fly LOP and have done so as high as FL230 without any issues. A recent flight east with a big tailwind had me loafing along at FL230, 9.5 gph and 230 knots over the ground.

What might have turned out to be the best possible Mooney ever - would be if they had put the TSIO-360-SB in the Eagle. It was already lighter than the Ovation due to fewer options. Close to 252 efficiency with the longer body. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2017 at 7:19 PM, Danb said:

The only time it wasn't a poor mans acclaim is if like myself you bought your BravoGX with no knowledge the Acclaim was coming out a year later, the cost New were close.

I wouldn't worry about that.  You have a most evolved version of the M20M.  Those earliest Acclaims as you know all needed top overhauls in like 300 or 400 hrs and other newest of the line glitches to be resolved at owners expense.  Plus the earliest acclaims are not as fast as the Acclaim type S so I am sure the speed gap is very small compared to your plane. 

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

On 12/21/2017 at 9:25 AM, gsxrpilot said:

I looked very seriously at an Eagle but have been very happy with my decision to get a 252. Speed, performance and economy are great. The useful load is not. But with an Encore conversion and a general cleaning up of the panel and the airframe and I'll have UL in the 1100 range. 

ROP at 10,000 is 170 kts TAS. I can also fly LOP and have done so as high as FL230 without any issues. A recent flight east with a big tailwind had me loafing along at FL230, 9.5 gph and 230 knots over the ground.

A balloon will do 230 knots over the ground with enough tail wind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2017 at 7:08 AM, Mike@Loves said:

Hi Steve,

As a non-US citizen I can only spend 6 months out of 12 in the US so I split my time between Florida (97FL), St. Vincent (TVSA) southern Caribbean - my primary residence and 2 - 4 weeks a year in Europe -  UK/Germany. For 4 years I flew a Wing Derringer back and forward to the "Islands". I sold it earlier this year and bought a M20J in which I have done 2 trips. Although it is a great aircraft, for that trip it is really at the limit for range and speed. We did fly back once in a day but it was a long day! We usually overnight in Puerto Plata, DR in both directions. 3 trips in a year are approximately 65 hours. The remainder of our flying is usually around Florida. The M20J is set to go to a new home in January.

I was RAF trained - C130s. A UK airline -  Vickers Viscounts. Cathay Pacific - L1011, B747-200/300/400. Retired early to go "Blue Water" sailing, ended up flying Islander, AC50, C402 in the Caribbean. Sailed up to US. Got a job flying Learjet 25/35/55/60 in Florida. 2005 US immigration would not renew my visa.Sailed back to the Caribbean to set up a jet operation C550/CJ3. Retired 2010. Bought house at Love's Landing (97FL) to keep flying. My wife said that I was driving her crazy because I couldn't get in an aircraft! 

For the past 4 - 6 months I have been looking at various Mooney types, turbo and NA. 231, 252, Missile, Rocket, Eagle/Screaming Eagle, Ovation. They are all suitable, it's just that some are more suitable than others! The flight down to St. Vincent is an interesting planning situation. By being able to select a cruise altitude  between say 8K and 18K it is usually possible to find a tailwind, or at least reduce the headwind significantly. Refuelling in the Bahamas or Turks and Caicos is expensive. If possible a non stop from Florida to Puerto Rico, not a great stopover at this time, to refuel and then on to St Croix. Or non stop Florida - St. Croix, 1024nm. The advantage of these 2 stops is, US soil to US soil. No eApis etc. until clearing out at TISX. Carrying max fuel out of TISX reduces the fuel uplift in TVSA to a minimum or zero. 100LL is $9.00/gal in TVSA!!! There are several other considerations, but I think you get the idea.

The budget is $160K but I suppose that could be pushed out a little.

I seem to have gone on a bit but reducing it any further would have given full picture.

Mike

I really like my rocket - it is a hot rod of the group.  I would not describe it as the most efficient but it is quite efficient. In my experiments I figure I can go almost as efficient as a 231/252 original if I am disciplined enough to slow down and run at very low power settings - it goes roughly 231/252 fuel flows at 231/252 speeds.  ...but usually I like to go faster - I can't help myself.  Anyway its nice to have extra power just in case....there's something lively having allotta extra Hp on tap with the flick of the fingers on your right hand.  Even when I'm not running fast, its a lovely feeling knowing its there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aviatoreb said:

I really like my rocket - it is a hot rod of the group.  I would not describe it as the most efficient but it is quite efficient. In my experiments I figure I can go almost as efficient as a 231/252 original if I am disciplined enough to slow down and run at very low power settings - it goes roughly 231/252 fuel flows at 231/252 speeds.

