Recommended Posts

Good morning. 

Iam looking at a 2005 Mooney Bravo that has a has a Lycoming TIO-540-A1FB engine and would like to see if anyone could share their experience with this engine. Is it a good engine or has it had problems? I remember reading  some time back about some Cessnas with Lycoming engines that had crank shaft problems and would not like to get into a situation like this. 

Thank you, 

Fernando Paez 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

I am a new 2000 Bravo owner. I'm sure a few who are smarter on the engine will give you their take on the specifics.

My take thus far is it is a great engine that you need to study to ensure you are running it properly as the POH settings are designed for Max performance, not longevity. I run 29" No & 2400 rpm, leaned 50 ROP. That gives me 17.5-18 gph. if you run 30/2400, expect 18.5-19 gph.

Are you new to turbo engines? If so, you will need to plan your descent profiles a little more. I've heard mostly good things about folk making it to TBO with the wet head design and flying as listed above.

Fly Safe,
Safety Forum Mod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal experience has been good so far.  I’m a Lycoming fan. I bought my Bravo with 1600hrs on the engine now approaching 1900hrs. It’s a thirsty engine design, but it runs great. I also typically cruise at 29/2400, keep the CHTs below 400 on take off and below 380 at other times, keep the TIT below 1625. and keep an eye on the exhaust system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bigger concern with a 2005 is the avionics. Not many G1000 birds out there with an STEC55x.  Hopefully there’s a path to a GFC700 and an NXI but that’s not clear. If it is offered (not guaranteed) it’ll be a big check. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, smccray said:

 

My bigger concern with a 2005 is the avionics. Not many G1000 birds out there with an STEC55x.  Hopefully there’s a path to a GFC700 and an NXI but that’s not clear. If it is offered (not guaranteed) it’ll be a big check

 

That concern has always steered me away from looking at pre 2007 G1000 aircraft. 

Also, I should add that the older crankshaft AD on the Bravo engine should’ve been taken care of long ago. Most, not all, Bravo pilots seem to run their engines ROP rather than LOP even with well tuned GAMI injectors.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fernando Paez said:

Good morning. 

Iam looking at a 2005 Mooney Bravo that has a has a Lycoming TIO-540-A1FB engine and would like to see if anyone could share their experience with this engine. Is it a good engine or has it had problems? I remember reading  some time back about some Cessnas with Lycoming engines that had crank shaft problems and would not like to get into a situation like this. 

Thank you, 

Fernando Paez 

The Lycoming engine will be supported for long into the future. Any that were affected by the crankshaft AD have been long since handled.

The biggest thing you should consider on an '05 is the G1000. If it doesn't have the $30,000 WAAS upgrade, which is no longer available from Garmin,  it will never be able to fly an LPV approach, and since the G1000 is part of the certification of the GX Bravo it cannot be replaced with other avionics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

GX Bravo it cannot be replaced with other avionics

As Don Maxwell told me "hold my beer and watch this" He is going to do just that with either an Ovation or Bravo.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a 2005 bravo.. it is N/A for the camshaft AD., you can check by engine serial#.    They are great planes, but they are thirsty.  Going to the Acclaim is at least another 100K.  The g1000 has the WAAS upgrade and GTX345R.   As indicated above that WAAS update is $25000 and not obtainable anymore.  an airplane without that upgrade should be penalized by that amount.   Only one bravo that we know of has the GFC700.  It was the factory test plane. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, PaulM said:

I have a 2005 bravo.. it is N/A for the camshaft AD., you can check by engine serial#.    They are great planes, but they are thirsty.  Going to the Acclaim is at least another 100K.  The g1000 has the WAAS upgrade and GTX345R.   As indicated above that WAAS update is $25000 and not obtainable anymore.  an airplane without that upgrade should be penalized by that amount.   Only one bravo that we know of has the GFC700.  It was the factory test plane. 

 

 

If it requires the crank AD (shouldnt if it has been properly annualed) that will be upwards of 50 or more AMU's. Updating the avionics will be expensive also. 100K for a newer Acclaim will look like a bargain.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

 Updating the avionics will be expensive also. 100K for a newer Acclaim will look like a bargain.

