N33GG Posted August 22, 2011 Report Share Posted August 22, 2011 Anybody have any experience or opinions regarding converting an M20C to the 200HP IO-360 via STC? How complex is the conversion, what is the cost vs. overhaul of the O-360, pros and cons, etc. Maybe it is just a case of E standing for envy (apologies to all the other C owners out there), but I was just wondering if there was any first hand info out there. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry 5TJ Posted August 22, 2011 Report Share Posted August 22, 2011 Well, I have owned both an "E" and a "C" and the main difference I saw was...the "E" is much harder to start when warm. Otherwise, the performance was about equal for those two mostly-stock aircraft. After I put a new engine in the "E" it was stronger than before, but not qualitatively stronger than the "C" I have now. At the risk of starting a MooneySpace flame event, I'll rate the real-world performance of the two as about the same, based on my 800 hours in the "E" plus 400 in the "C" model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triple8s Posted August 22, 2011 Report Share Posted August 22, 2011 I have about 30 minutes in an E and close 150hr in a C, so I dont really remember enough about the E but I have a hard time thinking the extra 20 ponies doesnt give you something. Maybe a little better climb? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piloto Posted August 22, 2011 Report Share Posted August 22, 2011 By math going from 180HP to 200HP you gain 5kts and 200fpm. The 200Hp engine is fuel injected which gives a liitle bit longer range because it can be leaned LOP. Ii is also not subject to carb. icing. José Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted August 22, 2011 Report Share Posted August 22, 2011 George, Getting 10% more horsepower would probably show up by getting off the ground better, maybe climb better, possibly cruise a few knots faster...it's hard to say... With the fuel injection, you will be able to reliably run LOP. Previously, when other people looked into this idea, the economics of the day did not allow for it. On the other hand, you really like your airframe, and you want it to be the best it can be. Get the IO360, a GTN, an Aspen and an AP to go with the new panel layout. Research the costs, see if the economics have changed. Best regards, -a- Jose beat me to the response..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry 5TJ Posted August 23, 2011 Report Share Posted August 23, 2011 The 20 extra HP ought to show up in climb, I agree. But the "E" is a bit heavier than the "C" for equal equipment, and I've got a hunch the angle-valve IO-360 engines might not average quite 200 hp, just as the O-360s might be a touch better than 180 hp, so maybe the difference is not really as great as we'd think. I sure can't tell any difference when I average the trip times for routes I flew in both planes (like nearly 100 round trips to SNA, which is about 3 hours each way). I can tell a difference in the T210 compared to either Mooney, but the T210 is about 25-35 knots faster and that is noticed. So is the fuel burn. I'd say don't spend money on an engine conversion thinking it will be faster. Spend money on drag reduction if speed is what you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaV8or Posted August 23, 2011 Report Share Posted August 23, 2011 Also, with the IO-360 you can forget about carb ice. I asked about this conversion when I was shopping for planes. I thought if I found a nicely equiped C with a runout engine, I would do the conversion and get a nice E. I asked a could of Mooney experts at MSCs and they all said it wasn't worth it. I was just better off holding out for an E. If you really love the C you have and need a new engine, maybe it's worth it. Too bad you can't just go to the IO-390. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted August 23, 2011 Report Share Posted August 23, 2011 Why stop with IO-390? Why not buy an IO-550 with an M20 airframe already attached to it... -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parker_Woodruff Posted August 23, 2011 Report Share Posted August 23, 2011 If I had an M20C, I'd hate to lose the cheapness of operating/overhauling the O-360. I'm guessing the expense might warrant an upgrade in airframes if you're wanting to climb to altitude quicker and see an insrease in speed. That said, once you go to fuel injection and/or more horsepower, it's a lot like going to a turbo. You don't wanna go back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N601RX Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 Quote: N6719N Anybody have any experience or opinions regarding converting an M20C to the 200HP IO-360 via STC? How complex is the conversion, what is the cost vs. overhaul of the O-360, pros and cons, etc. Maybe it is just a case of E standing for envy (apologies to all the other C owners out there), but I was just wondering if there was any first hand info out there. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 Although the IO-360 can run LOP, you still have to feed those extra horses. The 0-360 is a pretty fuel miserly engine at altitude and I HIGHLY doubt you will see anything close to a $10K fuel savings over the O-360. With the eventual release of the electronic ignitions, the carb engine is supposed to be able to run LOP for an even greater fuel economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N601RX Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 Quote: Barry Although the IO-360 can run LOP, you still have to feed those extra horses. The 0-360 is a pretty fuel miserly engine at altitude and I HIGHLY doubt you will see anything close to a $10K fuel savings over the O-360. With the eventual release of the electronic ignitions, the carb engine is supposed to be able to run LOP for an even greater fuel economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetdriven Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 I'd say that you can run 1-2 GPH less on the same cranks horsepower if running LOP. The IO-360 angle valve cylinders are slightly more efficient at 2500 RPM or above. Yes they are more expensive. If I had a C model, The simplicity of the thing and the long lived reputation of the engine would make me think twice to convert it. Quote: N601RX The IO-360 cylinders are around $1000 more each when it comes overhaul time and the servo is more expensive to overhaul than a carb. But then the IO-360 can be ran LOP and will burn less fuel per hour at the same airspeed so If you conservately say that it will use 1 gallon per hour less and the engine has a 2000hr TBO then there will be a $10,000 fuel savings over the life of the engine at todays fuel prices. If it saves 2 gallons per hour then the savings would be $20,0000. I think the entire firewall foward is different. Engine, cowling, control cables, spinner, possibly prop. It would seem to be more feasable if you could find a E or F donar aircraft that had a good engine and spar corrosion. Lasar sells the stc paperwork. I don't think it is very expensive. Is your usefull load on the C already the same as an E? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry 5TJ Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Quote: carusoam Why stop with IO-390? Why not buy an IO-550 with an M20 airframe already attached to it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Jerry - you're not likely to get carb ice when you see airframe icing. Induction ice, maybe, but not ice in the carb. I've had carb ice once in my C. It was on departure with high humidity and temps around 70 degrees. Thunderstorms closing in to the area and at night. A pretty intense experience, but not a big deal in hindsight. There's a fancy little knob that pretty much solves the problem and you go about your business... I'm sticking with my 180 horses and riding them as far as they'll take me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N601RX Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 There is a very good flight test article by Bob Kramer at www.moneypilots.com. Click on the "MAPA LOG SAMPLE ARTICLES" tab and then scroll down to flight test reports. Read the M20E article. He includes several tables of data that compare the C to an E. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Quote: N601RX Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottfromiowa Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Like Joe's buddy in Good Fella's...This thread "Amuse's me". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Mexted Posted April 22 Report Share Posted April 22 Hello all. Could I just quantify this if there is anyone out there who has done this. Firewall forward off an F into a C ? Is this doable? New boost pump. And an STC. I read elsewhere Lasar can do this so I'll enquire tomorrow. Many thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.