New to M20C

[MyNameIsNobody]

I think it is hilarious that a guy asks about ins and outs of buying a C and morphs into a “I spent more on my panel than the plane is worth, look at my awesome panel”.

Good advise on the pre-buy.  Look at the logs for history.  A lot depends on your purchase price.  If a new engine has been factored in that is not a problem, but bonus time flying before overhaul.  Tank reseal and bladders is a $7-10k proposition plus down time.  Usually tanks and senders (fuel smell in cockpit) weep before they run and NEED sealed.

Inspection of tubular steel in cabin as well as spar inspection (Below rear seat) are CRITICAL as this can require a wing replacement or make the plane not airworthy.

Gear pucks are $100 bucks a piece and there are about a dozen.  A tool can be rented to replace.  A bigger deal in a heavier long body plane.  They should have been replaced and upgraded (fewer pucks) at least once.  Not a deal killer, but a negotiation.

The avionics are going to get updated by you as will interior if original.   These can be done a little at a time, but I would deduct if no GPS/Engine Monitor and ADSB.  Again negotiation stuff.

If Hartzell prop they have an eddy-current inspection that adds up over time and is a hassle.  Hope it works out for you.  I trained on 150’s and flew 172’s before buying my short body Mooney.  THERE IS NO COMPARISON.  Mooney is hands down a better experience and a lot faster.

Edited May 3, 2018 by MyNameIsNobody

[MyNameIsNobody]

1 hour ago, steingar said:

True, there is nothing made like the M20c.  Had I more coin I would happily spend it on my aircraft, the Lucky Strike certainly deserves it.  

M20E?  Come on man...

[Chris from PA]

I live in eastern PA and have flown my C to Key West and Minnesota. Very simple airplane that has withstood the test of time.  If you're an A&P, or you have a friend, you can save some money and learn a ton by purchasing a "fixer upper."  Otherwise spend as much as you can and get a nice one. 

[Mooneymite]

On 4/30/2018 at 2:57 PM, cap said:

I am looking at selling my 172 for a M20C (65). Just doing some exploration to make sure its a good fit for me.

im curious if there are common snags or concerns with this model. Anything I really have to look out for when buying.

thx

Welcome to Mooneyspace world where if you ask what time it is, there will be a thousand explanations of how to build an atomic clock!  

Your basic question is a good one:  "Is it a good fit for you?"  But only you can answer that!

The C is a small step up from a C-172.  It is a very easy airplane to fly.

The retractable gear is unforgiving if you forget it and you'll pay a bit more for insurance.

The speed and efficiency make it all worthwhile.  It is not a great load hauler.

It is an excellent instrument airplane, so plan on getting your IR.

Jump right in!  You'll be glad you did.

Keep us posted on your search for the perfect Mooney.

[jaylw314]

33 minutes ago, Mooneymite said:

The retractable gear is unforgiving if you forget it

I'm not sure why, but I find that sentence hilariously awesome

[Skates97]

On 5/1/2018 at 8:00 PM, Jim Peace said:

I bought my plane from a friend who owned it for 41 years.  All the time he thought to upgrade to something bigger or faster but the numbers never even came close to a C.  Sure you can go 200 plus knots in something else but you will most likely still be flying with one other person for the 200 dollar hamburger.  Would only make a few minutes difference at best for possibly over 100k more....."no way Jose"

Even with some of my coast to coast trips a faster plane would not make too much of a difference....I still want to stop and get out every 4 hours max......

That is why I will most likely never "upgrade" from my plane. Most of my trips are in the 3-500nm range and it is perfect for that. I do have a coast to coast trip in the planning stages for 2019 and will make the trip to AK in the coming years, but even then I will want to get out an stretch, and I never get tired of just enjoying the view out the window, the journey can be as much fun as the destination.

[steingar]

20 hours ago, MyNameIsNobody said:

M20E?  Come on man...

