M20J vs A36

[Alan Fox]

7 minutes ago, bonal said:

Perhaps we should re name this thread Mooney bashing,  thank you Mr. Mooney for making the m20c otherwise people that make a normal income that aren't AP or IA's would be unable to fly anything that goes much faster than a hundred ten knots. 

Perhaps if we compared it to another  200 horsepower 4 seat aircraft , That would be more appropriate ????  Lets compare it to a Beech Sierra , not the Bonanza..

 

[midlifeflyer]

2 hours ago, Alan Fox said:

Just curious if you are considering the "Mooney as a sports car "  because that would be totally inaccurate ,  Mooney has never sold an aerobatic aircraft , Where as Beech has sold many aerobatic Bonanzas ...

 

I don't equate sports car with aerobatics, but that's just me, 

[bonal]

So what your implying is that Mooney's are shit and are below the coveted Bo's and Comanche and more akin to a VW Jetta. Seems to me the J can keep close to a Bo on much less fuel and loads are reasonable and if I'm not mistaken a 252 will fly faster and farther with the same air frame. Just seems like you two don't really like Mooney's very much other than something to salvage or repair and sell.

 

[midlifeflyer]

2 hours ago, Alan Fox said:

Perhaps if we compared it to another  200 horsepower 4 seat aircraft , That would be more appropriate ????  Lets compare it to a Beech Sierra , not the Bonanza..

 

Actually, the closest Mooney/Bonanza comparison I can think of with my limited experience is a an Ovation and a C or F series Debonair/Bonanza with an IO-550 STC conversion. 
Even then, I find the whole idea of personal preference being equated with objective "better" or "best" a bit silly.

Edited November 28, 2019 by midlifeflyer

[EricJ]

2 hours ago, Alan Fox said:

Perhaps if we compared it to another  200 horsepower 4 seat aircraft , That would be more appropriate ????  Lets compare it to a Beech Sierra , not the Bonanza..

Or a Cardinal RG, which has the same engine as a J model.

[Alan Fox]

1 hour ago, bonal said:

So what your implying is that Mooney's are shit and are below the coveted Bo's and Comanche and more akin to a VW Jetta. Seems to me the J can keep close to a Bo on much less fuel and loads are reasonable and if I'm not mistaken a 252 will fly faster and farther with the same air frame. Just seems like you two don't really like Mooney's very much other than something to salvage or repair and sell.

 

What I am implying , is that a J Mooney , is not in a league with an A36 Bonanza ,  Last I heard , A 252 , is not a J , I have owned both , and currently DO OWN BOTH , I am speaking from a perspective of facts and experience , I fly Mooneys 250 hours a year ,  I hate to break it to you , But comparing an A36 to a J model , Is like comparing a J Model , to a Piper Warrior ….  Not in the same class ,  Perhaps if some one would compare Apples and Apples no one would get their feelings hurt … As far as Comanches are concerned I have never flown one , so I don't know ,  I have cut up a few Comanches , and they are better built , than our Mooneys ,  But I have never worked on a Piston aircraft that was built better than a Bonanza / Baron...

[Alan Fox]

2 minutes ago, EricJ said:

Or a Cardinal RG, which has the same engine as a J model.

Agreed , I can tell you this , The 182 RG is the BEST MISSION CAPABLE aircraft I have ever flown...  Cruises at 150 True on 12 gallons ,  Carries 1300 lbs , and will fly at 40 Knotts straight and level , Its an amazing aircraft...  I have flown in regular Cardinals , and prefer the Mooney , although the Cardinal is HUGE inside..

[bonal]

My feelings got nothing to do with it. And aren't hurt in the least. But it sure seems like you don't care much for brand M. And correct me if I'm wrong but isn't a 252 still a mid body. I know it's not a J but shows the potential for the design. Anyway have yourself a very happy thanksgiving I think all of us that get to enjoy the privilege of aviation have much to be thankful for. 

[bonal]

18 hours ago, Alan Fox said:

What I am implying , is that a J Mooney , is not in a league with an A36 Bonanza ,  Last I heard , A 252 , is not a J , I have owned both , and currently DO OWN BOTH , I am speaking from a perspective of facts and experience , I fly Mooneys 250 hours a year ,  I hate to break it to you , But comparing an A36 to a J model , Is like comparing a J Model , to a Piper Warrior ….  Not in the same class ,  Perhaps if some one would compare Apples and Apples no one would get their feelings hurt … As far as Comanches are concerned I have never flown one , so I don't know ,  I have cut up a few Comanches , and they are better built , than our Mooneys ,  But I have never worked on a Piston aircraft that was built better than a Bonanza / Baron...

Sadly I have only a couple of flights in an a36. It was purchased new by my mom and dads best friends when I was still very young and don't have much memory of it. But looking at articles on the A36 I have to concede they are in a different league 

[Alan Fox]

Heres what I imagine , every time I see this type of post....

