which model is the best F,J,K or M

[ToddCC22]

So I’m going on my PPL and am starting the investigation of what I want to buy for a plane when I finish my VFR certification. As with anything new, I’m overwhelmed with the different models and engine choices.  I figured this is a great place to get people’s opinions of what they loved or wish they had differently as they made their first purchase. I’d say I’m looking at spending less than $125ish, knowing there will be upgrades and maintenance as my skills progress.  Really can see using this for 200-700 mile trips and growing my skills into it. I travel a fair amount and see it useful there as well. 

[M016576]

Welcome to mooneyspace- You’re in the right place!

The mission and the budget drive the airframe choice.

for 125 you can find a well appointed J or K.  Both will work well for your mission of 200-700 mile trips.  The major difference between the two is the engine- the K has a turbo charger, the J doesn’t.  That turbo charger will allow for faster climbs to altitude and a faster top speed, but the benefits don’t really kick in until 10,000’ (at least not on the stock K as it’s built).

the M20M “Bravo” is a fantastic aircraft, (fast, turbo charged, longbody) but finding one that is in good shape for 125 or less may present a challenge.  Most of the bravos I’ve seen that are “turn key-ish” cost between 150-200.  If you do find one for 125, take a close look at it- it might be a screaming deal, or could be hiding something.

Operating cost is a little different between those three-

J burns 10gph in cruise

K- 12-13

M- 18-20

An F is definitely in the price window too.  It performs similarly to a J, and if it has speed mods done to it (cowling, windshield, etc) might fly exactly like a J.  Worth looking at the nicer F’s and comparing them with J’s And K’s- especially the panels.

again- welcome to mooney space!

[Steve_B]

Welcome aboard.

I went through a similar process to decide which one was "right" for my missions.  I'm in the market as well right now.  If you haven't already, check out these articles.  They are a great source of info comparing the different models.

http://www.mooneypilots.com/mapalog/flight_test_reports.html

-Steve

[mike_elliott]

125K will get you a very nicely appointed J, a clapped out M that needs another 125K, or a nice K. You will get all kinds of opinions of which is best, suffice it to say they are all the best at what their designed mission target is, which you touched on slightly. The J is the most efficient. The M is by far the fastest and the highest flyer, but you need 200K to play in this class. The K is a great compromise, especially a 252 Encore version, but don't expect one of those for 125K. The F is the king of useful load/range and still affords that extra 10" that us type "a" personalities demand. 125K is a great budget for a new to you F model and J. You will get a lot more plane with an F, but it will be slower and less efficient. Expect 145 TAS vs 155 TAS on the same fuel burn. An E is a nice hot rod but has shorter legs, less room, less useful load. Don't expect 100% dispatch utility out of any of them. Get a TBM for that. Spend money not only on the best plane, spend it on yourself becoming the best pilot. Here is where real savings can be unearthed.

[Danb]

Very loaded question Mike beat me to the punch so I’ll delete our similar statements, I’d consider that your not a pilot yet, glad your taking up this adventure, I’d lean towards the lower end of the performance and complexity of the aircrafts Mooney offers. You’ll be saving money during each hour flown between the four cylinder and the big block in the Bravo. Also you’d be able to keep in front of an aircraft doing 150 vs 190, there is a difference in the speed of our brains and overload your about to encompass. Do it, have fun join our club, there is never enough Mooney flyers out there Happy New Year.

 

[Yetti]

F is the perfect speed value combo.  you will have a fair amount of cash left over for fuel and fixing it.  You will be going just about as fast as a J.  Learn to land in someone else's plane, then transition to a Mooney and finish your PPL.

[larryb]

Whatever you do buy the best example you can find and afford. There is nothing more expensive than a bargain airplane. It is truly pay me now or pay me later.

[Bob - S50]

Todd,

Where do you live? Out west where you have to deal with mountains a lot or east of the Rockies where, for the most part, mountains are not an issue?

For flights less than about 300 miles, assuming calm winds, it usually doesn't pay to climb very high either time or fuel wise.  If you are like my wife, you may find you don't want to sit in the plane more than about 3 hours at a time so effectively you'll only fly legs that are 450 to 500 miles.  Longer than that and you'll stop for a little fuel, stretch the legs and relieve a little internal hydraulic pressure.

