Any previous Bonanza owners?

[Lood]

I feel rather ashamed by having to ask this here, but on the other hand, I know that I should atract some very honest opinions. I didn't want to ask the question on the Beech forum because they'll be biased. So here goes:

My mission is as follows: I fly alone 80% of the time and average around 50hrs/year. The other 20% is with my wife and two children and 10% of this is fully loaded - either to MAUW or to where the available space in the Mooney allows. At MAUW and density altitudes of 5k ft plus, my Mooney really struggles. On warm days I seldom get it to climb at more than 150ft/min. Normal cruise speed when loaded usually sits around 138kts TAS. I have an itch and I've put my Mooney up for sale and I am looking out for something with more grunt. My kids aren't getting smaller and I'll probably be flying them around more when they go to high school in two years time.

There is a 231 for sale here that belongs to a friend of mine. He has owned since 1982 when it had done only 200hrs. It is in excellent original condition with a brand new factory reman engine, but no wastegate or intercooler. Problem: he wants a lot of money for it - ZAR1.1bar ($165k US).
Option two is a 1980 M20J with 1750hrs TT and 46hrs on the engine since overhaul. It has a G430 and S-Tek 50 A/P. Not sure what the owner wants for it, but it looks like it will be in the region of ZAR800k ($120k US)

Apart form the prices being too high - specially that of the 231, I'm worse off in terms of full fuel payload, in both these airplanes, than I am with my '67 F. It has a usefull load of 1040lbs which gives me a payload of 655lbs.

Now, during all this poking around all over the place, a couple of Bonanza's have made their appearance. One is a '71 F33A, excellent condition and equipment, but only 150hrs left on the engine - $97k.
The second one is a '69 V35A, 300hrs SMOH and getting a complete new CofA as it has been sitting for a while - $110k.

After some research, I came to the conclusion that the Bonanza's offer an average of about 150lbs more payload over the Mooney's and when compared to my F, they give almost the same in terms of nm/gal. The J and K Mooneys rule here though.

So, what am I to do? Please give me your honest opinion. I know Mooney's and I really love them. I've heard some horror stories about how expensive maintenance on Bonnies can be, but then I've had a ZAR100k annual on my F. There aren't many Mooneys here in SA and even fewer that are for sale.

What would you do??

[jetdriven]

Especially no Bonanza can offer the same NM.gal as a 231.   Especially a J.  A Bonanza is faster though and offers more headroom. 

[John Pleisse]

1) The Bonanza doesn't offer 150lbs more payload with full tanks. More often than not, that 150lbs of payload flies out of the back of the CG envelope in under 2 hours. The final 2.5 hours of fuel can't be flown with 4 seats full...even with youth in the rear.

2) You have to drop the gauntlet and not dilly-dally. I did it for 10 years. If you want to haul the family.....buy a larger plane. F and V series Bonanzas won't offer you more than a Mooney.

3) If you are developing a taste for Bonanzas, buy an A36. You can haul your family and CG issues virtually disappear. Comparing Mooneys and short body Bonanza's won't solve your problem.

I have learned all of the above the hard way.

 

[KSMooniac]

I only have about 10 hours in a V-tail (P-model, I think...been a while).  The CG limitations are a big concern on the shorter models, and I agree with the above post that they will not offer you any more capability to take the same payload a fixed distance compared to your F.  It will likely climb faster, but that might be the only improvement.  The higher useful load will be partially/mostly offset by the requirement to carry more fuel to cover the same distance.

The 231 will definitely be a backwards step if you're hoping to take 4 people on a trip of any distance.

If you're only flying 50 hrs a year, and 20% of that (10 hours) is fully-loaded, then I think the best course of action is to simply find a plane to rent/borrow/lease that meets the requirements for those 10 hours.  An A36 would be an excellent choice, but the budget will be a lot higher than your F and if you only need it for 10 hours a year, I'd try to find one to borrow.    Frankly if you're only flying 50 hours a year, your hourly cost will be quite scary compared to rentals, at least in this country.  (I don't add up my total costs for this very reason!   )

At the end of the day I think you've just discovered how great Mooneys are for traveling on a budget!  You can find other planes that are faster, or carry more, but none that do it as well as a Mooney.