When I was shopping I found the price of most of the M20E's was prohibitive given the 10 knots speed increase.  Might have just been the time period and airframes available.  Had I been able to afford one that's what I'd be flying.  But like the man said, for most trips I'd not notice the difference.

[Andy95W]

21 hours ago, MyNameIsNobody said:

M20E?  Come on man...

 

1 hour ago, steingar said:

When I was shopping I found the price of most of the M20E's was prohibitive given the 10 knots speed increase.  Might have just been the time period and airframes available.  Had I been able to afford one that's what I'd be flying.  But like the man said, for most trips I'd not notice the difference.

Yes, the M20E is a better airplane.  Faster, and the ability to fly lean of peak make it both more efficient and more desirable as an airplane.

But, no offense to anyone here, I agree with Steingar.  $5-$10,000 more money for about 5-7 knots more speed simply don't make it worth it to me.  And then you add in the additional expense of ownership, such as:

     -more fuel system components to maintain and overhaul

     -cylinders that are more expensive because only one manufacturer makes them

     -an electric fuel pump that puts out 30psi and doesn't last as long as mine that only puts out 6psi

     -hot start issues

There's a lot to like about the M20C.  In no way does that detract from the M20E.

[Mooneymite]

25 minutes ago, Andy95W said:

There's a lot to like about the M20C.  In no way does that detract from the M20E.

Very well put.  I agree with you on all counts.

[zaitcev]

On 5/3/2018 at 10:58 AM, Urs_Wildermuth said:

really? Wow. Well, I am very happy with it.

I became disillusioned with Aspen when I found its annoying failure modes. The biggest problem is, there's no partial failure. Anything goes bad in the AHARS, it's the red X time, even though the airspeed is still available, and possibly nothing's bad with the gyros. It's all or nothing. And man, is that thing picky. Unlike e.g. Sandia, which can desaturate using just the gravity and some software, or several experimental EFIS that take magnetometers for it, Aspen uses GPS. So, GPS reception goes bad and in 30 seconds you get red X. You also get red X if GPS speed does not check against the airspeed. You get pitot frosen, you lose AI too. In a steam gauge airplane you can continue using power settings and pitch attitude, but here it's AF447 if that happens. Now, most of these concerns is relieved by having standby gauges, which you do have -- even the standby AI (although I hope it's not electric). Still, I just cannot trust Aspen anymore.

P.S. The first time I found about overbearing self-checking and consistency of Aspen was when I practiced emergency extension checklist on Arrow. It called for an energetic rudder input to make gear come down. I stomped those rudders and Aspen threw red X. Took some 20 seconds for it to self-correct.

Edited May 4, 2018 by zaitcev

[gsxrpilot]

2 minutes ago, zaitcev said:

I became disillusioned with Aspen when I found its annoying failure modes. The biggest problem is, there's no partial failure. Anything goes bad in the AHARS, it's the red X time, even though the airspeed is still available, and possibly nothing's bad with the gyros. It's all or nothing. And man, is that thing picky. Unlike e.g. Sandia, which can desaturate using just the gravity and some software, or several experimental EFIS that take magnetometers for it, Aspen uses GPS. So, GPS reception goes bad and in 30 seconds you get red X. You also get red X if GPS speed does not check against the airspeed. You get pitot frosen, you lose AI too. In a steam gauge airplane you can continue using power settings and pitch attitude, but here it's AF447 if that happens. Now, most of these concerns is relieved by having standby gauges, which you do have -- even the standby AI (although I hope it's not electric). Still, I just cannot trust Aspen anymore.

I'm only 200 hours in... but fingers crossed, I've never seen the red X on my Aspen. If I do, I'm counting on the G5 sitting next to it to get me down.

[MyNameIsNobody]

1 hour ago, steingar said:

When I was shopping I found the price of most of the M20E's was prohibitive given the 10 knots speed increase.  Might have just been the time period and airframes available.  Had I been able to afford one that's what I'd be flying.  But like the man said, for most trips I'd not notice the difference.