So unless you live in the west, or are willing to sit in the plane for more than about 3 hours, and your missions will often include legs longer than 500 miles; I'd look for a nice J ('78 or newer).

The J is 10 knots faster than the F which could save you 15 or 20 minutes on those longer trips you mentioned and save you 2 or 3 gallons of fuel ($15).

The J has enough range to fly the entire 700 mile trip non-stop with plenty of extra fuel.  In fact it will fly at normal cruise speeds of 155 - 160 for about 850 NM and still have 10 gallons left on board.

If you live out west, don't mind sitting in the plane awhile, don't mind sucking on oxygen, and want to take advantage of higher tailwinds up high; consider a K.  However, I've never flown one but I understand there are differences between the 231 and the 252.  From what I've seen, the 231 requires more pilot management skills to manage the turbo.  Others can give you more detail.

Just be sure to look at the useful load when you look at any airplane.  You'll find J models with a useful load under 900 lbs.  Ours currently has a useful load of about 975 (with 6 quarts of oil in the engine) but after we do our avionics updates we'll be up closer to 990 or so.

Best of luck.

[KLRDMD]

2 hours ago, M016576 said:

Operating cost is a little different between those three-

J burns 10gph in cruise

K- 12-13

M- 18-20

Those are ROP (rich of peak) numbers. Generically speaking, a turbo allows you to run LOP (lean of peak) without speed loss as you simply increase the MP (manifold pressure) for any given altitude. 90% of the time I flew my K model at 9.0 GPH (gallons per hour) in cruise, LOP.  The other 10% of time I flew it at either 9.5 or 10.0 GPH. I never burned 12-13 GPH in that airplane.  On 9.0 GPH at 10,000 feet I saw 155-160 KTAS (knots true airspeed) depending on density altitude. With a turbo, the higher you go the faster you go so 12,000 ft is faster, 17,000 ft is faster yet, etc. Likewise, 6,000 ft is slower and 3,000 ft slower yet in a turbo.

The J is a non-turbocharged, normally aspirated airplane. They are fastest around 8,000 ft. Above that and below that they are slower. Flying LOP in a normally aspirated airplane means lower true airspeed at reduced fuel consumption.

The M is turbocharged but does not run well LOP.

[FloridaMan]

1967 M20F with hydraulic flaps, manual gear and some speed mods is the best Mooney in my opinion; I own both that and the Rocket. All airplanes have a tradeoff in operational costs, what you can carry, safety, acrobatic ability, range, speed, et cetera. The Rocket is for point-to-point traveling and has better dispatch reliability with a tradeoff between useful load and range, much higher operating cost, and it is not as enjoyable to fly. I consider the M20F to cost about as much to operate as my Jeep Wrangler and is a wonderful plane to just take out and do some sightseeing out of, but still has the ability to cover distance at 2/3 the fuel cost, 50% greater speed and twice the range of a 172. The hydraulic flaps and manual gear are low maintenance items with no motors or switches to fail (aside from the gear up/down indicator lamp microswitch), the initial buy-in cost is low, the IO360-A1A is a less expensive engine to overhaul and does not have the deadly dual-magneto setup, and those early M20Fs often have 1000lbs of useful load. My understanding is that some time in the 1970s Mooney changed the rivets in the wings the resulted in a period of higher drag (slower) wings for a few years with the M20F. The control feel of the F is light and nimble. You can land it on grass and I can land it and be stopped in 500ft of the runway threshold. The Rocket's controls are heavy and it feels truck-like, but gives a much better ride in turbulence. You use more runway and I burn 20% more fuel on long trips and make them in roughly 2/3rds the time as the M20F. 

[FloridaMan]

Also, where are you located? 

[DonMuncy]

I take a little different attitude than most. I would suggest one get the newest model, best Mooney he can comfortably afford. If you can only (comfortably) afford a C, it will do everything you need. If you can afford a J, go for it. Faster is more fun. If you can afford a turbo, it is nice to be able to get over the mountains or weather better, even if you don't do it too often. 

That said, do not sacrifice quality in the model you are shopping for, just to have newer. If you can't afford the nicer ones (of that model) on the market, drop down to the level you can.

[smccray]

I’ll weigh in with a few thoughts. 

A Bravo isn’t a $125k airplane. It’s a also a lot of plane for a new pilot. I have no doubt the transition would be possible, but it’s not a small transition.