[Shadrach]

Quote: Lood

What would you do??

[WardHolbrook]

Quote: Shadrach

I have a bone stock 67F, if I were you I would have my plane checked out... Something is wrong. I easily get over 500FPM at 5000'DA... I climbed out yesterday at over 1000FPM (after accelerating to a cruise climb 115-120mph) with two 200 pounders and 40gals of fuel - field elevation 704'msl with a DA 3200' . We went to 5500msl and never saw less than 700FPM wide open throttle (WOT), ram air open (RAO)... OAT 36C+ at field elevation.  My plane under roughly standard conditions will cruise 153kts true at 7000' 100ROP WOTRAO... How are you flying your plane on climb out?  I would lean for take off at a DA of 5000ft...

Yours appears to be a bit on the doggy side. I don't think you need a different type of plane, maybe you just need to get yours to perform as it should...

[Shadrach]

Quote: WardHolbrook

My thoughts as well. Something's not quite kosher - inaccurate tach? Rigging? I should be able to do much better. What kind of speeds and power settings are you using?

[Shadrach]

Lood, get yourself one of these...

http://www.amainhobbies.com/product_info.php/cPath/89_610/products_id/23619/n/Hanger-9-Micro-Digital-Tachometer?utm_source=Google-Base&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Product-Feeds&source=google_ext

I keep one in the plane to make sure I'm getting full RPM...

[Lood]

Phew! I hear you and thanks to all for the replies - that's why I asked.

First of, my power settings on the F:
My average operating altutude in terms of runways is around 4000' AMSL which would return a DA of about 5500' and higher, on average. I normaly cruise between FL075 - FL095. Power is always WOT, except when at sea level, which happens maybe once a year, in any way. Mixture at 80 deg ROP and RPM at 2500. Climbs are normally done at WOT, target EGT of around 1200 - 1250 deg, 2600 RPM and speed at 110 - 120 mph. My airplane doesn't have ram air.
When I fly alone, even with half tanks, I would see a max ROC of about 700'/min. With my family loaded, together with some bags and full tanks, we're normally at about 70lbs below MAUW and I will get a max ROC of about 300'. On a cold day, that might go up to 400'.

Regarding the low TAS, I set all the parameters on my G296 while in flight and it gives me the TAS. When fully loaded, the TAS is actually more towards 134 kts than 138. I've also done the 4 way ground speed test at 7500' using the GPS and IIRC, it averaged at 138kts. That was at the same power setting as above, half tanks and two up weighing in at 520 lbs.

Hire and fly in SA is not an option. Normal training airplanes like C150, C172, the small Cherokees and some of the newer LSA types are available, but very expensive. I live on a farm in a rural area and there's no hire and fly available in anyway. Closest where I'd be able to get a higher performance airplane is about 350nm away and the price would be near impossible.

In terms of the number of hours flown per year, the average private pilot in SA would not even do 20 hrs. If you do 50 - 60 hrs, like I do, that is seen as a lot of flying and way above average. Very, very few private pilots reach 100 hrs in a year. It is just so expensive that you have to think twice before doing it just for fun, unfortunately.

I've downloaded a number of W&B spreadsheets on both F33's and V-tails, because I've heard a lot about their CofG problems and it is of great concern to me. After palying around with these using different loading configurations, it becomes clear that one needs to be very, very carefull. Specially if you put larger people at the back and even more so when you load bags. However, I do get further when compared to my F. Throw a 201 into the equation and all the calculations go belly up. The M20J is an incredibly effecient airplane.

Another requirement of my mission is that I do a 4 - 6 weekly flight to another farm that is 285nm away. So, whichever airplane I fly, it has to be able to do 600nm plus reserves, because there is no refueling option along the way. Mooney's excell in this department, but then I have to start with full tanks and I can't trade fuel for more weight inside the cabin.

[Shadrach]

What's the TT and condition of your engine?  How long have you been flying behind it? 

Quote: Lood

Throw a 201 into the equation and all the calculations go belly up. The M20J is an incredibly effecient airplane.