Bingo.  I'd check on the crank AD but I would expect that to be an issue.  Older avionics... compare the cost of upgrading the panel to alternative models.  I'm only aware of one Bravo with WAAS and a GFC700 autopilot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I once owned a 2007 Acclaim and now I own a 95 Bravo.  I loved the Acclaim and I would own one again if I could afford it.  That said, I also really enjoy flying the Bravo.  I intentionally steered away from the G1000 Bravos for the reasons listed before, e.g. no WAAS, no clear upgrade path for avionics, autopilot issues.  The troubling thing about the Acclaim is that almost every one I've seen advertised seems to have had a top overhaul every 600 hours or so.  I did not fly mine but 250 hours before a medical issue required its sale so I have no first hand experience though with that.

As for the engine, as long as it is properly flown and maintained, one can expect good dispatch reliability and "normal" costs.  This business of it being "thirsty" is humorous to me.  I fly LOP and I routinely see 11-12 NM per gallon at 175 knots which is just fine in my book.  

Whatever you do, get transition training and learn to fly (and especially land) the plane the way it was designed.  Fast landings are not pretty.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other point is that the exhaust system is not very robust and cracks often.  The G1000 looks great but I choose steam gauges to get around the WAAS problems.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

If it requires the crank AD (shouldnt if it has been properly annualed) that will be upwards of 50 or more AMU's. Updating the avionics will be expensive also. 100K for a newer Acclaim will look like a bargain

I hear you there... $100K will be a bargain... You are right! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Fernando Paez said:

Good morning. 

Iam looking at a 2005 Mooney Bravo that has a has a Lycoming TIO-540-A1FB engine and would like to see if anyone could share their experience with this engine. Is it a good engine or has it had problems? I remember reading  some time back about some Cessnas with Lycoming engines that had crank shaft problems and would not like to get into a situation like this. 

Thank you, 

Fernando Paez 

AD 2012-19-01 was to have been complied with no later than 12 years after manufacturer, but things do get missed.  The AD drove compliance with Lycoming SB569A, which provides the serial numbers of effected engines.

Clarence

 

23A1CD83-7EAF-44EE-8CFB-27D4D3737963.jpeg

Share this post


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

As Don Maxwell told me "hold my beer and watch this" He is going to do just that with either an Ovation or Bravo.

Way to go Don!  Just tell Trek there’s a GFC500 problem on the other side of the country to keep him out of your hair. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, PaulM said:

I have a 2005 bravo.. it is N/A for the camshaft AD., you can check by engine serial#.    They are great planes, but they are thirsty.  Going to the Acclaim is at least another 100K.  The g1000 has the WAAS upgrade and GTX345R.   As indicated above that WAAS update is $25000 and not obtainable anymore.  an airplane without that upgrade should be penalized by that amount.   Only one bravo that we know of has the GFC700.  It was the factory test plane. 

 

 

I think the price penalty for no upgrade path to WAAS is actually more than the cost of what the upgrade was when it was available. To me this is an example of the whole being more than the sum of the parts. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bravoman said:

I think the price penalty for no upgrade path to WAAS is actually more than the cost of what the upgrade was when it was available. To me this is an example of the whole being more than the sum of the parts.

That will be the odd thing in pricing.. I can't tell.. either it will be more, since it is unobtainium.  Or it will be less. as the planes go to people who don't "need" WAAS. We flew them for 11 years without it.  I went missed on only one approach that could have been completed on LPV before the upgrade.  There will be a slow amount of wrecked planes that make GIA63W's available in the secondary market.  If a NXi path comes out then there will again be a $21K WAAS package.. of course it will be coupled with the NXi cost, but it will bring a.. pay $$$ you get WAAS sort of resolution.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 That will be the odd thing in pricing.. I can't tell.. either it will be more, since it is unobtainium.  Or it will be less. as the planes go to people who don't "need" WAAS. We flew them for 11 years without it.  I went missed on only one approach that could have been completed on LPV before the upgrade.  There will be a slow amount of wrecked planes that make GIA63W's available in the secondary market.  If a NXi path comes out then there will again be a $21K WAAS package.. of course it will be coupled with the NXi cost, but it will bring a.. pay $$$ you get WAAS sort of resolution.  

I agree with you too.  There's a gap in value right now.  The lack of clarity in the future is a big problem for anyone who wants to buy a Bravo.  However- the plane still has a lot of utility, and over time there will likely be a solution.  NXI doesn't have a path using anything other than a GFC700 autopilot.  WAAS upgrades were $20-30K.  The GFC700 autopilot was offered briefly to early G1000 Mooneys- I want to say it was $25K.  Right there you're half way to an early Acclaim.

