Jump to content

1990 M20K 252 TSE ADDITIONAL INFO ADDED

BillC

By BillC
in Aircraft Classifieds

 Share

Recommended Posts

BillC Community Regular

BillC

Posted
Posted

Detailed Description

1990 Mooney M20K 252 TSE with a TT of 1583 hrs, only 93 hrs SMOH. Serial number 25-1229.  This Mooney has a lot of nice add ons,  many not listed. EXTENSIVE ANNUAL JUST COMPLETED June 2020. ALSO, PAINT HAS BEEN BUFFED AND POLISHED. LOOKS LIKE NEW!

Avionics / Equipment

Garmin GTN 750 GPS/ NAV/Com

Autopilot

Storm scope

Stereo with remote

WAAS

ADSB

Oxygen

Certified to fl280

EDM engine management

Dual alternators

Airframe

1990 Mooney M20K 252 TSE

Speed brakes

Engines / Mods / Prop

TS10 360 MB 1 turbocharged

Interior / Exterior

Exterior has just been buffed and polished.  Looks like  NEW!   Interior is about a 6 out of 10.

 

Remarks

I’m selling this for a friend as her husband has died. I‘m a professional pilot but dont know alot about this plane. I run the engine and exercise the systems weekly. The wing tanks were just resealed. There is a lot of nice options on this plane.  Many may not be listed. If you have questions,  I have all the logbooks and will research them for you. Delivery is possible. Annual done June 2020!

Located in  Portland, Maine.  Asking $165k US

Thanks.

Colin  207-939-6184

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gsxrpilot Grand Master

gsxrpilot

Posted
Posted

This one seems to be well equipped. It has the right autopilot in the KFC150 and has the altitude pre-select option. I would prefer it had an engine monitor instead of the Alpine CD player, but I guess you can't have everything.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greg_D Rising Star

Greg_D

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

This one seems to be well equipped. It has the right autopilot in the KFC150 and has the altitude pre-select option. I would prefer it had an engine monitor instead of the Alpine CD player, but I guess you can't have everything.

It looks like there is a JPI of some sort installed just above the KAS-297B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
gsxrpilot Grand Master

gsxrpilot

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Mcstealth said:

I know I have read it before, and there are caveats in finding the correct gear doors?, but about what is the conversion cost including labor? 

I'm really not qualified to answer this... @Parker_Woodruff had a 252 done several years ago as did @kortopates as well. I think Don Maxwell did a conversion just a couple of months ago for @smwash02. I've just been collecting parts so I'm ready to do the conversion when I do an engine overhaul. One of those guys might give a better idea of cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kortopates Grand Master

kortopates

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, MIm20c said:

I think most of the 252’s are in the 750-825 range. This is why the encore upgrade is so sought after...

I think mid 800's to near 900 lbs is more like it. All the 252's very similar because they left the factory with all the options except for some panel differences. Ones that got heavy where the vintage panel collectors - ones that always squeezed another item without removing anything. Or they re-weighed it ;) Before my Encore conversion, mine was just under 900 lbs before Encore conversion (no FIKI, no AC, but everything else including dual alternators, dual brakes and 115 cuft O2). Now reborn as a Encore its just under 1130 lbs with full glass panel including dual GTN's.

Edited by kortopates
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kortopates Grand Master

kortopates

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Mcstealth said:

I know I have read it before, and there are caveats in finding the correct gear doors?, but about what is the conversion cost including labor? 

no caveats in finding correct gear doors - they're just longbody doors. Conversion cost range greatly depending on how you source the parts. If you bought all the parts new from Mooney recently, the first stage of re-doing the brakes - which is the expensive one, would total $18K in all new, mostly factory parts. Dual pilot & co-pilot brakes adds more. The engine part is much easier. Total cost ? 

Edited by kortopates
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Falcon Man Collaborator

Falcon Man

Posted
Posted

Hello All - 

Over the last 40 years I have owned several Mooney's - E, J,  252 Encore, a 231 and now a 262.

Here's what I have learned about gross weight and useful load numbers in the log books: Most of the K model airplanes listed for sale have not had a recent actual weight so the useful load numbers carried thru the paperwork are never accurate. My IA/AP Mooney specialist (KNR INC) has digitally weighed dozens of Mooneys and the ALL have gained weight over what the logbooks say. One of the main reasons is repainting and clear coat. Clear coat can add as much as 50 lbs! Mine was repainted in 1995 when converted by Coy Jacobs from a 231 to a 262. More modern paints don't need clear coat from what I have garnered in my research.

My IA's advice is never purchase an older Mooney without having a current weight. Of course, most Western US seasoned 252 owners I have met are not much bothered by the useful load issue - they accept that it is very limited and love the plane for its unmatched efficiency and performance. Most of them are average to small frame pilots and fly primarily by themselves as well. Here out West turbocharging is well worth the added expense when crossing the Rockies/Sierras/Cascades. Realistically, IMHO if you are of a large stature and actually NEED a turbocharged Mooney that can carry a high amount of stuff and people fly a Bravo or Acclaim and accept the commensurate loss of efficiency. My 262 has Monroy long range tanks, dual vacuum and alternators, Avidyne IFD 540/TAS 610/EDM 900, six pack instruments and with 100 gals of fuel I can legally carry myself and a small amount of gear.

Regarding the Encore - it's a better aircraft in a few regards - stronger gear, better interior and 28 volt electrical system. It is actually SLOWER than a stock 252 due to the increased empty weight. Adding only 10 hp does not make up for the heaver gear, interior, dual vacuum and alternators. It would be interesting to know if kotopates 252 converted to Encore is as fast or efficient as it was prior since there are so few out there. I really loved my Encore but financial realities at the time just could not support the increased expense. Now I enjoy 252 performance on a 231/262 budget.