[aviatoreb]

I was looking very closely at a V35B before I ended up buying my Mooney Rocket.  We have 3 kids and I liked the idea of flying with all hands on board, but like you, of my 125hrs a year probably 95% of my flying is with just me, or me and a co-pilot (often one of my boys is co-pilot though) on board.  Another requirement was the possibility of at least an inadvertent tks system.

Well, sitting in the V35B settled the issue very quickly. I was very surprised to be very very uncomfortable given Bonanza's reputation of being a big airplane. I am 6'4'' and the leg room was poor.  Head room is amazing - I could wear a 10 gallon texas hat if I were so inclined.  In fact, that v-bar was such that with my legs as they were standing tall since leg extension is poor, the knees are up high and as such the v-bar knocks my knees severely completely eliminating full deflection.  I could try to scooch my knee out of the way, but not at the same time as keeping it on the rudder - meaning a full slip deflection is all but impossible.  So that was it for Bonanza with me.  Besides that....they are wonderful planes and there is absolutely nothing wrong with a Bonanza if it fits your mission and your body.

Well, on the other end of the scale - the so-called small Mooney - is very very comfortable for me.  My legs sit well forward like sitting low in a sports car like a Porche.  This is the first airplane I have been in where I do not want to keep the seat full back.  I have it one notch away from full back as full back is too much!  Even the big Cessna 414 I am sometimes co-pilot in does not have leg room like that.  You know what they say, Al Mooney was 6'5'' and he built himself an airplane.  I think it is true!  I have never been so comfortable in an airplane.  Quite sufficient head room.  Shoulder room is fine.  Leg room is fabulous.  

And the performance of any Mooney, and esp my new to me Mooney Rocket, I feel giddy for the rest of the day every time I fly it.  I am still feeling giddy today from flying yesterday!

So I gave up that 5% of the time mission entirely.  It is really both the economical and the sensible way not to compromise the 95% of the time mission for 5% of the time.  That is only maybe 2 or 3 flights a year.  In fact one of those "flights" will be next weekend.  We will drive the ol' mini-van 7 hrs to a family reunion, and I know that at about hour 5, with the kids saying "are we there yet" and I am thinking the same thing, and stuck at a toll both line - I will be dreaming about my head at 12000ft on a quick <1.5 hrs jaunt of utter fun instead.

[Lood]

This afternoon was perfect for flying, so I decided to go do some test flights. I had 32 gal of fuel on take off and I was in the airplane alone with only my 10 lbs flight bag as company. I weigh in at 230 lbs which means my F was very lightly loaded. It has an empty weight of 1700 lbs, resulting in this flight taking place at 2132 lbs - thus 608 lbs below MAUW.

There was no surface wind and the OAT was 64 deg F on the ground. My runway is at 4000ft. Initial climbout was at WOT, 2600 rpm, target EGT of around 1230, fuel flow was just over 15 gal/hr. At 90 mph, the ROC was 900 ft/min and at 120 mph it decreased to 500 ft/min. Power settings for the tests below were WOT, 2500 rpm and 80 deg ROP.

I redid the 4 way ground speed test using the GPS and the results were as follows:

6500ft; OAT 50 deg; 140kt GS; 129kt IAS; 10,6 gal/hr
7500ft; OAT 46 deg; 141kt GS; 126kt IAS; 10,3 gal/hr
8500ft; OAT 43 deg; 140kt GS; 122kt IAS; 9,8 gal/hr
9500ft; OAT 43 deg; 139kt GS; 119kt IAS; 9,6 gal/hr

I calculated the TAS using the results and the grand total was 141kt for today's flights combined. My Mooney's engine has 700 hrs SMOH, but I'm not sure when that overhaul took place. IIRC, it was done around 2000 somewhere. So, although it's still got many hours left, it has run for at least 10 years now. I bought this airplane in 2008 and have flown 210 odd hours in it. The engine runs well, but I am a bit sceptic about the oil consumption. I only fill it when it gets below 6 on the dipstick and it needs to be topped with one quart every 3 - 5 hours. Oil temps and CHT's are fine.

So, even at this very light load, it really doesn't perform as it should. From what I've heard, most F owners claim cruise speeds of 145 - 150 kts.