I've heard a number of Rocket owners claim this but when questioned say if they pull the power back to 12.5-13 GPH they can get the same 170KTAS as a 231 at 12,500 ft. The problem is, that's no where near the efficiency as a 231. I get that same 170 KTAS at 12,500 ft on 9.0 GPH. The Rocket is burning 40% more fuel to go the same speed - hardly "almost as efficient".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, KLRDMD said:

I've heard a number of Rocket owners claim this but when questioned say if they pull the power back to 12.5-13 GPH they can get the same 170KTAS as a 231 at 12,500 ft. The problem is, that's no where near the efficiency as a 231. I get that same 170 KTAS at 12,500 ft on 9.0 GPH. The Rocket is burning 40% more fuel to go the same speed - hardly "almost as efficient".

I don't know but I don't own one - but I was thinking it took 10-11gph to go 170 in a TSIO360 machine.  But you know better than me.  But that is where my statement comes from.

A common setting I go LOP at 12.5-13 and that gives about 175.  At an altitude like 12.5.  I actually don't like to run it lower than that since I worry it is getting sort if cold.  But a rough memory on that since I don't operate like this much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hard to beat a missile for this mission.  1300NM range at 170KTAS at 12K (no wind) with an hour reserve.  Most missiles have a useful load of 1100lbs.  I guess the late model M20S (screaming eagles) are pretty much the only thing range and features wise that do much better for the money.  Maybe an ovation, but they have a lower useful load, I think.  Never flown the m20S or R- just going off of the info I’ve seen on this board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I just looked at the Eagle that was on EBAY. It is now on Trade-a-Plane. The plane is physically located at Kenosha (WI).

https://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=MOONEY&model=M20S+EAGLE&listing_id=2316036&s-type=aircraft 

Plane is nice; a few cosmetic issues. UL was 970. The questionable:

1) Sat a while (10 hours since 10/2014) and sparse hours since 2010.

2) Oil changes seemed to have been too expensive for the first owner. Entries indicate 60, 70, 90 and 130 hours between some of the changes. Long stretches of the oil sitting due to sparse usage between 2010 and 2018.

Disappointing as I had high hopes on the way to see it. The seller mentioned a recent bore-scope that showed the cylinders to be fine...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, smlynarczyk said:

FWIW, I just looked at the Eagle that was on EBAY. It is now on Trade-a-Plane. The plane is physically located at Kenosha (WI).

https://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=MOONEY&model=M20S+EAGLE&listing_id=2316036&s-type=aircraft 

Plane is nice; a few cosmetic issues. UL was 970. The questionable:

1) Sat a while (10 hours since 10/2014) and sparse hours since 2010.

2) Oil changes seemed to have been too expensive for the first owner. Entries indicate 60, 70, 90 and 130 hours between some of the changes. Long stretches of the oil sitting due to sparse usage between 2010 and 2018.

Disappointing as I had high hopes on the way to see it. The seller mentioned a recent bore-scope that showed the cylinders to be fine...

If he has 1385 on the original cylinders on a Continental he must be doing something right. Budget in a top end and you should probably be ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LANCECASPER said:

If he has 1385 on the original cylinders on a Continental he must be doing something right. Budget in a top end and you should probably be ok.

Im doing a prebuy on this pretty shortly. All the cylinders are above 70 psi and the engines not making any metal. Quite surprising actually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Niko182 said:

Im doing a prebuy on this pretty shortly. All the cylinders are above 70 psi and the engines not making any metal. Quite surprising actually.

1998 was the last year of the J. 1999 was the first year of the S (eagle). Compare late J prices to this and this seems like a good deal, especially when you consider the advantages of the extra room. I hope the pre-buy goes well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

1998 was the last year of the J. 1999 was the first year of the S (eagle). Compare late J prices to this and this seems like a good deal, especially when you consider the advantages of the extra room. I hope the pre-buy goes well.

That extra room doesn’t do you much good without the extra useful load to go with it (970 is pretty low for a S from what I understand).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, M016576 said:

That extra room doesn’t do you much good without the extra useful load to go with it (970 is pretty low for a S from what I understand).

It needs the screaming eagle upgrade to do the airframe justice and gain the useful load. 

If I was in a prebuy on this aircraft I’d have @Txbyker ‘s prop on deposit no question about it. 

  • Like 1
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.