Mooney or Cirrus?

[BKlott]

I don’t see this as just a “chute” versus “no chute” decision.

For someone in the used aircraft market today, that wants a state-of-the-art aircraft, they face the choice of either acquiring a legacy airframe and spending $$$,$$$ modernizing it to make it “like new” or they can purchase a newer airframe that is already state-of-the-art.

The problems associated with going the modernization route are seemingly endless. You start with 40 to 50 year old airframes that, with few exceptions, were not corrosion proofed at the factory. There is no good, reasonable way to thoroughly correct that. 

To have the glass panel, fully integrated avionics package with a full function auto pilot, you will need to redo the instrument panel and rewire the aircraft to bring it up to snuff. You’re not really going to keep using 40 to 50 year old wiring after doing all this work, are you? It isn’t like the Avionics shops are sitting around waiting for someone to come by and give them something to do. It took me six months to obtain two quotes on a much simpler audio panel, GTN and CDI purchase and install job.

Then you can start refurbishing the airframe with new UV screen tinted glass, a leather interior and a sharp new paint job. Finding a paint shop that is careful, detailed oriented and meticulous in it’s work will be the next challenge for you. Once you find one and get on their schedule, don’t plan on flying your airplane for another two months. 

Of course, you’ll want the engine and propellor to be like new as well. While your engine is at the overhaul shop or you are waiting for your factory reman to show up, you might as well send out that engine mount for x-ray inspection and repairs. After all, it has been supporting that engine for the past 45 to 50 years while being subjected to vibration, G forces and temperature extremes. Besides, you can’t eyeball it and see all the cracks or internal rust that is taking place. To be “like new” you’ll want to renew everything firewall forward that hasn’t recently been replaced already.

All of this doesn’t even address airframe specific items like landing gear donuts or leaking wet wing fuel tanks, etc.

When you finally get done with your project, which will take more than a year out of your life at best....count on it....you will still have a legacy 45 to 50 year old airframe that you have invested well over $$$,$$$ in it that is subject to being rendered unairworthy by corrosion.

The other option is to spend your $$$,$$$ and purchase a 10 to 12 year old airframe that is state-of-the-art, that isn’t subject to corrosion issues, that has some additional features that the legacy airframes do not have and go flying...avoiding all of the hassles, aggravation, inconvenience and grief that comes with refurbishing a legacy airframe.

Make no mistake. If you own an airplane, want it to be nice and keep it long enough, you will end up with $$$,$$$ invested in your ship. Engines and props wear out, avionics become worthless and unreliable, paint jobs, glass and interiors become worn and dated. You might find that the ragged out plane that doesn’t bother you...nobody else wants. Either way, that costs you money in the end.

 

 

 

 

[ExpressJetter]

1 hour ago, Andy95W said:

I always thought the Cirrus looked like a sperm with wings and spindly landing gear.

Couldn't agree more on the looks.  Plus I'm not a fan of not having the ability to control prop settings.

[RogueOne]

1 hour ago, BKlott said:

I don’t see this as just a “chute” versus “no chute” decision.

For someone in the used aircraft market today, that wants a state-of-the-art aircraft, they face the choice of either acquiring a legacy airframe and spending $$$,$$$ modernizing it to make it “like new” or they can purchase a newer airframe that is already state-of-the-art.

The problems associated with going the modernization route are seemingly endless. You start with 40 to 50 year old airframes that, with few exceptions, were not corrosion proofed at the factory. There is no good, reasonable way to thoroughly correct that. 

To have the glass panel, fully integrated avionics package with a full function auto pilot, you will need to redo the instrument panel and rewire the aircraft to bring it up to snuff. You’re not really going to keep using 40 to 50 year old wiring after doing all this work, are you? It isn’t like the Avionics shops are sitting around waiting for someone to come by and give them something to do. It took me six months to obtain two quotes on a much simpler audio panel, GTN and CDI purchase and install job.

Then you can start refurbishing the airframe with new UV screen tinted glass, a leather interior and a sharp new paint job. Finding a paint shop that is careful, detailed oriented and meticulous in it’s work will be the next challenge for you. Once you find one and get on their schedule, don’t plan on flying your airplane for another two months. 

