Upgrading from a Piper Dakota

[Davidv]

@carusoam I don’t mean to nit pick since your post was very good and informative, but I believe my TIO-540 has 270HP.  However, you still feel a big difference on takeoff between the 270 lycoming and 280 continental. 

[N231BN]

An earlier 231 or a 252 Encore will have a 1000lb useful load or better. For your requirement, that leaves 400lbs or 66gal of fuel. My average fuel burn is 12.5 and block speed is about 150kts(mostly below O2 altitudes). That gives you 648nm with a 1 hour reserve, further the higher you go.

I love my 231, it's a good airplane and it was cheap! However, if I was going to spend more than 200k with your mission it would be B36TC all the way. A good model will have 1200lbs useful.

[Danb]

David agreed our weak point is being a dog on the takeoff run, once we break ground the climb out is impressive, however its made up in the lower teens with 200 knots 17.5 gph,ouch, I can not think of another plane I would trade my Bravo for. Me my wife baggage and 120 gal(1040 useful load) and we are off for a long cross country over most weather. Love it. A few years ago I did Vegas to Delaware with one stop 8 hours total. That was the usual tail winds west, it took me 10.5 hours going to Vegas, That is where the turbo shines goin higher in smooth air, over some weather and fast.

[Davidv]

Agreed, I'm a little slower than you numbers but mine is a 1992 and still would only trade it for a newer Bravo or Acclaim.  I made it from Nashville to Ft. Lauderdale in 3.5 hrs last month at 15,500 and loved every minute.  I'm just about to swap out my baffling for Gee-Bee's kit so that should allow me to fly higher with better temps (my current seals are a total mess and won't let me get much better than 380-390 without being too rich).

[gsxrpilot]

Bravo's and Acclaims are nice two person personal airliners, but they don't have the useful load or the range of the 252 Encore. As @N231BN said, you need a 231 or 252 Encore to get the useful load you need.

In my 252 if you loaded 600 lbs of people/luggage, you could still cary 68 gal of fuel. That would give you an easy 5 hours of range or 1100 miles. 

Here is what that flight would look like in my 252 with 600 lbs of people/stuff. It would never take more than one stop. This would be in the flight levels. But it could be done lower as well.

[Danb]

Paul my useful load is 1040, there aren't to many 231's or 252's with a whole lot more, always stating Bravo's don't have much useful load isn't always true, and paints a picture not correct, how much more useful load do you have over 1040?

[KSMooniac]

I concur that an Encore or 252 upgraded to an Encore might be the best solution for carrying up to 600 lbs of butts over a long distance.

For the OP, that is an M20K model with the CMI TSIO-360-SB engine, 220 hp. You should be able to find one with 1000-1100 lb useful load, which offers a lot of flexibility when burning 11-12 GPH at cruise making 17-18 NMPG. 252 models were mostly made in the mid to late 80's while the Encore was made 97-98. Your budget should easily get a factory Encore, but there aren't many so you may need to be patient. 252's can be updated with a little effort and modest cost (maybe 5k ish). Replacing legacy avionics with modern will help noticeably with useful load since these came loaded with full King panels from the era.

At this point, I would encourage you to beg rides in any of these candidates...you'll quickly determine if you like the seating position and comfort, baggage capacity/volume, etc. Any of them will be a noticeable improvement for your trips vs the Dakota, but of course you must really like one to make the leap.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[DesertNomad]

The Factory Encores... were those new aircraft or rebuilt older ones that the factory bought and renovated? The Mooney line is still a bit murky to me as there just don't seem to be many around here.

[gsxrpilot]

30 minutes ago, Danb said:

Paul my useful load is 1040, there aren't to many 231's or 252's with a whole lot more, always stating Bravo's don't have much useful load isn't always true, and paints a picture not correct, how much more useful load do you have over 1040?

I stand corrected. That's a really good useful load.

And actually 252's don't have good useful load. It's only after they've been converted to Encore's that they can get close to 1100 useful.

[gsxrpilot]

18 minutes ago, DesertNomad said:

The Factory Encores... were those new aircraft or rebuilt older ones that the factory bought and renovated? The Mooney line is still a bit murky to me as there just don't seem to be many around here.

At the end of the M20K run, Mooney was building the Encore variant. These are "Factory Encores". At the same time, Mooney released a drawing which if followed, can convert a 252 to an Encore. It involves brakes, an additional 10 hp, and control surface weights. The reason it's a popular conversion for 252 owners is the additional 230 lbs of useful load that comes with the conversion.

[KSMooniac]

The Factory Encores... were those new aircraft or rebuilt older ones that the factory bought and renovated? The Mooney line is still a bit murky to me as there just don't seem to be many around here.

The 252 went out of production after 1990, and came back as the Encore (clever name) in 97 but stopped after 98. These models will have the nicer, modern interior with fiberglass side panels instead of the older plastic. Less than 30 were made, though.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[Davidv]

Looks like a few in the market right now

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/list/category/6/piston-single-aircraft/manufacturer/mooney/model/m20k-encore

[gsengle]

Looks like a few in the market right now
https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/list/category/6/piston-single-aircraft/manufacturer/mooney/model/m20k-encore

That purple one looks really nice. But also consider if you have a desire for anti icing capability/fiki...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MIm20c]

With your mission (higher DA/shorter runways) a turbo/310hp/both? could come in handy.  I’ve been closely watching the 252 market and nothing has made me jump yet. I really like the bravo for sale by one of our members. I talked to him a little over a month ago and probably would have purchased it but really think a mid body will be my next step. 