MMmmk.  You had just said, well you read your quote on spending more money, but no similar...The E and C are very similar.  Not saying one is better...JUST similar.

[Marauder]

5 minutes ago, zaitcev said:

I became disillusioned with Aspen when I found its annoying failure modes. The biggest problem is, there's no partial failure. Anything goes bad in the AHARS, it's the red X time, even though the airspeed is still available, and possibly nothing's bad with the gyros. It's all or nothing. And man, is that thing picky. Unlike e.g. Sandia, which can desaturate using just the gravity and some software, or several experimental EFIS that take magnetometers for it, Aspen uses GPS. So, GPS reception goes bad and in 30 seconds you get red X. You also get red X if GPS speed does not check against the airspeed. You get pitot frosen, you lose AI too. In a steam gauge airplane you can continue using power settings and pitch attitude, but here it's AF447 if that happens. Now, most of these concerns is relieved by having standby gauges, which you do have -- even the standby AI (although I hope it's not electric). Still, I just cannot trust Aspen anymore.

P.S. The first time I found about overbearing self-checking and consistency of Aspen was when I practiced emergency extension checklist on Arrow. It called for an energetic rudder input to make gear come down. I stomped those rudders and Aspen threw red X. Took some 20 seconds for it to self-correct.

Never seen any of these issues with my 6 years with the Aspen. I do know they had issues early on with installation problems on the AHRS. Specifically poorly made connectors that was addressed with additional instructions to the installers. The pitot failure mode is exactly what is supposed to happen. The guy who posted the video on YouTube complaining about the Aspen failing then realizing the failure mode was pointing out he had pitot icing. It is no different than what would happen to your mechanical airspeed indicator if the pitot iced over.

Not sure where you get that Aspen uses GPS for the heading. The antenna attached to the fuselage is a combined GPS antenna, magnometer and OAT sensor. Again, if you are seeing these errors, it is most likely related to that unit. If your GPS navigator fails, the Aspen has a backup GPS that will keep your flight plan alive. The Aspen does use the GPS data from the navigator for TAS, GS and winds aloft calculations. It also drives that little blue indicator on top of the HSI indicating your ground track.  

I do agree that Aspen could have spent more time on the degraded mode. It would have required them to obtain additional certifications on the unit. My backup device is the L-3 ESI-500 which has a degraded level of performance if the pitot-static system fails. 

If you still own the Aspen, I would seek out someone knowledgeable on the early AHRS issues. 

[zaitcev]

6 hours ago, Marauder said:

Not sure where you get that Aspen uses GPS for the heading.

Not sure where you get that I claimed or implied that Aspen uses GPS for the heading.

They do use GPS for the attitude desaturation though. Well, the term is a misnomer, but what it comes down to is that MEMS gyros (or any other kind, e.g. laser) do not have any way to tell where the up is, and ostensibly you cannot even rely on accelerometers. And as gyros operate, they accumilate drift, so if nothing is done, in an hour your electronic AI will show a persistent false bank or pitch. In a mechanical gyro, a very small amount of friction and asymmetry are present (the latter is introduced on purpose). So, if left alone, AI drifts in such a way that it starts showing level. But in an electronic AI these effects are absent, unless programmed in software. In order to find the up and down, an electronic AI typically uses an external reference to "desaturate" (which should be used "de-drifting", I suppose).

Anything external will do, like a star tracker, but in practical systems either GPS is used or a magnetometer.

As an example, the following mini-EFIS that I investigated for purchase use GPS: Grand Rapids (GRT) - 100 seconds before loss of attitude, AvMap Ultra, Aspen PFD, MGL Extreme. The following use magnetometer: Dynon D10A. The following is unknown: Tru-Trak Gemini. The only one that I know that uses an artificial friction and the vertical reference from accelerometers is Sandia 340. At the time Garmin G5 was not yet available, so I don't know how it desaturates.

