Help me pick a Mooney! (or talk me out of Mooneys if you can!)

[Niko182]

This is a decent example.

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28591635/1966-mooney-m20e-super-21

All the speed mods on it. He states 165 knots at 10 GPH which sounds possible, maybe a tad bit optimistic but wouldnt be surprised if it could do that.
530 waas with a brand new GNC255. Engine monitor, and an aspen. ADSB compliant. J bar. nice paint job. it does have the prop that requires a Prop.

To be honest that everything you're looking for. and its maintained by a pretty popular MSC.

[doc_arcadia]

13 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

What type of flying experience do you have?  

The C might be the most expensive choice you can make. From what I’ve seen (and my personal opinion) there is very little to be gained going from a C to different NA Mooney of similar vintage. Many people moving up jump into an Ovation/Bravo/252.  If I move up in the future and stay with the Mooney it will probably be a Bravo if I can find the right one. 

When you say the C may be the most expensive choice I can make ... what do you mean? Is the C likely to cost me a lot over the purchase price? Is the C the most expensive plane I can buy for a certain experience level? 

[carusoam]

Doc,

You’re gonna have to wait for what he meant by that...

Cs aren’t any more expensive in that respect...

He may have been pointing out that buying one plane to replace it soon after with another may not be financially pleasant...

Since fuel type is important to your decision still.., an M20E has fuel injection and can be run easily LOP burning 100% of the fuel used and provides more excess hp that is used for improved T/O and climb...

It is expensive to change motors. So selecting the better motor for you, is important early in...

C and E are essentially the same airframe, the E has a more capable engine... and makes for a fantastic retirement plane...

Have you made any headway in your selection process?

Best regards,

-a-

[Ragsf15e]

Those were fair rebuttals of my “buy a J” theory.  To each their own I think in that respect.  

I guess my thought is that the C-J all have about the same operating costs (insurance could be more on a pricey J) and use roughly the same engine.  I’d like to get the most performance and newest systems possible.  The buy in is more and that’s important, but you may get that back and more selling a J vs something else.  

No matter what, operating costs will quickly overcome initial purchase price.  I feel lucky that I bought a nice F and it took about 4 years at 100 hours per year to spend more than my initial purchase.

[doc_arcadia]

19 minutes ago, Niko182 said:

This is a decent example.

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28591635/1966-mooney-m20e-super-21

All the speed mods on it. He states 165 knots at 10 GPH which sounds possible, maybe a tad bit optimistic but wouldnt be surprised if it could do that.
530 waas with a brand new GNC255. Engine monitor, and an aspen. ADSB compliant. J bar. nice paint job. it does have the prop that requires a Prop.

To be honest that everything you're looking for. and its maintained by a pretty popular MSC.

Efharisto Niko! (From the name, I'm assuming you might know what that means. If not ... it means "thank you!")

 

That Mooney E sounds good ... except that there's no UL94, or other fuel STC that I know of, for it. Not a deal breaker, but I do think I would greatly prefer to use an unleaded fuel which exists today. 

But thanks again!

 

[gsxrpilot]

What to buy... and why to buy it

M20C - Capital is limited and price of entry is paramount... still faster and more efficient than any other brand up to twice the cost.
M20E - Just like a C but better. Faster on less fuel and no carb to ice up. The back seat won't have regular occupants.
M20F - You need four seats and all the useful load you can find.
M20J - Factory installed LoPresti speed mods make for a fast and very efficient four seater.
M20K - Higher altitudes are required or would be very useful. Will struggle to get past a J below 10K feet, but in the flight levels is very fast on very little fuel.
Bravo - You want to go very fast from A to B with two people who pack light. And to hell with the fuel.
Ovation - You live East of the Mississippi and can afford it so why not.
Acclaim - You live West of the Mississippi and can afford it so why not.

[Niko182]

9 minutes ago, doc_arcadia said:

Efharisto Niko! (From the name, I'm assuming you might know what that means. If not ... it means "thank you!")

 

That Mooney E sounds good ... except that there's no UL94, or other fuel STC that I know of, for it. Not a deal breaker, but I do think I would greatly prefer to use an unleaded fuel which exists today. 