[DaV8or]

Quote: Lood

I calculated the TAS using the results and the grand total was 141kt for today's flights combined. My Mooney's engine has 700 hrs SMOH, but I'm not sure when that overhaul took place. IIRC, it was done around 2000 somewhere. So, although it's still got many hours left, it has run for at least 10 years now. I bought this airplane in 2008 and have flown 210 odd hours in it. The engine runs well, but I am a bit sceptic about the oil consumption. I only fill it when it gets below 6 on the dipstick and it needs to be topped with one quart every 3 - 5 hours. Oil temps and CHT's are fine.

So, even at this very light load, it really doesn't perform as it should. From what I've heard, most F owners claim cruise speeds of 145 - 150 kts.

[Shadrach]

Lood, you're in the ball park. You may benefit from having the rigging checked. It might give you a few knots more.  Also, why are you reducing RPM in climb? Noise?

[bgpilot1]

You have a beautiful plane with great legroom and payload for a 4 seater!  You could have your RPM checked with a cheap prop tach.  Also, a Challenger air filter may be a good solution since you don't have ram air.  Would gear doors hanging low be an issue? 

Barry

[Kwixdraw]

Quote: N4352H

1) The Bonanza doesn't offer 150lbs more payload with full tanks. More often than not, that 150lbs of payload flies out of the back of the CG envelope in under 2 hours. The final 2.5 hours of fuel can't be flown with 4 seats full...even with youth in the rear.

2) You have to drop the gauntlet and not dilly-dally. I did it for 10 years. If you want to haul the family.....buy a larger plane. F and V series Bonanzas won't offer you more than a Mooney.

3) If you are developing a taste for Bonanzas, buy an A36. You can haul your family and CG issues virtually disappear. Comparing Mooneys and short body Bonanza's won't solve your problem.

I have learned all of the above the hard way.

 

[Parker_Woodruff]

The only Bonanza worth considering over a Mooney in my mind is an A36 - for the sole reason of the large double-doors in back that make loading people and big things easy.

I almost went that route, but in the end wanted the efficient speed of the M20K.  I want to go from TX to FL fast.  I also know Mooneys much better and they fly nicer than any Bonanza I've ever flown (35 or 36).

[Lood]

My Mooney is pretty much stock, yes. The only mod I've done is the cowl closure, but that doesn't add any speed. I am very tempted by the 201 windshield though. Like in the US, the market here is pretty much non-existent as far as sales goes. There just aren't any buyers and nothing really moves.

I have decided to keep my Mooney up for sale only untill its due for annual in November. If it hasn't sold by then, I'm keeping it and the 201 windshield and some serious sound proofing will be first on the list.

 

 

[KSMooniac]

I agree that you're right where the plane should be for a stock F.  A careful check of the control surface and gear door rigging (while retracted on jacks) might yield some improvement.  

Climbing at 2600 RPM is leaving some performance behind, though...keep that prop control in until you level off!

[Lood]

I'll try a full power climb next time I fly. I don't have any particular reason for coming back on the rpm. One thing I have noticed is that the cowl flaps on my Mooney don't close completely. When pushed right in to the closed position inside the cockpit, the cowlflaps are still trailing open by about an inch. I don't know if it should be like that or if that would have any effect on performance?

I do notice a definite noise reduction when I close them in cruise flight. Another thing that I've noticed is that I don't always get 2700 rpm on take off. Most of the time the rpm would be just over 2600. Strange thing is that when I do touch-and-go's, the rpm often goes past redline when I take power after I've touched down and cleaned up. I actually then have to wind the prop control back quite a bit get the rpm on or just below the redline.

[DaV8or]

Quote: Lood

One thing I have noticed is that the cowl flaps on my Mooney don't close completely. When pushed right in to the closed position inside the cockpit, the cowlflaps are still trailing open by about an inch. I don't know if it should be like that or if that would have any effect on performance?

[jetdriven]

Ours is a J but the cowl flap links go onto a threaded rod. You can take up on the rod to get them to close better.  Per the J service and MX manual, the trailing edge has to be flush to 1/4" open when closed.

[rorythedog]

for what it's worth.....oat seems to have a dramatic effect on true airspeed in my plane.  depending on many factors, my m20j can cruise anywhere from 149 kts to 162 (when it's really cold outside).