Of course, you’ll want the engine and propellor to be like new as well. While your engine is at the overhaul shop or you are waiting for your factory reman to show up, you might as well send out that engine mount for x-ray inspection and repairs. After all, it has been supporting that engine for the past 45 to 50 years while being subjected to vibration, G forces and temperature extremes. Besides, you can’t eyeball it and see all the cracks or internal rust that is taking place. To be “like new” you’ll want to renew everything firewall forward that hasn’t recently been replaced already.

All of this doesn’t even address airframe specific items like landing gear donuts or leaking wet wing fuel tanks, etc.

When you finally get done with your project, which will take more than a year out of your life at best....count on it....you will still have a legacy 45 to 50 year old airframe that you have invested well over $$$,$$$ in it that is subject to being rendered unairworthy by corrosion.

The other option is to spend your $$$,$$$ and purchase a 10 to 12 year old airframe that is state-of-the-art, that isn’t subject to corrosion issues, that has some additional features that the legacy airframes do not have and go flying...avoiding all of the hassles, aggravation, inconvenience and grief that comes with refurbishing a legacy airframe.

Make no mistake. If you own an airplane, want it to be nice and keep it long enough, you will end up with $$$,$$$ invested in your ship. Engines and props wear out, avionics become worthless and unreliable, paint jobs, glass and interiors become worn and dated. You might find that the ragged out plane that doesn’t bother you...nobody else wants. Either way, that costs you money in the end.

 

 

 

 

You know that Mooney is still making airplanes...right?  Such a weird assessment.  What is with the 40-50 year old airframe comparison? You do know that Mid-body J’s were made in 80’s and 90’s much less an Eagle, right?  So Mr. gloom and doom I just bought a J with modern paint scheme, Modern leather and a 300HP engine for well under $100AMU’s.  The panel AND wiring was already upgraded and “updated” wiring from...horror of horrors early 80’s.  When we overhaul the engine and prop it will be a known (to new limits) job.

OR

I could buy a used Cirrus for _______________Amu’s

My plane is neither ragged or worn out, I could give a flying $#^ if anybody else wants it because they are not getting it.  Yeah, buying and flying ANY airplane costs money in the end....Well duh to that.

[RogueOne]

2 hours ago, BKlott said:

I don’t see this as just a “chute” versus “no chute” decision.

For someone in the used aircraft market today, that wants a state-of-the-art aircraft, they face the choice of either acquiring a legacy airframe and spending $$$,$$$ modernizing it to make it “like new” or they can purchase a newer airframe that is already state-of-the-art.

The problems associated with going the modernization route are seemingly endless. You start with 40 to 50 year old airframes that, with few exceptions, were not corrosion proofed at the factory. There is no good, reasonable way to thoroughly correct that. 

To have the glass panel, fully integrated avionics package with a full function auto pilot, you will need to redo the instrument panel and rewire the aircraft to bring it up to snuff. You’re not really going to keep using 40 to 50 year old wiring after doing all this work, are you? It isn’t like the Avionics shops are sitting around waiting for someone to come by and give them something to do. It took me six months to obtain two quotes on a much simpler audio panel, GTN and CDI purchase and install job.

Then you can start refurbishing the airframe with new UV screen tinted glass, a leather interior and a sharp new paint job. Finding a paint shop that is careful, detailed oriented and meticulous in it’s work will be the next challenge for you. Once you find one and get on their schedule, don’t plan on flying your airplane for another two months. 

Of course, you’ll want the engine and propellor to be like new as well. While your engine is at the overhaul shop or you are waiting for your factory reman to show up, you might as well send out that engine mount for x-ray inspection and repairs. After all, it has been supporting that engine for the past 45 to 50 years while being subjected to vibration, G forces and temperature extremes. Besides, you can’t eyeball it and see all the cracks or internal rust that is taking place. To be “like new” you’ll want to renew everything firewall forward that hasn’t recently been replaced already.

All of this doesn’t even address airframe specific items like landing gear donuts or leaking wet wing fuel tanks, etc.