But thanks again!

 

Whats the gain of UL94 over 100LL

[gsxrpilot]

7 minutes ago, doc_arcadia said:

That Mooney E sounds good ... except that there's no UL94, or other fuel STC that I know of, for it. Not a deal breaker, but I do think I would greatly prefer to use an unleaded fuel which exists today.

I think you'll have to make a decision on this UL94. If this is high enough on the priority list, then the only Mooney you're looking at is an M20C. That's fine, but it's a whole different buying experience (and owning experience) than say opening up the possibilities to the other Mooneys. 

So assuming you're looking for an M20C... the most expensive one you can find, will likely turn out to be the best deal. It's unlikely you'll be able to spend over $60K on an M20C. But you'll want the following... we can assume that an airplane that isn't airworthy is a deal breaker. That would include corrosion.

Stec30 autopilot or better
WAAS GPS - Garmin 430W or better
A six-pack arranged panel
ADSB Out
Full four cylinder engine monitor.
Currently in annual and regularly flying
Johnson Bar manual gear
LoPresti speed mods such as 201 Windshield, 201 Cowl, Gap seals, wing tips, belly, etc.
No eddy prop hub
 

I'd try to get as far down the list as you can... but the first two would be deal breakers for me.
 

[doc_arcadia]

5 minutes ago, Niko182 said:

Whats the gain of UL94 over 100LL

The 94 UL should be cheaper than avgas (besides its inherent cheapness, county taxes in my county are also being waived on UL94), and, of course, better for the environment of people who hang around airports (including me). The unleaded fuel should be easier on the engine (no lead to foul the plugs). And, when LL goes away, I'll still be able to fly on a fuel which exists today. 

So, for me, the ability to fly on at least UL94 makes sense. 

[kpaul]

55 minutes ago, Niko182 said:

This is a decent example.

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28591635/1966-mooney-m20e-super-21

All the speed mods on it. He states 165 knots at 10 GPH which sounds possible, maybe a tad bit optimistic but wouldnt be surprised if it could do that.
530 waas with a brand new GNC255. Engine monitor, and an aspen. ADSB compliant. J bar. nice paint job. it does have the prop that requires a Prop.

To be honest that everything you're looking for. and its maintained by a pretty popular MSC.

Isn't that the same MSC that just dropped poor Don's plane on it's nose?

[Ragsf15e]

54 minutes ago, Niko182 said:

This is a decent example.

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28591635/1966-mooney-m20e-super-21

All the speed mods on it. He states 165 knots at 10 GPH which sounds possible, maybe a tad bit optimistic but wouldnt be surprised if it could do that.
530 waas with a brand new GNC255. Engine monitor, and an aspen. ADSB compliant. J bar. nice paint job. it does have the prop that requires a Prop.

To be honest that everything you're looking for. and its maintained by a pretty popular MSC.

Looks like a beautiful E.  Nice engine times.  Probably very fast.

Needs autopilot to get real value out of all the other fancy avionics.  That’s a big ticket item.

[Bob_Belville]

Fuel is the least important of the operating costs for Mooney owners. And a small delta cost would be even less important. Really.

I doubt that the lead in 100LL is a factor in plug fouling. I run fine wire plugs and lean the mixture during ground operations. I never have a fouled plug. I suspect that's the typical report you'd get here.  

But it is your call.

[MIm20c]

1 hour ago, doc_arcadia said:

When you say the C may be the most expensive choice I can make ... what do you mean? Is the C likely to cost me a lot over the purchase price? Is the C the most expensive plane I can buy for a certain experience level? 

My response was slightly sarcastic in that (for me) there is always a desire to upgrade to a newer/faster/better plane. However, nothing pre K really meets my upgrade criteria.  This means the next upgrade will be a big jump.

The C has lead some other forum members down a very expensive path... C -> Ovation -> JetA. 

 

I just want to mention don’t worry about the fuel. Short of an RV12 burning fuel you hauled in 6 gallon cans it will not make any difference in your yearly cost. 