[DXB]

6 hours ago, zaitcev said:

I became disillusioned with Aspen when I found its annoying failure modes. The biggest problem is, there's no partial failure. Anything goes bad in the AHARS, it's the red X time, even though the airspeed is still available, and possibly nothing's bad with the gyros. It's all or nothing. And man, is that thing picky. Unlike e.g. Sandia, which can desaturate using just the gravity and some software, or several experimental EFIS that take magnetometers for it, Aspen uses GPS. So, GPS reception goes bad and in 30 seconds you get red X. You also get red X if GPS speed does not check against the airspeed. You get pitot frosen, you lose AI too. In a steam gauge airplane you can continue using power settings and pitch attitude, but here it's AF447 if that happens. Now, most of these concerns is relieved by having standby gauges, which you do have -- even the standby AI (although I hope it's not electric). Still, I just cannot trust Aspen anymore.

 P.S. The first time I found about overbearing self-checking and consistency of Aspen was when I practiced emergency extension checklist on Arrow. It called for an energetic rudder input to make gear come down. I stomped those rudders and Aspen threw red X. Took some 20 seconds for it to self-correct.

The lack of a functional backup modes independent of airspeed and GPS are indeed unfortunate weaknesses of the Aspen, which otherwise is a very elegantly designed unit  that has stood the test of time.  That said, I will certainly be adding in the Sandia (or similar) in the near future.  Here's some guys getting Red-X'd by their Aspens over the north Atlantic - luckily in severe  clear VMC, though the function came back with pitot heat.  

 

[gsxrpilot]

That video shows some pretty poor troubleshooting. They immediately cycle the power to all their avionics. First of all, since you know how the Aspen works, it might be useful to check the ASI and try the Pitot heat. I realize it was VMC, but it was cold.  Secondly, even without the Aspen, they still had an AI, ASI, and two GPS units. Even in IMC, it's hardly an emergency.  Finally, in my airplane, the Aspen is on it's own switch. That allows me to cycle it's power without killing my radios, GPS, etc.

[zaitcev]

2 hours ago, DXB said:

 Here's some guys getting Red-X'd by their Aspens over the north Atlantic

It's actually Matt Guthmiller in the right seat. "Some guys" were trying to go around the world at the time and they took him onboard for the Atlantic leg in order to learn the ropes.

[Jim Peace]

On 5/1/2018 at 8:47 PM, DXB said:

I see on your JPI you have RPM on top of MAP.  I did not know you could change that.  I may do the same

[Marauder]

I see on your JPI you have RPM on top of MAP.  I did not know you could change that.  I may do the same

Funny you mentioned this. I was playing around with the JPI configuration this afternoon. All of the non-primary instruments and information can be moved around or removed. Pretty slick.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[carusoam]

Jim,

Why would you prefer one over the other?  RPM over MP  vs.  MP over RPM

Both are important. MP being the more critical of the two...

During my take-off roll... I want to glance at MP and FF  as the go/nogo decision after airspeed comes alive...

After that , it’s all systems go...

 

Marauder, your thoughts are always welcomed as well...

 

If Something is going to ruin my day, it’s probably going to be MP related first ...

Best regards,

-a-

[Marauder]

Jim,
Why would you prefer one over the other?  RPM over MP  vs.  MP over RPM
Both are important. MP being the more critical of the two...
During my take-off roll... I want to glance at MP and FF  as the go/nogo decision after airspeed comes alive...
After that , it’s all systems go...
 
Marauder, your thoughts are always welcomed as well...
 
If Something is going to ruin my day, it’s probably going to be MP related first ...
Best regards,
-a-

The original orientation of my factory gauges were MP on top of RPM. When I installed the EI units, I went with RPM on top of MP. With the JPI in landscape mode, I kept mine in the reading orientation (left to right).

Whatever way your brain processes it is the right way.

[Hank]

So the JPI tach has numbers along the arc, with the current reading down below. Why does the MP side just have a green arc with tickmarks and no numbers? It looks so naked and alone . . .

Just one more reason for me to like my steam gages.