When you finally get done with your project, which will take more than a year out of your life at best....count on it....you will still have a legacy 45 to 50 year old airframe that you have invested well over $$$,$$$ in it that is subject to being rendered unairworthy by corrosion.

The other option is to spend your $$$,$$$ and purchase a 10 to 12 year old airframe that is state-of-the-art, that isn’t subject to corrosion issues, that has some additional features that the legacy airframes do not have and go flying...avoiding all of the hassles, aggravation, inconvenience and grief that comes with refurbishing a legacy airframe.

Make no mistake. If you own an airplane, want it to be nice and keep it long enough, you will end up with $$$,$$$ invested in your ship. Engines and props wear out, avionics become worthless and unreliable, paint jobs, glass and interiors become worn and dated. You might find that the ragged out plane that doesn’t bother you...nobody else wants. Either way, that costs you money in the end.

 

 

 

 

PS-Enjoy your 172...

[RogueOne]

2 hours ago, BKlott said:

I don’t see this as just a “chute” versus “no chute” decision.

For someone in the used aircraft market today, that wants a state-of-the-art aircraft, they face the choice of either acquiring a legacy airframe and spending $$$,$$$ modernizing it to make it “like new” or they can purchase a newer airframe that is already state-of-the-art.

The problems associated with going the modernization route are seemingly endless. You start with 40 to 50 year old airframes that, with few exceptions, were not corrosion proofed at the factory. There is no good, reasonable way to thoroughly correct that. 

To have the glass panel, fully integrated avionics package with a full function auto pilot, you will need to redo the instrument panel and rewire the aircraft to bring it up to snuff. You’re not really going to keep using 40 to 50 year old wiring after doing all this work, are you? It isn’t like the Avionics shops are sitting around waiting for someone to come by and give them something to do. It took me six months to obtain two quotes on a much simpler audio panel, GTN and CDI purchase and install job.

Then you can start refurbishing the airframe with new UV screen tinted glass, a leather interior and a sharp new paint job. Finding a paint shop that is careful, detailed oriented and meticulous in it’s work will be the next challenge for you. Once you find one and get on their schedule, don’t plan on flying your airplane for another two months. 

Of course, you’ll want the engine and propellor to be like new as well. While your engine is at the overhaul shop or you are waiting for your factory reman to show up, you might as well send out that engine mount for x-ray inspection and repairs. After all, it has been supporting that engine for the past 45 to 50 years while being subjected to vibration, G forces and temperature extremes. Besides, you can’t eyeball it and see all the cracks or internal rust that is taking place. To be “like new” you’ll want to renew everything firewall forward that hasn’t recently been replaced already.

All of this doesn’t even address airframe specific items like landing gear donuts or leaking wet wing fuel tanks, etc.

When you finally get done with your project, which will take more than a year out of your life at best....count on it....you will still have a legacy 45 to 50 year old airframe that you have invested well over $$$,$$$ in it that is subject to being rendered unairworthy by corrosion.

The other option is to spend your $$$,$$$ and purchase a 10 to 12 year old airframe that is state-of-the-art, that isn’t subject to corrosion issues, that has some additional features that the legacy airframes do not have and go flying...avoiding all of the hassles, aggravation, inconvenience and grief that comes with refurbishing a legacy airframe.

Make no mistake. If you own an airplane, want it to be nice and keep it long enough, you will end up with $$$,$$$ invested in your ship. Engines and props wear out, avionics become worthless and unreliable, paint jobs, glass and interiors become worn and dated. You might find that the ragged out plane that doesn’t bother you...nobody else wants. Either way, that costs you money in the end.

 

 

 

 

Is a mandatory chute repack and ADSB update as well as replacing ratty 12 year old leather a hassle, aggravation, inconvenience and grief inducing situation?  How about an engine and prop overhaul?  Does a 12 year old Cirrus not have these issues?

[RogueOne]

$150-350k for a “pre-owned” Cirrus.  Wonder what kind of panel and engine I can get for $200-250k?......

[RogueOne]

Agree 100% it is NOT just a CHUTE or NO CHUTE question...