[Lami]

I don't like the time on any of those planes. I'm not to excited about the age of them either. It took me about a year to find my m20. I payed less then 50k and the engine was all most new. I will tell you these planes don't fly at 170mph on 9 gph.  At least mine doesn't do those numbers. I have been looking for another plane and time and time again I keep going back to Mooney. They really are one of the best private planes in the market place. I think you can do a lot better then the two on controller. I found my plane on some off brand cite that I didn't think even worked.  Some listings are years old so it does take some time. 

[MIm20c]

23 minutes ago, Lami said:

I will tell you these planes don't fly at 170mph on 9 gph

The C is very capable but performance can vary greatly between airframes. Mine will do 145-148kts at 9 gph (50 ROP) although I like to add a little extra fuel when pushing 22/24 power settings.  I do agree mission wise the extra 5-10 kts will not make a difference. 

My largest complaint with my aircraft is not having the 64 (or larger) gallon tanks.  

[carusoam]

When you are done with the UL94 discussion, you can move on to the more important details...

I find the UL94 to be more important down the line...

Some great ideas are always coming...

Synthetic oils sounded really good too... how could anyone goof that up?

Works good in automobiles... killed a few aircraft engines...

Unless you like deeply researching these things.  Picking things that sound good on paper take a long time to prove out in aviation.

There isn’t a service engine soon light on the instrument panel, or a computer system automatically monitoring the engine and adjusting ignition timing... (more on that later)

It is possible to save a lot of time and money by doing what a lot of people are doing...

Don’t take this to mean go brand B or C.  You don’t need herd mentality to be successful...

I would rather be second on something like this... or speaking with the author of the STC personally...

Find a Mooney owner and mechanic that are using this already... talk to the author of the STC and gain some confidence...

I used this approach when looking at Missiles... then when buying the 310hp engine STC...

When you own a Mooney... there are many like minded individuals that don’t mind weighing options in many different viewpoints...

Some are incredibly in the know.

 

Some math for the good doc...

$1 per gallon saved...

10 gallons per hour burned.

100 hours per year flown. (More than average)

Upside of risk...

$1,000 in savings...

 

Downside of risk...

Damaged engine, cost of OH, long time before flying again...

 

The fuel injection can net better known savings.  

Go with the knowns.

For the unknowns... Let somebody else go first...

Now, if you had said the lead was a bothersome chemistry and you couldn’t  fly with it... that would be a worthy challenge...

UL94 or UL102... you are just too soon.

Select the plane that most fits your mission.  Don’t get bogged down on one item... cycle through all the items until you are clear on what is your highest priorities and what is at the bottom of the list...

1amu isn’t very much, but it is every year...

report what you find when you ask Swift about the Mooney STC and which of their fuels they recommend... 

A great Monday conversation.

Best regards,

-a-

[ArtVandelay]

When you say the C may be the most expensive choice I can make ... what do you mean? Is the C likely to cost me a lot over the purchase price? Is the C the most expensive plane I can buy for a certain experience level? 

It depends...
If you plan on upgrading, the Cs lower price ceiling means you lose more on upgrading.
The operating costs: hangar, insurance, fuel, maintenance over time will dwarf the expense of buying the plane itself. Because you get money you paid for the plane back when you sell, the operating costs you don’t.
The reason modified E can be as fast as a J is because they are lighter, less weight, less lift, less drag.
Be careful with speed claims, they are like fish stories...
Something rarely mentioned, Js are easier to work on, less screws...I can remove both cowls and one piece bottom in about 5 minutes.

[Niko182]

5 hours ago, doc_arcadia said:

The 94 UL should be cheaper than avgas (besides its inherent cheapness, county taxes in my county are also being waived on UL94), and, of course, better for the environment of people who hang around airports (including me). The unleaded fuel should be easier on the engine (no lead to foul the plugs). And, when LL goes away, I'll still be able to fly on a fuel which exists today. 

So, for me, the ability to fly on at least UL94 makes sense. 