K if you need/want a turbo. There’s good info here on 231/252. At your budget I would look for a good intercooled 231.

J vs F is a good place to think. $125k would buy one of the nicest F models in the country. There are good thoughts above on a mod’d F being a great value- and no doubt it is. However- I look at a modified F like a collector car. Very cool, beautiful, and expensive, but also unique. There’s less liquidity as you have to find a buyer that sees the value.

J values are up right now with very little inventory on the market. $125k should buy a very nice round window J.  Look for one with a 2900 lb gross weight.  Much easier to sell later.

[LANCECASPER]

Here's another thing to keep in mind . .  purchase price vs. the "real" price of the machine you are maintaining

If the J was produced today it would be at least a $500,000 airplane, probably closer to $600,000 (when they went out of production twenty years ago they were pushing $250,000). Airplane parts prices prove that you are maintaining a $500,000 piece of equipment, no matter what you paid for it.($2000 landing gear motors, $2000 fuel pumps, $1000 magnetos, $8000 fuel tank re-seals,. $10,000 props, etc, etc). If you could buy a new one for $500,000 today the good news is that for a few years you wouldn't be dumping much into it.

However, any machine that is 20-40 years old is going to have to have parts replaced on a regular basis. The first year or two of ownership, almost without exception, you are going to be catching up on what hasn't been done in the past. Easily you could spend $20,000 each of those years playing catch-up, with some on this site having spent much more than that. After that you are still maintaining something, that if it sold new today would be $500,000 - $600,000. By the way, we haven't even mentioned upgrades like a new instrument panel ($75,000), a new interior ($15,000), new paint ($15,000, LED lights and strobes and beacon all the way around  ($3000). Some people go into the purchase and the upgrades are the first items they want to do and then when the maintenance items come up they don't have the ability to cover the things that keep the airplane in the air. 

Don't fool yourself into thinking that if you paid $125,000 that you are maintaining a $125,000 piece of equipment. If you decide to go into it upfront knowing that you are dealing with a half million dollar toy, it doesn't make the checks easier to write, it just makes writing them less confusing.  

[ToddCC22]

Thanks for all your input, I figured you guys would have a lot of knowledge and experience to share. I’m based in North Carolina and would stay east of the Mississippi at this point but who knows where the future takes me. Got s great instructor and learning on 172. A belated Merry Christmas to all!  

[jaylw314]

5 hours ago, ToddCC22 said:

So I’m going on my PPL and am starting the investigation of what I want to buy for a plane when I finish my VFR certification. As with anything new, I’m overwhelmed with the different models and engine choices.  I figured this is a great place to get people’s opinions of what they loved or wish they had differently as they made their first purchase. I’d say I’m looking at spending less than $125ish, knowing there will be upgrades and maintenance as my skills progress.  Really can see using this for 200-700 mile trips and growing my skills into it. I travel a fair amount and see it useful there as well. 

$125k should put you in a place to get a very nice J or K, and I'd +1 on @DonMuncy's comment about getting as new a plane as reasonable.  For that price, it should have 1-2 bonuses, such as engine monitor, WAAS GPS, and/or ADS-B installed, which are more cost-effective to buy already installed.

I've flown from Oregon to Los Angeles (700 nm) in my J non-stop and use about 45-47 gal, so that leaves me about 15 gal of reserve.  Flight time is 4.5-5 hours.  You can probably get better time (and worse fuel consumption) if you stay lower than 12,000', but we have mountains along our route.

Realistically, if you have no need to go high, getting a K makes little sense with the extra complications, even if the price is similar.  The operating costs will be somewhat higher as well.  My mission has made me think twice about trading in for a K, but where you are it's hard to imagine it will be a major factor.

[carusoam]

Summary...

1) Learning to fly in a C172, a trainer... great way to start.

2) asking a question about one’s future in aviation... an intelligent question, with several right answers...

3) to be successful long term.... it helps to know your strengths and weaknesses...

• Financial strength or weakness makes half of these choices for you...
• Technical strength or weakness makes a few choices really easy...
• Aviation background, strengths and weaknesses give support for you choices...
• Dedication to continued learning, strengths allow you to progress into what you have purchased... weakness leaves you in over your head...

Examples....

early carusoam....

• low budget
• no aviation background beyond PPL
• no family members in aviation 
• Strong mechanical and engineering back ground
• M20C made a great airplane for first time ownership.

midlife carusoam...