[larryb]

In my opinion what is most important is how far you can fly a load of X pounds of people and stuff. 1000 lb useful load in an Encore is not the same thing as 1000 lb useful load in a Bravo due to the difference in fuel economy. With my rough calculation a Bravo is going to take 115 lb more fuel to fly an 800 mile trip. 

[Danb]

It all depends on your typical mission, in 35+ years of flying I’ve only used my back seats less than a dozen times, although I use them for flight junk. Therefore for many of us the importance of flying X pounds for X miles is a mute point. I realize we all have differing missions. I’d consider a plane that fits my typical profile and go from there. Seriously if I needed to move people often eg. if I had kids etc I most likely would have a twin or something like a Mirage. His Dakota fits his profile expect for speed, high useful load times 190knots per hour equals high dollars. Flying is a game of money as we increase our utility.

[DesertNomad]

Danb is right, if my Dakota could go 180kts, I'd be thrilled. While I rarely have people in the back seats, I do have useable back seats which is not true for all airplanes. Turbo and FIKI would be nice but probably not essential. On one hand, living out West, the turbo is probably more useful, since when we have icing here, the weather is usually not good for any light aircraft. Where FIKI would be nice is in the Pacific Northwest (where I fly 3-4 times a year) and in Michigan (1-2 times per year) when it is just cold-ish and overcast.

I guess I need to compile a list of the different Mooney models with TAS, useful load, TBO, and fuel burn to come up with a short-list. No matter how fast we go, I can't see planing more than a 4-hour leg and 3.5 is more usual. It sounds like a 252, Encore or Bravo may meet my mission.

Edited June 27, 2019 by DesertNomad

[Niko182]

My Eagle has a 1140lbs useful load. 5 days ago, i took of out of KTSP at 6000ft density alt, with 800lbs of people and 45 gallons of fuel. I was still getting around 600ft a minute climbing between 130 and 140 KIAS. I have a 310hp platform. Cruise is usually around 180 to 185 knots at 14 to 16gph. I have the useful load that youre looking for. Personally id look for an eagle if i were you. It has the space for 4, the useful load, the cruise speed, and the power.

Getting 4 in the plane is a minor shuffle, but once they're all in, it is quite comfy. 

[Danb]

There is an eagle for sale in Mass. a MAPA instructor.

[Niko182]

17 minutes ago, Danb said:

There is an eagle for sale in Mass. a MAPA instructor.

Pretty sure delta bought that one and it sold. There is however a very nice one on controller.

 

[carusoam]

7 hours ago, Davidv said:

@carusoam I don’t mean to nit pick since your post was very good and informative, but I believe my TIO-540 has 270HP.  However, you still feel a big difference on takeoff between the 270 lycoming and 280 continental. 

Sorry David,

you may have missed the line above the list...

(Close, but Rough hp numbers... my memory is a bit aged...)

That list was from an aged memory...

From a refreshed memory... 270hp is correct according to AOPA... 

Something @DesertNomad May be interested in reading... There are a few well written pages regarding  Mooneys.... MAPA is one resource (the best) and AOPA did a pretty good job too...

https://www.aopa.org/go-fly/aircraft-and-ownership/aircraft-fact-sheets/mooney-bravo (be sure to find all of the clickable tabs)

 

When comparing small hp differences... some get lost in the temperature of the day.... winter performance can be tremendous compared to summer performance... 5% increase in the same plane starts to be noticeable in every way... 10% is measurable in every way...

The 10% hp increase in the standard Ovation converted to a Standing Ovation, 280hp vs 310hp, has a very noticeable T/O distance improvement...

The normal, light load, T/O roll, started as 1200’ and got shortened to 800’...

This makes short runways more enjoyable...

The climb out... I have a local ‘mountain’ I want to climb directly over... It is a Class B airport 6k’ tall... initial climb rates over 2k’pm has me hurdling that bar in a few minutes...

Niko’s Screamin’ Eagle(?) has all of the performance + the best UL of all the Long Bodies...

Where these HP numbers make the most sense... T/O roll, and climb rate... the increased fuel puts a bit of a dent in the finances of cruise... and can’t be used on short descents...

 

Be careful visiting AAA... you don’t want to accidentally take home two Moonies... turbo for ultimate performance... NA for ultimate efficiency....

Best regards,

-a-

[gsxrpilot]

2 hours ago, larryb said:

In my opinion what is most important is how far you can fly a load of X pounds of people and stuff. 1000 lb useful load in an Encore is not the same thing as 1000 lb useful load in a Bravo due to the difference in fuel economy. With my rough calculation a Bravo is going to take 115 lb more fuel to fly an 800 mile trip. 

I'm not sure it's the MOST important. But is sure seems like a good way to compare apples to apples.

I would love to see some proper calculations or a spread sheet on this... But I believe that if limited to Certificated Four-place Piston Singles, the 252 Encore and the M20J can move X pounds further on less gas than just about any other airplane. 

You can always spend more on gas to get there faster. And for many that figures prominently in the equation. 

If I could afford the care and feeding, I'd fly a Bravo. And I almost bought an Eagle instead of my 252. I'd be curious as to how the Eagle stacks up to the 252 in that equation.