nathan lively

Questions about M20F and Mooney's in general

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Mike Ropers said:

I step in right foot on the floor - grasp the grab handle and swing in the left leg to the pilot side , lowering the derrière into the seat.  Getting out is less graceful

Yes getting out used to make me look like a fool :D  Now, I turn and put left foot on the copilot-side floor, and right foot on the wing walk.  I grab the doorsill grab handle with the left hand and yank myself up in one motion (I might brace my right hand on the doorsill as well).  From that position, I end up standing with one foot on the wing walk, so I'm far enough out I can stand up without hitting my head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Members that donate $10 or more do not see advertisements*

6 hours ago, nathan lively said:

- With the M20s being narrower in the engine compartment is there any over heating issues similar to the Grumman AA-5 line of aircraft?

I didn't see anyone comment on this yet, but my impression is that most IO-360 powered Mooney's run quite cool if the cowl and baffles are in good shape (not as sure about the O-360 ones).  The J model had a redesigned cowling that is more effective than the "doghouse" cowling of the A-G models.  With mine, I struggle to keep my engine warm except during the summer, and the only time I might break 380 during cruise is during the middle of summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome aboard, Nathan.

1) You found the right place.

2) At 6’ and 180#... There isn’t a Mooney that you won’t fit...

3) If your mission includes...

  • Speed
  • efficiency
  • Safety

You get all three with a Mooney.

4) If your back seaters are full scale and come with you all the time. The mid-body Mooneys are a good starting place...

5) Instrument panels have come a long way... some panels cost more than the plane itself....  How IFR capable do you want your plane to be?

6) electric gear and flaps...

  • both very reliable
  • both work very well
  • both require minimal maintenance
  • both have some wear items after 40years in service
  • engine cooling has improved since the mid 70s, it wasn’t terrible, but an engine monitor is important for you...

7) carburetors are great, FI is better, but the price for the ‘upgrade’ often matches the benefit...

8) When buying a forever plane, the M20E is high on many lists... long term efficiency is important to many...

9) if you start with an M20C, it may become a forever plane because it is that worthy...

10) PPI is critical to know what you are buying meets expectations...

11) A few MSers keep their planes on grass strips. One of us didn’t mind using unimproved surfaces... It is all about pilot skill at that level...

about me... 6’, 175#, started with an M20C, moved to M20R after a decade... four full sized adults filling the seats... 1k+UL...

What are your limitations?

Best regards,

-a-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the sound of a 46.5 AMU F.  Not at all.  Likely something hinky.  Hinky in Mooneys can get expensive fast.  Might be able to save some coin buying a G.  They've the stretched body of an F, but the engine of a C.  They're about 10 knots slower than other Mooneys and have a somewhat diminished payload.

You want cheap, good and fast.  Pick two.

I can't off the top of my head think of a true 4 person airplane you can get for that money that won't be a wreck.

Edited by steingar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes getting out used to make me look like a fool   Now, I turn and put left foot on the copilot-side floor, and right foot on the wing walk.  I grab the doorsill grab handle with the left hand and yank myself up in one motion (I might brace my right hand on the doorsill as well).  From that position, I end up standing with one foot on the wing walk, so I'm far enough out I can stand up without hitting my head.


At least we are not talking about the Bonalization technique anymore!




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SantosDumont said:

If I could buy my first plane again I’d buy an A36. Super easy to get in and out of.  They’re a lot more than $65k though.

Putting 4 adults in a Mooney is doable... but you won’t have very much range, or performance. 

I have flown at near gross many times.  Is there something unique about your conversion?  My F would take four 180lb adults and 80lbs of baggage 500NM with an hour of reserves. It never needs to though because I'm not really into aerial sausage parties or women that out way me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, nathan lively said:

They are really nice but I'm trying to stay as close to 40k as possible. Would like to be able to fly the plane I buy without breaking the bank. 

I’d throw a Comanche 250 into your search.  Others might disagree.

Clarence

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, M20Doc said:

I’d throw a Comanche 250 into your search.  Others might disagree.

Clarence

 

Clarence,

Do you have a fair amount of time in 250s?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

I’d throw a Comanche 250 into your search.  Others might disagree.

Clarence

 

I've seen the way Piper does their spares and I'm not willing to put my faith in them. I know they have a good track record but I prefer a beefier spar than what they build. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, steingar said:

I don't like the sound of a 46.5 AMU F.  Not at all.  Likely something hinky.  Hinky in Mooneys can get expensive fast.  Might be able to save some coin buying a G.  They've the stretched body of an F, but the engine of a C.  They're about 10 knots slower than other Mooneys and have a somewhat diminished payload.

You want cheap, good and fast.  Pick two.

I can't off the top of my head think of a true 4 person airplane you can get for that money that won't be a wreck.

PM sent about the aircraft I'm looking at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Marauder said:

 


At least we are not talking about the Bonalization technique anymore!