• improved budget
• A decade of M20C ownership
• IR
• full sized family
• M20R makes a great airplane for second time ownership.

Part of planning the right size airplane... is defining the mission...

• How many seats are filled with what size people? Four adults that I need to carry...
• How far do you fly all the time? 200nm family trips to see family...
• Are you flying over tall mountains?  5k’ or 14k’ turbos make sense for some flights... IO550s for others....
• Are you flying in IMC? Getting home from a weekend trip requires it...?

Can you afford to be wrong?  Buying and selling a plane can be sort of costly depending on your financial experience.

Pick a lead dog and follow him?

• if you like Bravos... find out what skills are held by Bravo owners...
• if you like Rockets... what skills do they have...
• if you have few skills... what planes do those people have...
• if you are just starting out...low on skills and dough.... high on willingness and drive... find his thread to see what an M20D can do with the right effort.

Buying too much airplane is a real possibility.

Buying too little airplane isn’t as much of a tragedy.

 

Know yourself first, then select....

• the engine you are comfortable owning and operating...
• is it TCd, TNd or NA...
• does it have a 2, 3, or four blade prop? Is it aluminum or composite?
• are you hauling full size adults in the back?
• cruising the east coast?

Well, that’s an F, G, J, S, R 

Narrow it down by personal economics and desires...

Are you looking for a...?

•  forever-plane
• retirement plane
• project
• something to do
• All out, fire breathing, 252

I think if I come back a second third time... working my way up to a Rocket would be my goal....

Best regards,

-a-

[Cruiser]

I have a different track for your consideration.

It will take about 70 hours to earn your PP.

It will take another 100 hours to learn how to fly

Then you will need about 50 more hours to get IFR qualified.

I suggest you do at least the first two in a basic trainer. After that, if you feel comfortable you can get the Mooney and do the instrument work in it.

Long cross country trips are another learning phase of flying. Take your time, get good at what you need to do. Be safe.

[Belobog]

Can one of you guys explain the difference between the standard K and the rocket?

[Danb]

Compare a Ford Focus with a 600 hp engine in it.

You have a normal mid sized Mooney built with a 210-220 hp engine convert to roughly a 300 hp turbocharged monster then you have a Rocket the name fits.

 

 

 

 

 

[M016576]

7 hours ago, KLRDMD said:

Those are ROP (rich of peak) numbers. Generically speaking, a turbo allows you to run LOP (lean of peak) without speed loss as you simply increase the MP (manifold pressure) for any given altitude. 90% of the time I flew my K model at 9.0 GPH (gallons per hour) in cruise, LOP.  The other 10% of time I flew it at either 9.5 or 10.0 GPH. I never burned 12-13 GPH in that airplane.  On 9.0 GPH at 10,000 feet I saw 155-160 KTAS (knots true airspeed) depending on density altitude. With a turbo, the higher you go the faster you go so 12,000 ft is faster, 17,000 ft is faster yet, etc. Likewise, 6,000 ft is slower and 3,000 ft slower yet in a turbo.

The J is a non-turbocharged, normally aspirated airplane. They are fastest around 8,000 ft. Above that and below that they are slower. Flying LOP in a normally aspirated airplane means lower true airspeed at reduced fuel consumption.

The M is turbocharged but does not run well LOP.

Yes- I picked all ROP numbers, primarily because I've *heard* (but do not know for a fact) that the M doesn't do LOP ops well... and I wanted the comparisons to match the mode in which the pilot would fly (minimizing variables?)  

LOP ops burns less fuel.  My previous J would cruise at ~155KTAS at 8-9gph at 10,000' DA.  The charts I've seen that compare KTAS for a M20K vs M20J show that the crossover point where the M20K pulls away from a J is somewhere around 8-10K.  I'm fairly certain that chart assumes ROP ops, though.

 

here's another way to look at the two.... this is from Byron, from another (very similar thread) from 2016....

On 2/9/2016 at 9:02 AM, jetdriven said:

the Mooneyland article is junk science. He claims that a 231 is so much faster that the extra fuel is offset by the faster speed. lets do some math.

M20J, 155 knots, 10 gph.  2000 TBO, 26000$ overhaul cost, from the factory.

M20K 231, 165 knots, 12 gph, 1800 TBO, and overhaul cost 45,000$.  (both quotes from airpower).

