CMartin

Costs comparison on aircrafts

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, smccray said:

The Bonanza numbers are more complex due to CG issues.

Later V-tails have 80 gallon tanks (74 gal usable).  15 or 20 gallon tip tanks (adding 30-40 gallons total) are common modifications.  Plane will run 170 ktas+ at 13 GPH- very similar to an ovation.  Useful load is commonly north of 1200 lbs.

The challenge with the V-Tails is aft CG.  Loading the plane with baggage and rear seat passengers adds a lot of weight to the back of the envelop.  As fuel burns, CG moves rearward.  It's very easy to load the plane outside of the CG.  Some planes have 1400lbs useful load, but practically they're closer to 11-1200 in the real world because of where you put the bags.  Adding a turbo normalizer, however, adds 70 lbs to the engine compartment and fixes the CG problem.  That changes it to a 200 knot airplane with the higher fuel burn.  Acquisition cost of a TN V35 and a rocket will be about the same, although the TN V35 would have a 10 year older airframe.

I would bet the rocket is a little faster than the TN V35, but I can't speak from experience.  I know rocket still supports the conversion, but the support from Tornado Alley is probably superior to support from Rocket Engineering should the owner have a problem.

If the practical useful load is 11-1200 lbs, with 80 gallons onboard,  that means a FF UL of  620-720 lbs

I think it is pretty fair to say that any Mooney is going to go faster than any BO on equal fuel burns.  The difference is of course varied depending on what exactly you are comparing.

But With this cursory look, it appears the BO is pretty much right in line with the Mooney when It comes to how much you can put in it and go X miles.  I wouldn't be surprised if in some cases the Mooney would win out, being able to carry more weight for the distance to be traveled, either in extra fuel or butts and bags.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Also keep in mind that the max weight you can put into any Mooney baggage area is 120 pounds.  It's 270 pounds for the 33/35 Bo's (not sure what it is in the A36's) and the later models have much bigger doors for easier loading.  My kids were bigger when I went from the M20E to the E33A, so removing the bench seat or using the rear seats for baggage in the Mooney was a non-starter for me (would make perfect sense if it was just my wife flying with me).  No issues with my CG in the former Bo (or Mooney for that matter) as my family is on the, ummm, feather side of the weight spectrum. 

These debates really do come down to your mission and how many butts are going to be in the seats regularly.  Now, I remove one back seat from the Travel Air to get more space if needed since I'm down to only 3 people with my son departing the house for his own adventures.  You can do the same with any Mooney that has the split back seats.  Think those are found on the 1981 and later models.

1968 E33A

UL = 1190

Full Fuel UL = 746

Range = 992 NM's, but that was to zero fuel and 6 hours.  Most of my missions were in the 3-4 hour range (550 NM)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, flight2000 said:

These debates really do come down to your mission and how many butts are going to be in the seats regularly. 

1968 E33A

UL = 1190

Full Fuel UL = 746

Range = 992 NM's, but that was to zero fuel and 6 hours.  Most of my missions were in the 3-4 hour range (550 NM)

Ours is more like 977lb of UL.  That’s full fuel, 54 gal. 800nm. 150kt. 
665lb in the cabin. 800nm. Basically all the fuel.   Remarkably similar. But it’s a 47 gallon burn off. 

Edited by jetdriven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, flight2000 said:

1968 E33A

UL = 1190

Full Fuel UL = 746

Range = 992 NM's, but that was to zero fuel and 6 hours.  Most of my missions were in the 3-4 hour range (550 NM)

Ohh, The 800NM rang I posted was with reserves.. to 0 fuel would probably be 950 miles + glide (lol)

.

Edited by Austintatious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, flight2000 said:

Also keep in mind that the max weight you can put into any Mooney baggage area is 120 pounds.  It's 270 pounds for the 33/35 Bo's (not sure what it is in the A36's) and the later models have much bigger doors for easier loading.  My kids were bigger when I went from the M20E to the E33A, so removing the bench seat or using the rear seats for baggage in the Mooney was a non-starter for me (would make perfect sense if it was just my wife flying with me).  No issues with my CG in the former Bo (or Mooney for that matter) as my family is on the, ummm, feather side of the weight spectrum. 