[midlifeflyer]

3 hours ago, Alan Fox said:

Heres what I imagine , every time I see this type of post....

Which one are you bashing, it has to be one of them, you know!  

[Alan Fox]

1 hour ago, midlifeflyer said:

Which one are you bashing, it has to be one of them, you know!  

Well now , The CRV , is way more efficient...

[Igor_U]

2 hours ago, Alan Fox said:

Well now , The CRV , is way more efficient...

Is it? 

Perhaps at 60mph but not at typical RV cruse speed...

[Hank]

4 hours ago, Igor_U said:

Is it? 

Perhaps at 60mph but not at typical RV cruse speed...

I've been told that an M20-C flying ROP uses the same amount of fuel as a V6 Ford Escape on a long XC, and in a third of the time. Anything injected should do much better LOP.

[Alan Fox]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

I've been told that an M20-C flying ROP uses the same amount of fuel as a V6 Ford Escape on a long XC, and in a third of the time. Anything injected should do much better LOP.

Sounds optimistic 150 MPH at 10 GPH = 15 MPG  , About what my v8 F 150 gets...

[gsxrpilot]

My K getting 21.5 MPG.

 

[gsengle]

Sounds optimistic 150 MPH at 10 GPH = 15 MPG  , About what my v8 F 150 gets...

False comparison. What would a f 150 get at that speed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hank]

3 hours ago, Alan Fox said:

Sounds optimistic 150 MPH at 10 GPH = 15 MPG  , About what my v8 F 150 gets...

My C runs 170 mph [145-+48 KTAS depending on altitude and pressure] using 9 gph.

The guy who flew his C from Ga -- > Ark used to be here. Drove his Escape once while the plane was down for annual and commented on the identical fuel burn (but not expense!).

Edited November 30, 2019 by Hank

[kpaul]

12 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

My K getting 21.5 MPG.

 

Ok, so now turn around and put that 27kts of tail wind on the nose...that 54 kts net change puts you about 15.6 mpg.   Also, using simple math of your 202 ktgs / 9.5 gph it appears your MPG is slightly generous...your only getting 21.26 MPG.

[Hank]

22 minutes ago, kpaul said:

Also, using simple math of your 202 ktgs / 9.5 gph it appears your MPG is slightly generous...your only getting 21.26 nautical MPG.

If you're gonna compare to a ground vehicle, you gotta use statute miles. So Paul was actually getting 24.47 mpg at 232 mph. That's better than almost everything that Ford makes, while traveling at Formula One speed.

[kpaul]

4 minutes ago, Hank said:

If you're gonna compare to a ground vehicle, you gotta use statute miles. So Paul was actually getting 24.47 mpg at 232 mph. That's better than almost everything that Ford makes, while traveling at Formula One speed.

I was only comparing what was in Paul's photos, his EDM900 uses nautical miles for everything, I never mentioned a vehicle.  And honestly I don't care about NMPG to SMPG comparisons because comparing any ground vehicle to an airplane is stupid, they have completely different purposes. 

[Hank]

1 minute ago, kpaul said:

I was only comparing what was in Paul's photos, his EDM900 uses nautical miles for everything, I never mentioned a vehicle.  And honestly I don't care about NMPG to SMPG comparisons because comparing any ground vehicle to an airplane is stupid, they have completely different purposes. 

I grew up traveling by car. Our longest trip was DC - Atlanta - SF; normal trips were 8-10 hours. Making these trips in my Mooney is so much nicer! So my purposes are the same, aside from driving to work, shopping, etc., in the car and making breakfast runs and proficiency flights in the plane.

[gsxrpilot]

@kpaul makes a good point that my best mileage of 21+ is wind aided. So it's much like getting great mileage in the pickup truck while going down a hill. So I'll take the average which would be 18+ mpg.

But as @Hank says, I also used to make long road trips and told myself I enjoyed them. I was proud of the fact that I'd driven every mile of interstates 10, 20, 40, 70, 80, and 90. But doing the same in a Mooney is soooooooo much better... for so many reasons... and the mileage isn't nearly as bad as most people think about airplanes. 

[gsengle]

Let’s also not forget that cars can’t travel long distances direct. Probably subtract 30% for the meandering of roads on a typical trip. Here is an ovation definitely traveling a line a car can’t, while going 230mph or so...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mooneymite]

Just now, gsengle said:

Let’s also not forget that cars can’t travel long distances direct. Probably subtract 30% for the meandering of roads on a typical trip. Here is an ovation definitely traveling a line a car can’t, while going 230mph or so...

The other side of this are the planes that fly a straight line to the destination, then engage in the B-52 traffic pattern adding miles and gallons to the overall trip.  Or in @Hank perennial complaint, flies thousands of extra miles around Atlanta's class B.