 

M02J, 2000 hours, its runout, has flown a theoretical 310,000 miles, and burned 70K worth of gas at 3.50$/gal.

M20J 231, 1800 hours, its also runout, flew 297,000 miles and burned through 75.6K in fuel.

total cost M20J,  $96,000.

M20K 231,  $121000.    if you have a top overhaul in there, its ~131K. Substantially more.

Im not bagging on the 231, im not. If you want or need the capability, it delivers much more than a 201, but it does come at a substantial cost.

 

 

[Hank]

2 hours ago, Cruiser said:

I have a different track for your consideration.

It will take about 70 hours to earn your PP.

It will take another 100 hours to learn how to fly

Then you will need about 50 more hours to get IFR qualified.

I suggest you do at least the first two in a basic trainer. After that, if you feel comfortable you can get the Mooney and do the instrument work in it.

Long cross country trips are another learning phase of flying. Take your time, get good at what you need to do. Be safe.

I bought my C at 62 hours, five weeks after my PPL checkride. Then I spent a year and 100 hours getting comfortable in it, and attending a MAPA PPP. Then I dillydallied another year before jnuckling down and getting my IR. The 100 hours cut insurance 50%; the IR cut it another 30%.

So far it's been 11 great years of owner-assisted learning, with only one ugly annual (carb box rebuild, new carb heat cable, doghouse resurrection Part II, new muffler), but lots of owner and A&P TLC.

Learn to land in the Cessna. You can transition to a Mooney anytime after you solo. I did it right after my PPL checkride. Finished my dual at Labor Day, then went 270nm over the Appalachians for Thanksgiving. This type of travel is why low-time pilot's insurance is high in Mooneys . . . . Don't let airplane hunting / purchase distract you from finishing your license!

Study well, train hard and learn to be accurate. Mooneys fly best when you fly the correct numbers. Aim for the correct speed and the correct altitude, don't go down final 5-10 knots too fast--the Cessna will do just fine, a Mooney will give yiu trouble flown like that. Start practicing accurate speeds and altitudes now.

[KLRDMD]

31 minutes ago, M016576 said:

I picked all ROP numbers, primarily because I've *heard* (but do not know for a fact) that the M doesn't do LOP ops well... and I wanted the comparisons to match the mode in which the pilot would fly (minimizing variables?)  

LOP ops burns less fuel.  My previous J would cruise at ~155KTAS at 8-9gph at 10,000' DA.  The charts I've seen that compare KTAS for a M20K vs M20J show that the crossover point where the M20K pulls away from a J is somewhere around 8-10K.  I'm fairly certain that chart assumes ROP ops, though.

here's another way to look at the two.... this is from Byron, from another (very similar thread) from 2016....

The M20M does not run well LOP. As one that has owned one and had discussions with many other owners, this is true.

The point is, speed doesn't suffer (at any altitude) if you're running ROP or LOP in a turbo as it does in a normally aspirated engine. The turbo has the ability to add back MP that the normally aspirated engine does not.

Questions: Not trick questions . . .

Which is faster, 65% power LOP or 65% power ROP ? Which is faster, 75% power LOP or 75% power ROP ?

Which burns more fuel 65% power LOP or 65% power ROP ? Which burns more fuel , 75% power LOP or 75% power ROP ?

43 minutes ago, M016576 said:

M20J, 155 knots, 10 gph.  2000 TBO

M20K 231, 165 knots, 12 gph, 1800 TBO

As noted above, at 10,000 ft, my M20K burned 9.0 GPH to do 155-160 KTAS depending on density altitude. At least in AZ, it is rare to cruise below 8,000 ft so 10,000 ft is reasonable  if you have a turbo or not. The J is ROP to get that speed, the K is LOP to get the same speed. That 10% fuel flow differential makes up for the difference in TBOs (2,000 versus 1,800). At the current $5/gallon average, the J burns $100k in fuel over 2,000 hours at 10 GPH versus the $81k in fuel for the K over 1,800 hours at 9 GPH. Looking at Jewell's overhaul pricing, there is a $7,300 difference in overhaul prices between a Lycoming IO-360 and a Continental TSIO-360. Over one complete TBO cycle you come out over $10,000 ahead in the K versus the J.

That's using real life, current numbers.

[M016576]

46 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

The M20M does not run well LOP. As one that has owned one and had discussions with many other owners, this is true.