[aviatoreb]

1 hour ago, RogueOne said:

PS-Enjoy your 172...

My 10 year old diamond da40 developed a a corrosion issue under the carbon wing where there was a metallic scaffold for wicking static / talk about expensive / the process was called scarfing.  Mine wasn’t bad and I sold it.  Some get it bad and it is expensive.

I actually very much dislike the old Avidyne glass panel found in older cirrus.  And very little upgrade path.

You describe a drudgery of restoring a legacy aircraft to better than new.  I quite enjoyed the path of personalizing my plane.  I get compliments wherever I go.  I think it’s much nicer than any used cirrus could possibly be. Of course a I understand the draw of a turn key purchase.... and someday if I sell my plane good blessings to the new owner who will buy my turn key.

have no doubt if I wanted a 12 year old cirrus I would get that.  It would be less nice.  But it’s an airplane so yeah I like all airplanes....  but still I made my choice.

ps I hardly think a 12 year old cirrus is always a turn key.

Pps the only thing in the cirrus airplane I find desirable is the parachute. Now the company sales is doing a fantastic job no doubt but the plane is good but not fabulous.   I wanted fabulous.  I got a Mooney.

 

 

Edited August 18, 2019 by aviatoreb

[BKlott]

5 hours ago, RogueOne said:

PS-Enjoy your 172...

I have...for the past eighteen years.

[RogueOne]

4 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

My 10 year old diamond da40 developed a a corrosion issue under the carbon wing where there was a metallic scaffold for wicking static / talk about expensive / the process was called scarfing.  Mine wasn’t bad and I sold it.  Some get it bad and it is expensive.

I actually very much dislike the old Avidyne glass panel found in older cirrus.  And very little upgrade path.

You describe a drudgery of restoring a legacy aircraft to better than new.  I quite enjoyed the path of personalizing my plane.  I get compliments wherever I go.  I think it’s much nicer than any used cirrus could possibly be. Of course a I understand the draw of a turn key purchase.... and someday if I sell my plane good blessings to the new owner who will buy my turn key.

have no doubt if I wanted a 12 year old cirrus I would get that.  It would be less nice.  But it’s an airplane so yeah I like all airplanes....  but still I made my choice.

ps I hardly think a 12 year old cirrus is always a turn key.

Pps the only thing in the cirrus airplane I find desirable is the parachute. Now the company sales is doing a fantastic job no doubt but the plane is good but not fabulous.   I wanted fabulous.  I got a Mooney.

 

 

I just watched a Jay Leno’s garage video.  A young 24 year old sailor (now a retired Admiral) purchased a ‘55 4 cylinder Mondial that was wrecked and unloved for $2grand.  3/4’s of his then salary.  He owned the car for 58 years.  He restored it in 2000.  It sold for $5.8M.  He could give a rats patut about the money.  The time he had rebuilding, racing, restoring, showing winning with his unloved beautiful blue (for its original French owner) 5 speed 175hp baby was worth much more than the money.

You get it.

Some do not.

Nice that there is both worlds.  Degrading one world on a site that is there FOR that world gets my reply.

Yours is kinder and gentler and I appreciate your ying to my yang.

[gsxrpilot]

The truth is no one knows how long the Cirrus airframe will last. We do know that it's not easily repairable. And while opening up and reskinning a Mooney wing looks like major surgery, I'm not sure it can even be done with a Cirrus.

We do know that Mooney airframes, if protected from corrosion have a practically unlimited lifespan. I'm in the process of restoring an M20K 252 back to brand new and modernized condition. It's nothing like @BKlott described. I'm continuing to fly and enjoy the plane about 200 hours a year. Each year I improve it just a little bit. The panel will be finished this year. Next year it will get an engine and prop. The year after a new interior and paint. At that point it will be effectively a brand new 252 Encore with a fully corrosion free airframe, modern glass panel avionics, better than factory paint and interior. There will be no current factory built airplane to compare it to. And it will be worth every penny.

22 mpg at 240 mph for 1400 miles... beat that.