I really hope Mooney opens the door for G1000 NXI upgrades, as well as GFC700 autopilot upgrades (hopefully WAAS as well).  It's a lot of incremental revenue for Mooney.  Owners would be very smart to take advantage of the opportunity, even though it'll be a big check.  The lesson from the past is that upgrade opportunities don't last forever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m curious if the performance/interface of the g1000 was different between the waas and non. One of the best things about the gns upgrade was the faster response and refresh rate. Is it the same for the g1000?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If youre looking at that red and white bravo gx, that thing has been on the market for a long time. 3 or 4 years. It hopped on and off multiple times. Find a 99 or 00 bravo and spend the 100 grand you save on new avionics. Then its a better plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, MIm20c said:

I’m curious if the performance/interface of the g1000 was different between the waas and non. One of the best things about the gns upgrade was the faster response and refresh rate. Is it the same for the g1000?

No, there was no change.. because the data display speeds are rendered by the GDU1040 displays that didn't change... the faster CPU in the GNS530/GIA63W  only could be seen in the GNS530 than ran the display directly.   The GIA63's are GNS530's without display, but in the g1000 configuration it doesn't impact the display. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, smccray said:

I agree with you too.  There's a gap in value right now.  The lack of clarity in the future is a big problem for anyone who wants to buy a Bravo.  However- the plane still has a lot of utility, and over time there will likely be a solution.  NXI doesn't have a path using anything other than a GFC700 autopilot.  WAAS upgrades were $20-30K.  The GFC700 autopilot was offered briefly to early G1000 Mooneys- I want to say it was $25K.  Right there you're half way to an early Acclaim.

I really hope Mooney opens the door for G1000 NXI upgrades, as well as GFC700 autopilot upgrades (hopefully WAAS as well).  It's a lot of incremental revenue for Mooney.  Owners would be very smart to take advantage of the opportunity, even though it'll be a big check.  The lesson from the past is that upgrade opportunities don't last forever.

It was hard to separately value the GFC700 upgrade, since it required the GDU1044 replacement at the same time to get the AP buttons.. where an NXi combo is already the 2 new display units with all buttons included.  All that is required is the 3 GSA81+85 servos, wiring and mounting hardware.  So it feels like 10K for the display, and 15K for the servos + hardware.  

  It is also implied by this: http://static.garmin.com/pumac/190-02128-04_03.pdf  (Cessna NXi maintenance manual section 3.7.21) that the legacy autopilot code is still in the NXi codebase.  The autopilots connect to GIA#2, so no hardware change there.  That doesn't mean that Mooney will certify it.. just that the code is there. 

The early Acclaims were also S55x and lacked WAAS as well.. I believe it was nearly 2007 before the GFC700 was standard.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, with regard to non-WAAS G1000, Garmin did not say they had no more GIA-63W units. They said they would not make them anymore. They are in stock. The upgrade kit is in stock at Garmin. I just bought one this month. Second with regard to the NXi upgrade, I think it will happen, but it will be a while. If you look at Garmin's project list, they are going from King Air down. The first SE they are doing is the PA-46. I suspect Mooney will be one of the last. Starting with the higher priced machines makes sense. I suspect it will be long enough that a WAAS upgrade to a legacy G1000 is worthwhile.

If you don't upgrade to WAAS however it is not a big deal. Yeah you can't do an LPV approach. Look at the approach charts for most GPS approaches. The difference between an LNAV and an LPV in most, not all, but most is 100'. How often has that made a difference to you? I suspect unless you are in a scheduled operation, rarely. I can even show you an approach where the LNAV minimum is lower than the LPV (KMTN RWY 33). Second restriction is not be able to file to a GPS destination AND alternate. Again, how often does that raise its ugly head? Depends on your home base. Me, a little more but not a lot. My issue is the way my home airport is laid out, people hit the GS antenna a lot so you have to the LPV to get really low. 

As to the Bravo, like the machine but it is different, requires a thorough understanding of its operation and it is a tad thirsty which is why I opted for a normally aspirated Continental. If you get a good price, you can buy a fair amount of fuel and accounting for present value of money, may be a good buy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GB,

1) are you sure Garmin has them in stock?

There are threads around here saying something different...

2) are you comparing WAAS approaches to ILS approaches...?

My home drome doesn’t have an ILS... so the difference between a WAAS approach and a VOR based approach would be many many 100s of feet...

Just trying to understand your points...

Best regards,

-a-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.