I'd ignore the UL94. The only place that sells it on the west coast is san carlos. Is that where you're located. if so, I guess this might make a difference, but if youre at an airport nearby, the amount of fuel it take to take off, fly to san carlos, land, get fuel, and fly back to your airport makes it mostly pointless. Additionally, the M20E is a 150 knot bird, vs the m20C being 140 to 145. E also has a better climb rate. If you fly 100 hours per year, as @carusoam stated it would make a thousand dollar difference at most and he was being generous on the 10GPH. more like 7 to 9. Also remember the E can fly LOP while the C can't. I strictly fly ROP, but if LOP is your cup of tea, That makes the UL94 vs 100LL debate nearly negligible.

[Hank]

7 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

I think you'll have to make a decision on this UL94. If this is high enough on the priority list, then the only Mooney you're looking at is an M20C. That's fine, but it's a whole different buying experience (and owning experience) than say opening up the possibilities to the other Mooneys. 

So assuming you're looking for an M20C... the most expensive one you can find, will likely turn out to be the best deal. It's unlikely you'll be able to spend over $60K on an M20C. But you'll want the following... we can assume that an airplane that isn't airworthy is a deal breaker. That would include corrosion.

Stec30 autopilot or better a functioning autopilot, heading bug at minimum
WAAS GPS - Garmin 430W or better
A six-pack arranged panel
ADSB Out
Full four cylinder engine monitor.
Currently in annual and regularly flying
Johnson Bar manual gear--many people say this, but I really like my electric gear and flaps
LoPresti speed mods such as 201 Windshield, 201 Cowl, Gap seals, wing tips, belly, etc.
No eddy prop hub

I'd try to get as far down the list as you can... but the first two would be deal breakers for me.
 

Airplane selection is very personal. See mynadjustment to Paul's list above. Despite its cult following, many of us enjoy not having manual gear. There is no extra cost unless something breaks . . . .

6 hours ago, Lami said:

I don't like the time on any of those planes. I'm not to excited about the age of them either. It took me about a year to find my m20. I payed less then 50k and the engine was all most new. I will tell you these planes don't fly at 170mph on 9 gph.  At least mine doesn't do those numbers. I have been looking for another plane and time and time again I keep going back to Mooney. They really are one of the best private planes in the market place. I think you can do a lot better then the two on controller. I found my plane on some off brand cite that I didn't think even worked.  Some listings are years old so it does take some time. 

My C very dependably turns in 147 knots true, which is 169 mph, on 9 gph. I fly Rich of Peak. All it takes is altitude, 7500 msl or more. I'm usually there withun 15 minutes of engine start (the joys of small, uncontrolled fields!). I almost never foul plugs simoly by leaning aggressively on the ground, eniugh so that I need to richen the mixture to taxi uphill. Thus has worked great for me for the past decade. Oh, I also descend power on to make up for the slow climb, it makes a difference in block time!

3 hours ago, teejayevans said:

It depends...
If you plan on upgrading, the Cs lower price ceiling means you lose more on upgrading.
The operating costs: hangar, insurance, fuel, maintenance over time will dwarf the expense of buying the plane itself. Because you get money you paid for the plane back when you sell, the operating costs you don’t.
The reason modified E can be as fast as a J is because they are lighter, less weight, less lift, less drag.
Be careful with speed claims, they are like fish stories...
Something rarely mentioned, Js are easier to work on, less screws...I can remove both cowls and one piece bottom in about 5 minutes.

This is true of early manual gear Cs, but beginning in 1969 the cowl is attached with camlocks for quick removal. Many vintagr Mooneys also have one piece bellies, which are simple to remove. And the C retains the cowl cheeks, making engine access incredibly simple. J owners need a helper to remove their lower cowl just to cha ge the oil, but not so on the C, just a few camlocks and each side comes off. My lower cowl has been off one time that I know of in my 11 years of ownership.

It boils down to what you want, and the specific planes that you are looking at. Check for these:

• One piece belly
• 201 windshield
• Speed mods--which ones does it have?
• Electric gear and flaps, or manual gear / hydraulic flaps?
• Radios--get a WAAS GPS; what are Com2 / Nav2?