 

 

 

 

 




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

You've too much time on your hands...;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, nathan lively said:

I've seen the way Piper does their spares and I'm not willing to put my faith in them. I know they have a good track record but I prefer a beefier spar than what they build. 

Comanche spar looks like an I-beam (literally a foot thick at the center).  There is nothing about the PA-24 airframe that one would call "underbuilt".   Other pros are removable fuel cells and oleo struts.   It's a nice airframe.  I just flew one week before last.  Makes almost identical numbers to my F except for the 25% increase in fuel burn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Clarence,

Do you have a fair amount of time in 250s?

About 500 hours.  Also some 180 time, then a bunch of 400 time.

Clarence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, nathan lively said:

I've seen the way Piper does their spares and I'm not willing to put my faith in them. I know they have a good track record but I prefer a beefier spar than what they build. 

Comanche spar is different than than the Cherokee series which had the failure in Florida.  Zinc chromate primer through out with no corrosion issues, no steel cage to rot, bladders from birth, cheaper parallel valve Lycoming compared to angle vale E and F model I0-360.

Clarence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Comanche spar looks like an I-beam (literally a foot thick at the center).  There is nothing about the PA-24 airframe that one would call "underbuilt".   Other pros are removable fuel cells and oleo struts.   It's a nice airframe.  I just flew one week before last.  Makes almost identical numbers to my F except for the 25% increase in fuel burn.

Higher, farther, faster and carries more from what I’ve heard!  Piper kool aid tastes better than Mooney kool aid.

Clarence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Comanche spar looks like an I-beam (literally a foot thick at the center).  There is nothing about the PA-24 airframe that one would call "underbuilt".   Other pros are removable fuel cells and oleo struts.   It's a nice airframe.  I just flew one week before last.  Makes almost identical numbers to my F except for the 25% increase in fuel burn.

Hmmm didn't realize their spare was that drastically different. May warrant a second look if this one doesn't pan out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nathan lively said:

 if this one doesn't pan out. 

Friends don't let friends buy Mooneys without autopilots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

Friends don't let friends buy Mooneys without autopilots.

Did my IFR and Multi engine in an aircraft with an auto pilot. I think I'm a weird one that's not the biggest fan of them. Made the long flights kinda boring. Just my opinion.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

Higher, farther, faster and carries more from what I’ve heard!  Piper kool aid tastes better than Mooney kool aid.

Clarence

I've run the numbers and seen it first hand. 

It's a nice bird but no faster (at least in my experience). It's thirstier. It has about 50lbs on me in useful but that is eaten up by fuel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, nathan lively said:

Did my IFR and Multi engine in an aircraft with an auto pilot. I think I'm a weird one that's not the biggest fan of them. Made the long flights kinda boring. Just my opinion.... 

You don't have to use it, but owning one makes the airplane more valuable and easier to sell. There are lots of Mooneys sitting around out there not selling very quickly, and none of them have autopilots. When one comes up for sale with even an Stec30, it's sold in a few days.

This is likely to get even more common as a new batch of modern autopilots are released. The birds without one are just not going to be very desirable or easy to sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

You don't have to use it, but owning one makes the airplane more valuable and easier to sell. There are lots of Mooneys sitting around out there not selling very quickly, and none of them have autopilots. When one comes up for sale with even an Stec30, it's sold in a few days.

This is likely to get even more common as a new batch of modern autopilots are released. The birds without one are just not going to be very desirable or easy to sell.

Some of us aren't worried about resale value. The executor of my estate can deal with the tire kickers and naysayers. I'm concentrating on the qualifications to become a UFO, and to keep on flying my Mooney until then. Thanks to Bennett for setting such a great example! 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hank said:

Some of us aren't worried about resale value. The executor of my estate can deal with the tire kickers and naysayers. I'm concentrating on the qualifications to become a UFO, and to keep on flying my Mooney until then. Thanks to Bennett for setting such a great example! 

Yep, "forever" airplanes are in a whole different category where the rules don't apply. And that immunity to resale value works both directions. Some don't spend any money on their planes and eventually they don't fly anymore and slowly sink into the grass at some random field. The value of the plane reduced to zero. Other's spend with abandon, i.e. @Marauder and @Bob_Belville, knowing they'll have to get the value out of it by flying, because they'll never get all the investment back out in a sale.

I like to think I own a "forever" airplane as well. 

Then there's @KLRDMD who probably doesn't do anything without an eye toward the resale value.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nathan lively said:

The aircraft also has a 330 and 530 no WAAS which is a nice bonus from my perspective. 

If you mean it has a GTX330 transponder and a GNS530 but the non WAAS version... and that's a good thing?

Give me just a minute... I've got a list around here somewhere...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gsxrpilot said:

If you mean it has a GTX330 transponder and a GNS530 but the non WAAS version... and that's a good thing?

Give me just a minute... I've got a list around here somewhere...

Just saying its a plus :) I'm ok without either.

Edited by nathan lively

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now