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

[doc_arcadia]

Hi. I'm trying to find an efficient aircraft. I've read and heard that posting here and asking for help is a wise thing to do ... so, I'm posting here and asking for help. My thanks in advance to anyone who is willing to give me some advice. 

 

I'm seeking a plane generally for flights from the Central Valley of CA to LA and SF. This generally means:

     one person in the aircraft. Rarely two. Three in the airplane is an unlikely possibility. 

     Usually approx. 200 miles each leg; sometimes up to 400 miles (LA to SF or the reverse)

     occasional flight over Tejon Pass, in either direction

     Likely access to UL94 on most of the trips, so I'd somewhat prefer a plane which can use that fuel

     paved airstrips at each end of my trips

     Max budget is ... well, a lot more than I'm likely to actually spend. I'm not so constrained by absolute number of dollars at this level, but I do want to get a good, or at least a reasonable, deal. 

I'm currently looking at:

 

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28893613/1966-mooney-m20c-mark-21

 

 

and

 

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28910845/1965-mooney-m20c-mark-21?dlr=1&pcid=17527&crmid=614667&if=1

 

Pros and cons are laid out in the ads. Both seem nice (though the one sold by All American Aircraft seems a bit nicer). Frankly, based on the NAAA valuation tool on trade-a-plane, and lurking on this site and others, they seem way overpriced. 

 

So, I'd like to ask for your help. Can anyone convince me that these planes are not overpriced? If they are overpriced, what are good prices for these aircraft? Does anyone see any ads for other planes which would appear to fit my mission?

Thanks again, and looking forward to getting some good advice!

 

[Marauder]

Hi. I'm trying to find an efficient aircraft. I've read and heard that posting here and asking for help is a wise thing to do ... so, I'm posting here and asking for help. My thanks in advance to anyone who is willing to give me some advice. 
 
I'm seeking a plane generally for flights from the Central Valley of CA to LA and SF. This generally means:
     one person in the aircraft. Rarely two. Three in the airplane is an unlikely possibility. 
     Usually approx. 200 miles each leg; sometimes up to 400 miles (LA to SF or the reverse)
     occasional flight over Tejon Pass, in either direction
     Likely access to UL94 on most of the trips, so I'd somewhat prefer a plane which can use that fuel
     paved airstrips at each end of my trips
     Max budget is ... well, a lot more than I'm likely to actually spend. I'm not so constrained by absolute number of dollars at this level, but I do want to get a good, or at least a reasonable, deal. 
I'm currently looking at:
 
https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28893613/1966-mooney-m20c-mark-21
 
 
and
 
https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28910845/1965-mooney-m20c-mark-21?dlr=1&pcid=17527&crmid=614667&if=1
 
Pros and cons are laid out in the ads. Both seem nice (though the one sold by All American Aircraft seems a bit nicer). Frankly, based on the NAAA valuation tool on trade-a-plane, and lurking on this site and others, they seem way overpriced. 
 
So, I'd like to ask for your help. Can anyone convince me that these planes are not overpriced? If they are overpriced, what are good prices for these aircraft? Does anyone see any ads for other planes which would appear to fit my mission?
Thanks again, and looking forward to getting some good advice!
 

The first plane is listed by All American and they are a top shelf broker.

There are some serious avionics in that plane and knowing what it costs, I certainly think it is in the right price range. You will need to assess the rest of the plane’s systems and engine to make sure.

The second plane is not as well equipped but the paint and interior look nice.

Both are worth a look see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[ArtVandelay]

No Mooney can use UL94 that I know of.

[sdflysurf]

New Mooney owner here.  The only thing that is a negative in my opinion is that I feel like I'm doing a group yoga session to get me and the passengers settled in and I have the longer F model (I'm 6'4 200lbs).  But once we are in it is a very comfortable ride and all of the benefits are huge upsell:  fuel efficient, fast, easy to fly, plenty of leg room, nice baggage compartment.

Good luck on your purchase!!

[doc_arcadia]

According to

https://swiftfuels.com/stc/

 

The carburated Mooneys can use UL94

[MIm20c]

Are upgraded avionics important to you?  Do you fly or want to obtain your instrument rating?

A single nav unit is not overly robust for IFR flying. To put in after the fact is expensive.  However, that paint job is amazing. 

[doc_arcadia]

I don't have an instrument rating, but will get one soon. So IFR-capable avionics are important to me. 

[Mooneymite]

Both listings show "Bladders".  In my opinion, that is "really good".  My bladders are more than 25 years old and I've never had a hint of a problem, so leaking tanks probably won't be a problem in the future.

Both listings are going to need an ADS-B solution by 2020.

Both listings have engines where you need to have a reserve for an engine overhaul.

The C model is a good fit for your profile.  However, the C "evolved" over the years and not all C's are the same.  Starting in '69 there were some substantive changes as Mooney evolved toward the 201.

[carusoam]

Being interested in all things Mooney...