It's all about compromise,

Jeff

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kortopates Grand Master

kortopates

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Falcon Man said:

Adding only 10 hp does not make up for the heaver gear, interior, dual vacuum and alternators. It would be interesting to know if kotopates 252 converted to Encore is as fast or efficient as it was prior since there are so few out there. I really loved my Encore but financial realities at the time just could not support the increased expense. Now I enjoy 252 performance on a 231/262 budget.

The "heavier gear" on the Encore is a myth. The one part that is heavier/beefier is the brakes torque plate bracket for the double puck brakes - which is negligible to go from a 2 bolt hole bracket to a three bolt hold bracket, in fact my new spindles after cleaning and powder coating weighed 1/10 lb less!  That's the reality from someone that has done it despite what some past Mooney executive has  and been quoted in print - nor was it my expectation when I set out to do the job. The double puck brakes and beefier rotors did add some weight. All told the brakes upgrade added 4.6 lbs! But control weights on all the control surfaces with the engine upgrade added more weight than the brakes at another 4.9 lbs. That totals to 9.5 lbs. Not very significant; especially given the mod added 230 lbs in useful  - 9.5 lb (from upgrades) = 221.5 lbs net increase in useful load! I was very happy. 

Of course its still as fast, maybe a bit faster because of the added 10 hp in climb with only 9.5 lbs in weight. Just because I have the all the added useful load doesn't mean all of a sudden we're loading it up heavier on every flight. The typical mission hasn't changed, only the size of the allowable envelope. So now I do have the option to take a third pax on a long leg where I also need extra gas for an alternate an hour away or to fill the extended tanks for my wife and I on a long leg with no nearby alternate. Then I will climb out heavier and slower. But we're talking about a flight that wasn't legally allowed before with the 252 - not my everyday flight. But now its having more options available to me. Most of the my flights are still flown with two of on board. 

As for increased expense I am not sure what that could come from. Its exactly the same engine merely boosted another 10 HP - which is really only used in climb. I believe it's well established that its more about  how we operate our engines that determines longevity and maintenance cost. We can run them hard and pay the bills or be gentle and get longer service. But I can never fault a Mooney pilot for not wanting to go as fast as their stead allows.  Its not clear to me or over time if I'll have higher airframe expenses paying to replace 4 rather than 2 brake pads, but so far they look like they'll actually be lasting much longer saving me labor with less frequent required brake maintenance - even if I don't charge myself for labor. :)

Honestly the only negative or added expense that I am seeing was the added cost and labor to do the conversion in order to expand my mission envelope. Honestly, I wouldn't have done it just to fly around with my pilot wife & I.  But I always had to say no to taking  passenger with us due to the weight limits. Now I am really grateful for the option to take another friend along on longer trips  that I didn't have before. I know a lot of pilots feel its an unnecessary expense and I've seen many experienced Mooney pilots load up their airframe over gross with pax and luggage; especially in the J's.  But I never could do that myself fully recognizing the airframe would handle it just fine and I am thankful I had the option to a legal solution that they didn't.   In the end I think I have the best Mooney airframe with the best compromise in performance and efficiency. 

Spoiler alert: "Realistically, IMHO if you are of a large stature and actually NEED a turbocharged Mooney that can carry a high amount of stuff and people fly a Bravo or Acclaim and accept the commensurate loss of efficiency." Typical  Bravo's useful load is just under 1000 lbs. Mine is over 1100 lbs. The Ovations and especially a Scream Eagle 310HP do better and see 1100+ lbs but all the long bodies carry more fuel and burn it faster reducing that actual payload. So you're very right about compromises! 

Edited by kortopates
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Falcon Man Collaborator

Falcon Man

Posted
Posted

Kortopates - Thanks for the clarification on the "myth" about heavier beefier gear.

Regarding the added expense I meant I eventually could not afford the Encore as it was much more expensive to purchase than a 252. Encore's now trade for nearly $ 50-75K more than a 252 according to current listings.

Do you have any time in a 1997/1998 Encore? I had ~ 250 hours in mine and it was definitely slower than my 262, with both at their max gross weight. My point was that at the Encore's max gross weight, 10 hp added could not make it as fast as a max gross weight 252. In fact at max gross weight my Encore just did not handle as well as my 231 nor 262 at their respective max gross weights. The Encore felt pretty sluggish to control inputs at max gross weight at 16-18,000 feet.

At < 5% increase in horsepower cannot make the same airfoil with a > 10% increase in weight, fly as fast nor as efficient. Additionally, the 252 was certified to 28K and the Encore is certified to 25K. I don't know what their comparable speed, fuel consumption and efficiency would be with both at 25K. Maybe Bob Kromer or one of the other factory experts back then would know.

Some of the differences I experienced might have been that the empty weight of the stock Encore was heavier than my 262. Encores are all equipped with the yaw dampener, newer interior and extra soundproofing of the firewall. I am not sure if those items added much weight.

There is no doubt that the modified 252 or stock Encore has better payload. It would be cool if you could have a fly off with a stock Encore!

Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carusoam Grand Master

carusoam

Posted
Posted

Welcome aboard Jeff!

40years of Mooney flying?

What took so long to find MS? (Our marketing guys want to reach all Mooney flyers... )  :)

We aren’t actually discussing small differences in plane price... are we?

@10k per year for minimal flying budget... that would be 400,000 spent in fuel and flying.... I bet your expenses are a wee bit higher than that every year... making selecting any Mooney a bargain for how much you fly...

Welcome aboard... :)

Best regards,

-a-

Link to comment
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.