[Rmag]

8 hours ago, BKlott said:

To have the glass panel, fully integrated avionics package with a full function auto pilot, you will need to redo the instrument panel and rewire the aircraft to bring it up to snuff. You’re not really going to keep using 40 to 50 year old wiring after doing all this work, are you? It isn’t like the Avionics shops are sitting around waiting for someone to come by and give them something to do. It took me six months to obtain two quotes on a much simpler audio panel, GTN and CDI purchase and install job.

Then you can start refurbishing the airframe with new UV screen tinted glass, a leather interior and a sharp new paint job. Finding a paint shop that is careful, detailed oriented and meticulous in it’s work will be the next challenge for you. Once you find one and get on their schedule, don’t plan on flying your airplane for another two months. 

Of course, you’ll want the engine and propellor to be like new as well. While your engine is at the overhaul shop or you are waiting for your factory reman to show up, you might as well send out that engine mount for x-ray inspection and repairs. After all, it has been supporting that engine for the past 45 to 50 years while being subjected to vibration, G forces and temperature extremes. Besides, you can’t eyeball it and see all the cracks or internal rust that is taking place. To be “like new” you’ll want to renew everything firewall forward that hasn’t recently been replaced already.

All of this doesn’t even address airframe specific items like landing gear donuts or leaking wet wing fuel tanks, etc.

When you finally get done with your project, which will take more than a year out of your life at best....count on it....you will still have a legacy 45 to 50 year old airframe that you have invested well over $$$,$$$ in it that is subject to being rendered unairworthy by corrosion.

I did all this... but on a ‘87 airframe...

[Austintatious]

On 8/18/2019 at 6:16 PM, gsxrpilot said:

22 mpg at 240 mph for 1400 miles... beat that.

That is insane!

[0TreeLemur]

The 50+ y.o. airframe on our C spent much of its life in dry climates, but since moving to the SE about 9 years ago some minor corrosion has started on the tubular frame.  None on the spar.  This week she leaves the MSC with a completely new coating/corrosion-proofing, both inside and outside of the tubes.    Have been told that the final tally will be about 2-3 months payment on a Cirrus after 4 weeks in the shop.  That's how I look at it.

[Carlo]

Its incredible that the Mooney design is so efficient. I remember reading about it in high school (class of 1983). I just finished getting my privates license (have ~60 hours). Would love to go to a newer ovation, but I keep reading that you need to be an experienced pilot to handle the landings. Its beyond just getting high performance certified. How much of a stretch is it?

[carusoam]

Welcome aboard Carlo!

Fast Cross country machines demand a slightly higher level of respect…

When it comes to long bodies… they are faster, more capable, and cost a bit more…

Some people have gone from zero to Long body with decent training….

What level of dedication do you have for your flying sport?

I wasn’t super dedicated at first… I started in an M20C to get my feet air dried…

Either way… Get started!

Go Mooney!

Best regards,

-a-

 

[Fly Boomer]

10 hours ago, Carlo said:

Its beyond just getting high performance certified. How much of a stretch is it?

Compared to the typical trainer, the list of new things to learn is deceptively short.  The trick is learning to do all of them at the same time.

[Schllc]

On 5/5/2022 at 9:50 PM, Carlo said:

Its incredible that the Mooney design is so efficient. I remember reading about it in high school (class of 1983). I just finished getting my privates license (have ~60 hours). Would love to go to a newer ovation, but I keep reading that you need to be an experienced pilot to handle the landings. Its beyond just getting high performance certified. How much of a stretch is it?

It is not a stretch at all for someone willing to learn. 
I bought my first ovation with about 40 hours and a few weeks before I took my pp check ride. 
I flew dual with an instructor for about 25 hours, by myself for about 10, the. Another 20 or so with other pilots until my confidence and proficiency grew. 
The only thing I would do differently if I could, would be to buy it before I started training for my ppl 

It’s more to manage and it feels overwhelming at first, but 7 years and 1200 hours later, so is every new plane I get into. 
 

[Will.iam]

On 5/5/2022 at 8:50 PM, Carlo said:

I keep reading that you need to be an experienced pilot to handle the landings. Its beyond just getting high performance certified. How much of a stretch is it?

Directly proportional to how quickly you learn.