UL94 sounds interesting...

the STC doesn’t seem to have Mooneys listed...

At least not that I can find...

They do list a phone number to call to find out...

The M20C makes a great plane for 200-400nm flights.

The M20E is similar, and has more efficiency possibilities...

The M20R is approved to fly with both 100LL and unleaded 100.

I started with an M20C, got the IR, then went with the M20R...

Today’s efficiency of the Mooney probably outweighs the the desire to use a new fuel with all the new challenges of fuel distribution tomorrow...

What makes the UL94 interesting to you?

I was interested in UL fuels when I bought the R eight years ago...  still waiting for the 100 to show up...

Enjoy the hunt...

Best regards,

-a-

[smccray]

I have what I imagine is an unpopular opinion, but I wouldn’t buy anything older than a J, assuming you can find a plane to buy.  Operating cost is unlikely to be materially different, desirability of the plane is higher, and when it comes to the next rounds of avionics upgrades the J will be included, earlier planes might be.  See the GFC 500 upgrades in process.  Yeah- Garmin has promised to extend the STC, but there are many examples of upgrades promised in aviation that never occur.

 

[Niko182]

I think the one being sold by all american is the way to go. It has a wonderful panel. Waas and ADSB equipped. Plus the aspens are a nice touch. also has an upgraded
interior. Its priced right were it should be. Statistically, the engine still has plenty of life if it was flown well and taken care of. no ad on the prop. for a single person short
cross country machine, That m20C looks perfect. LA to SF usually takes me about 2 hour, so in the C you should have no problem doing it in 2 and a half hours. Its a worthy
IFR machine too, with the GPS and the aspen.

[MBDiagMan]

1 hour ago, sdflysurf said:

New Mooney owner here.  The only thing that is a negative in my opinion is that I feel like I'm doing a group yoga session to get me and the passengers settled in and I have the longer F model (I'm 6'4 200lbs).  But once we are in it is a very comfortable ride and all of the benefits are huge upsell:  fuel efficient, fast, easy to fly, plenty of leg room, nice baggage compartment.

Good luck on your purchase!!

I had a C and now have an F.  There is no different in front seat legroom.  The OP says only front seats used so a C or E would work well for him.

[steingar]

If you’re that stuck on 2 seats why not go experimental? I would be flying an RV if a) Mrs. Steingar didn’t hate canopy's and b) it could hold all her shit, which it can’t. But if you don’t have luggage concerns there are lots of experimentals that will do the trick in a heartbeat and are a hoot to fly.

i have to admit, I don’t use my backseat for much more than luggage, though the few times I’ve used it ‘‘twas nice to have.

[jaylw314]

Interesting, on the Swift website it lists STC costs ($540) for all the M20's up through the M20G for their UL94 fuel.  I've never seen Swift UL94 sold anywhere, though

[SantosDumont]

The general advice is to buy an airplane that is equipped for your mission.  If you are planning to fly IFR, make sure it has all the avionics you need.

Having owned my F for two years now, if I was buying for a single pilot commuter mission I would probably get a Vans RV, or Lancair.  I love the efficiency of my F, but four seats is just more than I need 99% of the time.  The other 1% I really need a 6 seater.  I would rather have a few extra knots than 4 seats when flying single pilot commute missions.

I'm the kind of owner that wants to get my hands dirty during maintenance... just so I know what each part does and how it should be treated.   I'm pretty sure my next plane will be a 2 seat experimental.  It opens up more options for owner maintenance / avionics.  However, I wouldn't have the confidence to be looking at experimentals without having owned my F first.

The only things I don't like about the C models is the carburetored engine and small backseat.

I wouldn't worry so much about purchase price as the maintenance cost far outweighs the acquisition cost in the long run.  I'd worry more about getting the capabilities you want.  If you're not sure what they are, make a list.

My list of must haves when looking for my first plane were:

1.  Fuel Injection
2.  IFR Avionics
3.  Johnson Bar

If I was buying today, I would change #3 to ~200kts.

[doc_arcadia]

33 minutes ago, steingar said:

If you’re that stuck on 2 seats why not go experimental? I would be flying an RV if a) Mrs. Steingar didn’t hate canopy's and b) it could hold all her shit, which it can’t. But if you don’t have luggage concerns there are lots of experimentals that will do the trick in a heartbeat and are a hoot to fly.

i have to admit, I don’t use my backseat for much more than luggage, though the few times I’ve used it ‘‘twas nice to have.

The thing that's keeping me out of experimentals for now is my perception that they are not such a good deal. In particular, while they may be fine aircraft, they are all fairly young, and still on the steep part of their depreciation curve. If I buy, say, a 5 year old experimental, and sell it in 10 years, it'll be 300% as old as when I got it, and I'll have lost a lot in depreciation. 

On the other hand, if I buy a 50 year old plane now, and sell in 10 years, it'll only be 120% as old as when I got it. 

