Jump to content

How much did Mooneys cost new by year/model?


FloridaMan

Recommended Posts

To state it backwards, that 800k Acclaim would have cost about 260k or so back in 1980. Based on the price of high performance singles of the day it would seem that aircraft have outstripped inflation to some extent but when you factor in the significant technological advancements particularly with avionics who knows.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, mike_elliott said:

Agreed. When you fly in an Ultra, you will see just how much nicer they are than the nicest of C's etc. and thus far nicer than a CEzzna or a Cirri. They are that much nicer than  a 2016 Acclaim or Ovation! Garmin got it right with the NXI, Mooney got it right everywhere else.

GA has NEVER been a poor mans game and to wish it were is only a dream one has to have the best and spend the less. Unfortunately, It wont happen. Continually we see people wanting Mooney to make a 200K J model. Unfortunately, it wont happen. If Mooney could, they would.  Back when a 1967 F model was 28AMU's, you could spend that much on a VERY nice house, even in the Bay area. Now, you can spend 700K on a very nice house except in the Bay area  or that much on a new Ultra. 

The onerous is on us to be able to afford GA. We have to use our talents to make the sheckles required for entry, not bellyache about the entry fee. Mr. Market and competition keeps the prices as low as they can be and still have a viable company producing the finest GA piston planes made.

Hmmm.  Sadly, I both agree with you (“deal with the situation at hand- stop whining and just deal with it”) and disagree with you (because I do believe the future *could* be better, and have an idea of what better is). 

The issue with the “unachievable” 200k J is certainly economies of scale.  If the company can only move 12 units a year, and the basic costs remain fixed, then those 12 units MUST cost more than if the company moved 250 units for said company to remain solvent.  

Sadly, the engine manufacturers, the avionics manufacturers also suffer from the same issue.  Does a 6 cylinder, mechanically controlled air cooled engine *really* need to cost 60K?  The electronically controlled dual cam 414 HP V8 in my BMW costs about 15K new.  I know, it’s not an “airplane engine”.... but the fact is that BMW built about 500,000 of those engines over 6 years- so they cost less to produce.  The fixed costs are amortized across the units produced.

I have no doubt that the M20 Ultra is absolutely gorgeous on the inside.   The leather, the workmanship, the paint and the electronics, while amazing by GA standards, are probably no more complicated... really... than what’s in a 75K Mercedes.  Debatably, the Mercedes interior may be considered “nicer.”  Another example: a Stratux kit, built from a raspberry pi (hundreds of thousands of raspberries built), with a full blown AHRS, costs about 100bucks.  A “certified ADSb in” costs $2000....  economies of scale.  

we can and will, in GA, continue to go down this road of climbing costs.   New planes will continue to cost more as interest wanes, and liability wanes.  The price for entry may have never have been “cheap.”  But it was within reach at one point.  It’s becoming (if it isn’t already) unachievable for even the upper middle class.  As a kid that was able to learn to fly in a C172 at 15, because I worked a job at a golf course to afford some lessons... which fueled my desire to become a fighter pilot... to make “something of myself”... and to see what that opportunity has given me, and many like me... it’s heartbreaking to me to think that the next generations of Americans will potentially miss out on such an opportunity to learn, and love, and maybe even make a career of aviation.

but- you’re right- the present scenario is that GA is becoming more expensive, relative to the economy, and if one cannot afford it- sadly, they won’t be able to fly.  Mooney makes great planes.  If GA was more popular, they could make the exact same great planes for half the cost.

as a flight instructor, I would expect that you’d agree with this: more pilots in GA = a better, stronger GA community... and tens of thousands more = more demand = more production = lower costs in time for all.

Edited by M016576
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, M016576 said:

Sadly, the engine manufacturers, the avionics manufacturers also suffer from the same issue.  Does a 6 cylinder, mechanically controlled air cooled engine *really* need to cost 60K?  The electronically controlled dual cam 414 HP V8 in my BMW costs about 15K new.  I know, it’s not an “airplane engine”.... but the fact is that BMW built about 500,000 of those engines over 6 years- so they cost less to produce.  The fixed costs are amortized across the units produced

And sadly, it appears this concept of economies of scale  doesn't work in the housing market in Santa Monica or the Bay area either. Does it *really* need to cost 1.5m for a 2200 SF house in a neighborhood not controlled by MS13? It is also wishful thinking to be able to buy a new TSIO 550N in quantities for 60K today. They are considerably more. Thats close to a reman price with a core. If BMW sells new V8 engines for 15K and their 7 series cars are in the price range they are, It seems they might become a target of our "greed" panel here on MS if they are not careful.