These debates really do come down to your mission and how many butts are going to be in the seats regularly.  Now, I remove one back seat from the Travel Air to get more space if needed since I'm down to only 3 people with my son departing the house for his own adventures.  You can do the same with any Mooney that has the split back seats.  Think those are found on the 1981 and later models.

1968 E33A

UL = 1190

Full Fuel UL = 746

Range = 992 NM's, but that was to zero fuel and 6 hours.  Most of my missions were in the 3-4 hour range (550 NM)

Must be ‘82 because our ‘81 has fixed rear seat back.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Austintatious said:

Would you mind giving specifics?  I looked at BO's as well as Moonies and the difference didnt seem so great. What is your UL? Fuel capacity? FF UL ? Full fuel range ?

I'll provide specifics on my exact two airplane and the way I flew and fly them. Others may use different parameters. 

Mooney 231 - useful load 892 lb, useable fuel 75 gallons, 155 KTAS on 9.0 GPH

S35 Bonanza - useful load 1,114 lb, useable fuel 74 gallons, 170 KTAS on 12.5 GPH

That extra 220+ lb of useful load is important to me. That's an extra person even accounting for greater fuel burn. I was also able to put air conditioning in the Bonanza which would not be realistic in the Mooney. My empty CG in my Bonanza is 77.8 which means ALL of my useful load is usable. Don't let people scare you off about a high useful load not being usable. You simply don't buy those airplanes. Also, the V35 had an extra 100 lb useful load over the S35 and tip tanks give you another 100-200 lb useful load if you choose to add them, upping the fuel capacity to as much was 114 gallons and 1400 lb useful load on some.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My old 205 had 640 lbs gross weight with full fuel. I had the old king equipment, so a new panel would probably add to that.  That’s 2900 gross weight. It doesn’t get much better than that in a J model. 

The A36 has a couple different baggage weights.  All the way aft (behind the seats) it’s only 70 lbs.  The rear most seats are easily removed and the floor holds 450 lbs.  There’s an additional baggage space right behind the pilot/copilot seats in front of the club seating that I believe is rated for an additional 200 lbs.  My ‘85 A36 has 1350 lbs of useful load and a max fuel load of 104 gallons (74 in the main tanks).

9 hours ago, Austintatious said:

If the practical useful load is 11-1200 lbs, with 80 gallons onboard,  that means a FF UL of  620-720 lbs

I think it is pretty fair to say that any Mooney is going to go faster than any BO on equal fuel burns.  The difference is of course varied depending on what exactly you are comparing.

But With this cursory look, it appears the BO is pretty much right in line with the Mooney when It comes to how much you can put in it and go X miles.  I wouldn't be surprised if in some cases the Mooney would win out, being able to carry more weight for the distance to be traveled, either in extra fuel or butts and bags.

I agree- there are places where the Mooney will be more efficient than the Beech.  The mid body Mooneys compare well in useful load, but for the average plane, the Beech will be a little faster, burn more fuel, and carry more useful load.  Compared to long bodies, the Beech will be a little slower (or a lot slower depending on distance), burn a little more fuel, and carry more useful load.

As I said when I bought my A36 and sold my J- I’ll always be a Mooniac.  It doesn’t get any better in the efficiency department in certified aircraft.  Al Mooney designed a hell of an airplane with a crazy good legacy- but it’s not perfect.  Every plane has its faults- either useful load, or speed (aka fuel burn).  I’d go with a Tarbes Built Mooney, but that has a different fault...$

PS- @Jan Maxwell made a really good suggestion to me.  She said if you need more seats/useful load, buy a second Mooney and have your wife get her ticket.  I haven’t been brave enough to seriously suggest that.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Must be ‘82 because our ‘81 has fixed rear seat back.
They started very late in the '81's...my salvage is 24-1221 and had them. I think I've seen 1217 or close to that for sale years ago, and it has a bench. I'm not sure where the change cut over.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Austintatious said:

Would you mind giving specifics?  I looked at BO's as well as Moonies and the difference didnt seem so great.

I'll give mine too.