The point is, speed doesn't suffer (at any altitude) if you're running ROP or LOP in a turbo as it does in a normally aspirated engine. The turbo has the ability to add back MP that the normally aspirated engine does not.

Questions: Not trick questions . . .

Which is faster, 65% power LOP or 65% power ROP ? Which is faster, 75% power LOP or 75% power ROP ?

Which burns more fuel 65% power LOP or 65% power ROP ? Which burns more fuel , 75% power LOP or 75% power ROP ?

As noted above, at 10,000 ft, my M20K burned 9.0 GPH to do 155-160 KTAS depending on density altitude. At least in AZ, it is rare to cruise below 8,000 ft so 10,000 ft is reasonable  if you have a turbo or not. The J is ROP to get that speed, the K is LOP to get the same speed. That 10% fuel flow differential makes up for the difference in TBOs (2,000 versus 1,800). At the current $5/gallon average, the J burns $100k in fuel over 2,000 hours at 10 GPH versus the $81k in fuel for the K over 1,800 hours at 9 GPH. Looking at Jewell's overhaul pricing, there is a $7,300 difference in overhaul prices between a Lycoming IO-360 and a Continental TSIO-360. Over one complete TBO cycle you come out over $10,000 ahead in the K versus the J.

That's using real life, current numbers.

all legit.  65% is 65% is 65% of course, as far as power output is concerned- so long as the engine is run out of the red box, its doesn't matter how you get to the power %.

Like I mentioned before- if you're above about 10K, and fly there regularly, the K will pull ahead of the J.  below 10K, the J does just as well. 

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the speed to get to altitude- which with a  turbo is significantly faster if you're climbing to something greater than 5-7K.  I think that's really where you make up a bunch of ground in a K... if you are regularly flying above 10K.... or any turbo charged aircraft- spend more time in the thin air, and it's worth it.

at 10K I would see 155 at 9gph, LOP in the J.  Sounds like the same as your K, when you pulled it back- which would make sense- because they are similarly rated in HP and with an identical aerodynamic airframe (6cyl 210 vs 4cyl 200 hp).  You could always match a J's performance with a K in cruise, particularly as you get higher (if one has the discipline to "pull it back").... not sure about fuel flow (6 vs 4cyl)- but I'd expect it to be higher as you're feeding two extra cylinders to produce the same power out- i.e.-If one were to fly the K at their 10kt extra advertised speed (165 vs 155ktas(, they will incur a ~25% increase in fuel flows.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is this: you *can* fly a K just like a J.  or you can fly it faster at higher altitudes.  or its kind of a wash below 10K.  If you fly it at the speeds "advertised", expect that you'll burn more fuel than a J, at least below 10K.  so.... we're back to the original thought: pick the best airframe for your mission.  A K for lower altitude work will cost you more than a J and not net you an appreciable gain.  higher altitudes- the K will get you there faster for a similar cost.

 

[gsxrpilot]

Wow, sorry to be so late to this discussion. I've been out all day FLYING my M20K 252 around the desert southwest. 

We can quit talking about the Bravo (M20M) since the budget just isn't there. They are very nice airplanes, but then there are lots of nice airplanes out of the budget.

All the good points have been made, but I'll just emphasize a few of them.  This applies to the three models left for consideration. F, J, K

1. Buy the nicest (usually most expensive) version of whatever model you chose. There's nothing as expensive in aviation as a bargain on an airplane.
2. The budget would possibly buy the best F in the country (except for @Marauder's) and of the three models, the F will always have the best useful load. (K will have the worst)
3. The J (other than the useful load of the F) might be the best model ever to come off the Mooney factory floor. A J is the fastest up to 8000 ft. and the most range of any model at that altitude. 
4. The K (what I fly) is what you want West of the Mississippi River. If you don't mind strapping on the O2 mask and climbing into the flight levels, the K is now the fastest of the group and the range is amazing. But to be sure, the K will be chasing the J all the way to 10,000 ft where it starts to pull away and never look back. 
5. If you're gonna go K (which I wouldn't recommend for your location in NC, I'm from NC btw) skip the 231 and get a 252. It's in your budget and you'll be glad you did... if only for the useful load upgradeability.

If I were you, I'd be shopping for the nicest J you can find. And I'll disagree with the others around here and say once you've soloed and are comfortable with your landings, you're ready for that J.