 

6 hours ago, M016576 said:

it’s heartbreaking to me to think that the next generations of Americans will potentially miss out on such an opportunity to learn, and love, and maybe even make a career of aviation

I believe Its up to the individual. I know a millennial who just bought his 6th plane (has all 6 right now) is looking at his 7th, has his sights set on getting his instrument rating so he can get a TBM 930 soon. A new Cirrus, Cessna, Beech Money etc would not be an issue financially for him, just as his many properties or businesses. Did I mention he is a very kind and smart young man? Yes, the exception, but he decided his fate early and isn't afraid to put himself out there to achieve. Perhaps the issue of dying GA falls more on the shoulders of GA inherently not being able to provide instant gratification (no training, no barriers to entry, no consequences of actions) required and demanded by the majority of our future -  our youngsters, todays "utes". It is not that they will miss out, it is more a case they choose to miss out, in spite of moms/dads pocketbook to assist. Could it be because they would be forced to take ownership of their individual success or failure? But all is not lost. We have the Seth Meyers and Lee Drumhellers and the Alex Melia's who have decided they are the sole decision makers of their fate. They know there are no "do overs" and they dont deserve a good landing because little Timmy got one.' Can Alex afford a new Mooney? No way today, but I am betting on he will be able to someday. Its a DNA thing...just like I think this will be a moot issue for you at some point from what you said as your background and GA entry. (and good on you!!)

 

6 hours ago, M016576 said:

 If GA was more popular, they could make the exact same great planes for half the cost

It wasn't that long ago they did make a plane, albeit not nearly as nice or have nearly the avionics/engine package, for about half. GA wasn't that much if any larger. While your statement is wishful by all, it is just that, a wishful statement, not a fact with the costs of today involved to make a plane. This is a different animal than a BMW with a different perceived threat to society that has a high cost associated with that intangible alone.

GA's future depends on the mindset of our future. Throwing money at the problem hasn't worked here before, yet we continue down this path out of guilt or desperation, while wishing for an economic return of the "good old days" in not only GA, but darned near everything, including eggs and milk.

 

6 hours ago, M016576 said:

The issue with the “unachievable” 200k J is certainly economies of scale.  If the company can only move 12 units a year, and the basic costs remain fixed, then those 12 units MUST cost more than if the company moved 250 units for said company to remain solvent

How many do you think it would take? 20000?  What would GA be like if we had an additional half billion (the number of back ordered tesla 3 series) in the air at any one time? Can you imagine the size of the FAA, or the environmentalist pressure to rid us of that nasty fuel?. The "10" at rush hour would be the fast lane for sure if it were overcast. We most assuredly would  have cheaper planes (Mr. market would see to that) but we might not be able to use them just like you really cant **use** your Porsche on the 10, or let that variable cam timing V8 stretch itself in rush hour. 

Much to the chagrin of AOPA, there will always be 2 kinds of people in our world...those that own airplanes and those that dont. I currently fall into the latter myself, albeit by choice right now as I would be doing an airplane an injustice not having time to fly one I own. (I still maintain a hangar with all the great man cave things including an "ultra" nice Bravo). 

While I have to side with you on the wish fullness of where we would like GA, GA pricing, society, housing, BMW costs etc to be, reality is what it is, and it will always be up to us to "suck it up and deal with it" It has been that way each lap of the 67 I have taken around the big fireball in the sky, and there sure have been times I wish it were different.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even going experimental isn't that cheap.  I'm building an RV-8.  It will cost north of $100,000 when finished.  Include the cost of my labor ~ 3,000 hours and the all in cost is above $600,000.

Anyone who does anything in aviation really has to do it because they enjoy it, not to make money.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is that the new tech has a lower manufacturing cost than the old stuff and that any premium in modern avionics is due solely to the lack of economies of scale -- you're paying for the R&D, certification and the absolutely horrendous inefficiency in technology and engineering management exhibited by large companies. The raw manufacturing cost of modern avionics is likely orders of magnitude less than the old mechanical and discrete solid-state instruments. But, just like with software, you are paying for the expertise and time spent in development. It's why marine navionics cost so much less than their aviation counterparts. They're still mission critical and operate in harsh environments. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, markejackson02 said:

Even going experimental isn't that cheap.  I'm building an RV-8.  It will cost north of $100,000 when finished.  Include the cost of my labor ~ 3,000 hours and the all in cost is above $600,000.

Anyone who does anything in aviation really has to do it because they enjoy it, not to make money.

Experimental aircraft are not free...it's true.  But having owned both certified and experimental, not only is the purchase cost much lower for similar types, the overall cost of ownership is MUCH lower.  However, I'll be the first to admit, experimental is not for everyone.

$600,000?  You need to charge yourself at a lower rate.  Maybe $0.25/hour and then the cost will be below $500,00!  :lol:

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

The whole thing is a mess. These aircraft companies better watch out. They are RIPE for disruption. No general aviation aircraft manufacturer is truly innovating. Maybe in association with DARPA, at times but, not in retail airplane sales or development. Maybe they're held back by the FAA. I don't know. We need a Henry Ford for airplanes. $800K is just terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, johnlwebb@gmail.com said:

The whole thing is a mess. These aircraft companies better watch out. They are RIPE for disruption. No general aviation aircraft manufacturer is truly innovating. Maybe in association with DARPA, at times but, not in retail airplane sales or development. Maybe they're held back by the FAA. I don't know. We need a Henry Ford for airplanes. $800K is just terrible.