I also don't worry about carb ice, partially because I have a Carb Temp gage. A poster whi cautioned against this used to have a C without Carb Temp, and wrote extensively about no carb ice worries and no carb heat use; I'm not sure why it became a worry since he sold his C and bought an injected model . . . Search for many threads here about leaking hydraulic flaps and the pain to repair them.

Have fun shopping, and stay in touch!

[vorlon1]

8 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

What to buy... and why to buy it

M20C - Capital is limited and price of entry is paramount... still faster and more efficient than any other brand up to twice the cost.
M20E - Just like a C but better. Faster on less fuel and no carb to ice up. The back seat won't have regular occupants.
M20F - You need four seats and all the useful load you can find.
M20J - Factory installed LoPresti speed mods make for a fast and very efficient four seater.
M20K - Higher altitudes are required or would be very useful. Will struggle to get past a J below 10K feet, but in the flight levels is very fast on very little fuel.
Bravo - You want to go very fast from A to B with two people who pack light. And to hell with the fuel.
Ovation - You live East of the Mississippi and can afford it so why not.
Acclaim - You live West of the Mississippi and can afford it so why not.

Eagle?

[INA201]

I will agree with others about the 94 fuel.  It needs a lot of time on it to be "proven."  You would be adding an unknown to the equation of aircraft ownership.  On another note I can lean waaay back from peak and have a low gami spread.  In theory, running LOP like I do should beat the cost differential of 94.  If the environmental side is more important to you than all other factors then I would go with a C.  You don't want to feel guilty by running 100LL vs 94 when your principles are compromised. 

[Jerry 5TJ]

I’d consider a C versus an E because when 100LL is no longer available the C is more likely to be able to use the replacement fuel or mogas. 

[ArtVandelay]

Re: oil changes on the J

Removing the lower cowl is very doable if you have a 2 blade prop, a strategically placed cardboard box acts as a helping hand. Or if you have a quick drain you don’t need to remove the lower cowl at all.

[Mooneymite]

9 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

Stec30 autopilot or better
WAAS GPS - Garmin 430W or better
A six-pack arranged panel
ADSB Out
Full four cylinder engine monitor.
Currently in annual and regularly flying
Johnson Bar manual gear
LoPresti speed mods such as 201 Windshield, 201 Cowl, Gap seals, wing tips, belly, etc.
No eddy prop hub
 

I'd try to get as far down the list as you can... but the first two would be deal breakers for me.

 I wouldn't put an autopilot, or a Johnson bar very high up my list:

Virtually every C has a factory installed PC which is a single axis autopilot.  The PC is very simple to maintain and operate.  The C is incredibly stable in pitch during cruise and will maintain altitude very well once trimmed up.  I fly single pilot IFR and find that the PC is an adequate aid.  The other thing to consider is that there are several much lower cost autopilots being certified.  It might behoove you to "wait and watch" on an autopilot and not invest in old technology.

The manual gear?  Not for me.  20 years after buying my C, my shoulder bursa would loudly complain on each gear activation.  My electric gear has been reliable and simple to maintain.  Yes, there is an AD required 100/200 hour inspection, but it just covers items you should be doing anyway.  Any newer Mooney will have an electric gear, but not all are as simple as the one in the C.

I would put fuel bladders near the top of my list.

Oh!  Check out the difference in price for a factory reman O-360 versus the IO 360.

The C is really a sweet spot in the Mooney lineup.

[Andy95W]

2 hours ago, Mooneymite said:

 

Oh!  Check out the difference in price for a factory reman O-360 versus the IO 360.

And along the same lines, check out the difference between overhauling one carburetor versus 2 fuel injection units;

-the difference in cylinder prices (both new and overhauled);

-the difference in price between a low pressure fuel pump (6psi) versus the 30psi pump for the IO- engine (the lower pressure electric pump for the carbureted engines is surprisingly bullet-proof, there are a lot of thread posts here on Mooneyspace about failing high pressure pumps)

Saving 10% on gas costs money.

Pairing the IO-360 and the Mooney airframe was genius, it ranks right up there with things like peanut butter and jelly or putting a small block V-8 into the Ford Mustang.  But there's a reason that the M20C was produced through 1977 and that the Mark 21/Ranger has the highest production numbers of any Mooney model.