What is your UL? 1139lbs

Fuel capacity? a tad bit over 100 gallons

FF UL ? 539Lbs

Full fuel range?
depends on speed
182-185 KTAS at 9.5k on 15.5GPH = 1195 NM
179 KTAS at 9.5K on 12.9GPH = 1390NM
172 KTAS at 9.5K on 12.0GPH = 1435NM

I'm not willing to sit in the plane for 8 hours very often however.
with 60 gallons, I can usually put around 775lbs and fly a decent distance.
in 4 months then entire panel is being replaced and I'm hoping I'll have a useful
load around 1170 to 1180lbs.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

They started very late in the '81's...my salvage is 24-1221 and had them. I think I've seen 1217 or close to that for sale years ago, and it has a bench. I'm not sure where the change cut over.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk
 

Now that you mention it, I saw this 1981 on Controller.  Serial 24-1219 and it has the split seats.

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/33395537/1981-mooney-m20j

@RogueOne, what serial number is your Missile? 

Cheers,

Brian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RogueOne said:

24-1054 Brian

Wow, lot's of space between those aircraft.  Hmmm, the mystery deepens as to when Mooney went to the split removable seats.  ;)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Niko182 said:

I'll give mine too.

What is your UL? 1139lbs

Fuel capacity? a tad bit over 100 gallons

FF UL ? 539Lbs

Full fuel range?
depends on speed
182-185 KTAS at 9.5k on 15.5GPH = 1195 NM
179 KTAS at 9.5K on 12.9GPH = 1390NM
172 KTAS at 9.5K on 12.0GPH = 1435NM

I'm not willing to sit in the plane for 8 hours very often however.
with 60 gallons, I can usually put around 775lbs and fly a decent distance.
in 4 months then entire panel is being replaced and I'm hoping I'll have a useful
load around 1170 to 1180lbs.

Wow, that is in your Mooney!  Yea, I cant imagine wanting to be in one for 8 hours!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the top loading baggage compartment, I can only fit this small amount of stuff in my baggage compartment and back seat of my C model for 10-days at Oshkosh with my wife!  Of course I only have the smaller 48 gallon fuel tanks.

2D6819FD-F026-4C70-9D2D-0DD86C20902F.jpeg

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I owned a'65 C model for 7yrs in the 80's(978#Useful load)- fast(148kias),efficient,cramped(esp.lumbar area after 2hr),ok for hauling small kids in the rear,but really only for 2adults.Impressive handling in a level 3 TSRA.Mission changed after kids grew.

I owned a Cessna twin for the next 6yr, then owned an A36 Bonanza for 15 yr (ULwas ~1330#;106gal). Beech parts costs are much higher, tho things like bladder replacement require much less labor than redoing a wet wing.Cross country travel at 165ktas & 800nm for up to four adults in the Beech was sheer luxury.CG not a problem if common sense is used.

Considering all factors(hanger,insurance,annual/unexpected maint.,panel upgrades,STC's,fuel/oil) yearly expenses for each plane (including the twin) averaged about 3-4 times the hourly fuel costs(excluding engine overhaul).This was for flying ~100 hr/year. Never budget one of these babies on a monthly basis, and keep a big cash reserve ready for surprise AD's, engine, panel & fuselage "glitches".

MY ADVICE TO ANY PROSPECTIVE OWNER: CAREFULLY REVIEW ENGINE,PROP,AND AIRFRAME LOGS FOR THE PAST 5 YEARS(get work orders if poss.),and estimate the hourly costs& parts prices involved.(A mechanic can help you do this to help separate fact from fantasy).Most owners never do this simple but valuable prepurchase move.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome aboard Spazz.

Great costing input.

I started the same way as you, only 20 years later... then moved up to the M20R.... :)

If you will be staying on MS, Add some detail to your avatar area....

Believe it or not... we have a Spaz already!  @spaz

Best regards,

-a-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, I have recently owned both a M20E Mooney and a F33A Bonanza (straight tail).

My Bonanza insurance rate was between $1,000 & $2,000 /year, the Mooney a little under, but the F33A had a much, much higher hull value. 

I skimmed the thread and didn’t see a discussion of the size/weight of your family, but if you’re looking to fill the seats that could be a determinant...

If you fly in both I am sure that one will obviously stand out as the right choice for you!

Good luck!

Tim

 

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.