If I had the time to do more of my own maintenance,  as one may do with an experimental, then the maintenance costs would break in my favor. Unfortunately, I don't have the time, so I'll have to hire someone else to do the maintenance anyway, so the huge maintenance advantage of an experimental won't be there for me. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[carusoam]

Why I selected a Mooney...

It is the fastest...

- Factory built

- Four seats

- IFR capable

- Normally aspirated 

- available in TC and TN if the mission requires it.

- Incredibly strong airframe

- updatable with the latest safety features. Including Airbag safety belts.

- has an incredibly strong following.

- has the ability to run 100 unleaded fuel.

- Factory is still in business, building planes today.

 

Become familiar with the used airplane buying process...

If you want to visit a lot of Mooneys in one place... go see the one at AAA.

Compare airframes and instrument panels...

I bought a plane at AAA once... 

Best regards,

-a-

[McMooney]

absolutely love my m20e.

Honestly the backseats aren't that bad considering how far you pull the seat up to fly.

whatever you buy make sure it's atleast adsb compliant, you don't want the frustration of trying to install avionics right now.

Edited November 3, 2018 by McMooney

[doc_arcadia]

2 hours ago, carusoam said:

Being interested in all things Mooney...

UL94 sounds interesting...

the STC doesn’t seem to have Mooneys listed...

At least not that I can find...

They do list a phone number to call to find out...

The M20C makes a great plane for 200-400nm flights.

The M20E is similar, and has more efficiency possibilities...

The M20R is approved to fly with both 100LL and unleaded 100.

I started with an M20C, got the IR, then went with the M20R...

Today’s efficiency of the Mooney probably outweighs the the desire to use a new fuel with all the new challenges of fuel distribution tomorrow...

What makes the UL94 interesting to you?

I was interested in UL fuels when I bought the R eight years ago...  still waiting for the 100 to show up...

Enjoy the hunt...

Best regards,

-a-

At least half, and probably more,  of my flights will be in or out of SQL, which will have UL94 available from Rabbit Aviation Services. In fact, most of my flights will be short enough that I will be able to fly out and back on one fillup, i.e. on 100% UL94. The distribution issues are already taken care of in my case (i.e. someone else is making the fuel available where I fly). The 94 UL should be cheaper than avgas (besides its inherent cheapness, county taxes 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. 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. 

[Hank]

Well, @doc_arcadia, all I can say about the C model is good things! I really, really like ours, and so soes my wife. It's a great traveling machine,  carries a lot of luggage (she and I traveled once for 10 days, and had room to take a couple of bavs for friends traveling with us in a Cessna) and every now and then carries a 3rd or even 4th person. 

I'm really glad for my electric gearcand flaps, although some here are quite vocal in favor of the hydraulic flaps and manual gear. But my shoulder won't handle it. You will have the choice, there may be some vintage birds with hydraulic flaps that were upgraded in the past to electric gear. 

Do buy one with decent radios, a GPS and at least a functional wing leveler if not auto pilot. Acquisition costs for these are quite high, plus installation charges of 60-80 hours of shop time.

Welcome aboard, and happy shopping! 

[carusoam]

Lower cost, equal performance... Sounds perfect to me...

flying round trips, tankering fuel, is fine... as long as your weight and balance allow it...

Most Mooneys easily allow full tanks and two people....

Some Mooneys have such huge tanks you need to decide how much you want for your flight...

Roughly speaking an M20C...

- flys at 150mph...

- holds 52 gallons of useable gas...

- burns 10 gph...

- has a Useful Load about 1,000 Pounds.

Every now and then there is a 100LL distribution mistake. Because of it’s small scale quantities... something gets mixed...

Best regards,

-a-

[Johnnybgoode]

I'm fortunate or foolish enough to have one each Mooney and RV.  I love my C, but for your mission my RV-4 would be a much quicker and more efficient fit.  My 160HP RV equipped with a Catto fixed-pitch prop pitched for cruise speed nets me 200mph groundspeeds regularly on my 230 mile commute.  Can't touch that with my Mooney.

If you're set on a Mooney I don't see much advantage to the newer birds - the distances traveled aren't going to add up to that much time difference.  Just another 2 cents...

Good luck!

[Yetti]

1st one takes a ding for old interior, old radios, no ADSB, no WAAS GPS

[gsxrpilot]

Late to the thread... I spent today doing an AngelFlight. 

First of all, the plane listed by AllAmerican is priced exactly right... as will be evidenced by the fact that it will likely be sold this week if it hasn't already. Jimmy and David don't price planes to sit around. They move them and to do that, they are priced right.

M20C's are great, but if the capital acquisition costs are of no issue, then I'd want to do better than a C. 

[Hank]

P.S.--flying hurricane relief, the loading crews were shocked when I told them that flying solo after 3-1/2 hours that I could carry 600 lbs. Other than twins, all the other planes I saw on the list had capacities of 250-400 lbs. Typically, though, I run out of space before useful load, because I don't carry bricks or many boxes of books.