I don’t think that the cost of an airplane is the entire problem.  The cost of getting your PPL is also prohibitive, the number of hours that schools milk students for is crazy.

Clarence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard some interesting numbers at Oshkosh this past year. Probably some of you others heard them also. At the Mooney Owner's forum a spokesman for the Mooney factory mentioned the number of manhours needed to build an airplane by the various manufacturers. Cirrus 1200 manhours, Cessna 172 1800 manhours. Mooney Acclaim 6000 manhours. 6000! And they hoped with some experience to get that down to 3000. I believe our aircraft were designed in an era when labor was just not as high a proportion of the total cost of production as it is today. I can't imagine we're ever going to see new $250K, or even $400,000 Js.

Mike Busch is fond of comparing the price through the years of a Cadillac to a Cessna 182. The inflation adjusted price of a 182 has increased far more then the Cadillac. 

What I find even more interesting is comparing the price of a fully loaded high end ASTM certified LSA like a Bristell or a Flight Design, to Part 23 (or CAR 3) aircraft. I could buy a fully loaded Bristell, full glass panel, deluxe auto-pilot for around $200,000. Or a fully loaded Flight Design CTLSi GT for $179,000. And they both come with modern 2000 hour, electronic fuel injected engines that according to Mike Busch and Aviation Consumer, really do make TBO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 1977 M20J was sold new for 62K.  The price of airplanes, along with housing, healthcare, and college, has risen much faster than inflation and wages.  Perhaps the loss of disposable income for hobbies can also factor into the decline of GA, every year since 1978 basically. 

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

4 hours ago, John Mininger said:

I heard some interesting numbers at Oshkosh this past year. Probably some of you others heard them also. At the Mooney Owner's forum a spokesman for the Mooney factory mentioned the number of manhours needed to build an airplane by the various manufacturers. Cirrus 1200 manhours, Cessna 172 1800 manhours. Mooney Acclaim 6000 manhours. 6000! And they hoped with some experience to get that down to 3000. I believe our aircraft were designed in an era when labor was just not as high a proportion of the total cost of production as it is today. I can't imagine we're ever going to see new $250K, or even $400,000 Js.

Mike Busch is fond of comparing the price through the years of a Cadillac to a Cessna 182. The inflation adjusted price of a 182 has increased far more then the Cadillac. 

What I find even more interesting is comparing the price of a fully loaded high end ASTM certified LSA like a Bristell or a Flight Design, to Part 23 (or CAR 3) aircraft. I could buy a fully loaded Bristell, full glass panel, deluxe auto-pilot for around $200,000. Or a fully loaded Flight Design CTLSi GT for $179,000. And they both come with modern 2000 hour, electronic fuel injected engines that according to Mike Busch and Aviation Consumer, really do make TBO. 

At the MooneyMax conference Kevin Kammer said they had over $350,000 in material not including any labor in each new airframe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

It’s an obsolete design with a useful load problem and no parachute.   This is a problem. 

Useful load, yes.

Obsolete, nah no more obsolete than the engines we hang on the front of our airplanes regardless of what year they were made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Cruiser said:

At the MooneyMax conference Kevin Kammer said they had over $350,000 in material not including any labor in each new airframe. 

I find $350k a little hard to believe.  I do believe there are many $ in labor to form, assemble and build these planes.

I know it is experimental, but material is material, and an RV10 airframe only quick build (much of the labor included) can be had for $65+/-.  This is just the airframe no interior, engine etc.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, John Mininger said:

I wonder how long it will be before OEMs start offering the Dynon HDX system.

Whenever the FAA lets them . . . . . The holdup is approval of the system, followed by certification of the approved system for each individual airframe. $$$$$ and time, time, time, years, year$ . . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Also, I don't think the factories are state of the art. Many parts are fabricated using outdated labor intensive techniques. Someone needs a truly automated factory to get the cost down and "mass" produce airplanes.

Also, the cost of acquiring a PPL is prohibitive partly due to the way the schools go about it. The school model is obsolete. Innovate. Disrupt. If you need pilots to buy your planes, make them. Train them yourself. Train them in the airplane you want to sell them and create an affordable airplane.

All this takes significant investment and at this point may be moot since passenger drones are looking pretty good to disrupt general aviation.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure GA is expensive, but no more so than many other expenses. You can purchase a nice used Mooney for the price of a new luxury car. You can purchase a nice brand new Mooney for the price of a luxury RV. And your operating costs, all-in, are in the ballpark of a year tuition at a private school for 1 kid. It's cheaper than a year of college for 1 kid. So certainly not everybody can afford this, but there is a huge segment of the population that could afford it, if they wished.

I think the real issue is Safety. Society has gotten more safety-conscious over the years. But GA still has a lot of accidents and you hear about every one. So right or wrong, the perception is that it is too dangerous.

And the second issue is time. Lots more distractions these days, but no extra time. Most people don't wish to invest the time it takes. 

Larry 

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.