First Mooney buyer - looking at a M20E - thoughts?

[JamesMooney]

Hi all. Opening this up to MS'er input! I'm ready to make the leap into Mooney ownership. Previously owned a Cherokee 160. Moved from Canada to US, in the DC area, and ready to get into Mooneyland.

My minimum must-have specs: low to mid-time engine with good annual usage; ADs complied and fuel tanks in good condition; WAAS and autopilot; no unreasonable damage history. Nice to have extras would be engine monitor, glass PFD (Aspen; G5; etc.), and good to very good interior.

I was looking at 'F and 'J models, but a possible 'E has come available, and I'd love this groups' thoughts. My usual mission will be 2 people (and a dog ), 250-400 nm or less. Probably one longer trip (500 nm) per month. Occasionally 3-4 people on 100-150 nm trips (mostly the weekend breakfast trips with extra friends). By comparison, I'm used to flying Piper Archers and Arrows lately.

Although I thought I would be a M20F or J person.... I've got my eye on a M20E. Specs:

~4500 hours TT

~500 hours engine (o/h in 2004 - so only ~25 hours/year on engine... concern?)

- Avionics: Aspen PFD; GNS530W; STEC 30 with GPSS and Alt

- Other: JPI700 engine; LED lights; gap seals; fuel bladders

- Interior and exterior both in nice condition

- Damage: one gear up in late 1960s

Asking around $65-70k

Okay MS.... what do we think? Right plane, right mission? Right plane, wrong mission? Wrong plane for me? Price/specs? Pros/Concerns?

Edited August 17, 2020 by FlyingCanuck

[Danb]

Easily fits your goals.

Get quality PPI, good transition training including complex write off 

A good handful of Mooney pilots within 100 miles of DC.

Learn the nuances of flying in dc area 

Good luck join the Mooney family 

 

 

 

[rbridges]

The back seats will be tight.  The F and J models would be more comparable to the newer arrows and cherokees (post 73 or so when they stretched the fuselage).  Otherwise, the C and E models are very similar to cherokees of the same year.

The mooney you're eyeballing seems to have a very nice IFR platform.  If it checks out for lack of corrosion, it looks like a nice one.  I'm a little out of touch with prices.  A few years ago, I would have said too high of an asking price, but I have noticed they have been creeping upwards lately.

[M20F]

3 hours ago, FlyingCanuck said:

~500 hours engine (o/h in 2004 - so only ~25 hours/year on engine... concern?)

Look at the logbooks and plot out the hours over 16yrs.  If it has sat for the last 2yrs probably more of a concern then if it sat for the first 14yrs. 
 
PPI is key and I prefer those to be an annual (same basic process but one involves an actual signature). 

Good luck!

 

[mooniac15u]

Are you aware of the citizenship (or permanent resident) requirements for registering an aircraft in the US?  I don't want to make any assumptions about your status (maybe you're a US citizen) but you said you moved to the US so it seemed worth mentioning.

[gsxrpilot]

4 hours ago, FlyingCanuck said:

GNS530W; STEC 30 with GPSS and Alt

That is rare and very desirable in a short body Mooney. If this one passes a pre-buy inspection by a shop that knows what to look for, buy it.

The price is right as well.

[NJMac]

That is rare and very desirable in a short body Mooney. If this one passes a pre-buy inspection by a shop that knows what to look for, buy it.
The price is right as well.

Agreed. Price seems quite aggressive for that equipment.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[ValkyrieRider]

1 hour ago, gsxrpilot said:

That is rare and very desirable in a short body Mooney. If this one passes a pre-buy inspection by a shop that knows what to look for, buy it.

The price is right as well.

I was thinking the same exact thing.  IF the PPI (or annual) come out clean, $65 - $70K, in my opinion, is a tremendous deal.  I would also be a little cautious of the time since overhaul, specifically the last few years, but hopefully the PPI and log books will alleviate any concerns.  

[MikeOH]

Price seems right for the engine time and equipment.

BIGGEST thing for me would be recent use: last two years being crucial.  If it has sat for two years I would be concerned that the engine might need work much sooner than the hours would indicate.  The engine is always a crap shoot, but there's a premium built into the price for the low time engine...make sure you're getting something for that money.

[carusoam]

The M20E makes a great forever plane for two people that fly often...
 

Large enough to take two more guests along...

Bob can’t join us today... but he wrote a lot about his M20E... and how he upgraded every aspect of it... He and Nancy flew everywhere in it... 

One of his best pics is four adults flying around in it...

Bob’s plane recently sold and is transitioning to the new owner...

Fs and Js can be equally nice with additional room in the back... the extra space usually costs about 10AMU...

You get to decide if it is worth it to you... 

Whichever way you go...

Go Mooney!

Best regards,

-a-

 

[Yourpilotincommand]

This may suit your mission. However get the W/B info. You may not get a 4th person in the back seat, maybe 2 lightweight people and no luggage. Through the years the nose gets lighter and the CG shifts aft, very aft.. which was my case. Starter motor, generator, avionics, all get lighter. You may be surprised where the CG ends up with respect to the envelope.  You may need to add lead weights to the nose if you plan on carrying max weight, therefore much less fuel.

[gsxrpilot]

An E is perfect for you. The UL will easily accommodate two people and a dog with luggage. And when you're taking four people to lunch, you won't need full tanks. 

The E is a great airplane.

[Hank]

5 hours ago, Yourpilotincommand said:

This may suit your mission. However get the W/B info. You may not get a 4th person in the back seat, maybe 2 lightweight people and no luggage. Through the years the nose gets lighter and the CG shifts aft, very aft.. which was my case. Starter motor, generator, avionics, all get lighter. You may be surprised where the CG ends up with respect to the envelope.  You may need to add lead weights to the nose if you plan on carrying max weight, therefore much less fuel.

Exactly the opposite to my experience. Often CG shifts forward, and many short bodies with full fuel, two adults and no baggage (i.e., training, lunch runs, etc.) will be near the forward CG limit.

[Yourpilotincommand]

9 hours ago, Hank said:

Exactly the opposite to my experience. Often CG shifts forward, and many short bodies with full fuel, two adults and no baggage (i.e., training, lunch runs, etc.) will be near the forward CG limit.

Wow, that is interesting. Either way W/B is important to know for your mission before purchase. I didn’t realize that until after my purchase.

[Yourpilotincommand]

10 hours ago, Hank said:

Exactly the opposite to my experience. Often CG shifts forward, and many short bodies with full fuel, two adults and no baggage (i.e., training, lunch runs, etc.) will be near the forward CG limit.

Here is my loading with full fuel, a skinny co-pilot like me at 175lbs, front seats forward,  and 2 women in back at 145lbs each, no luggage, full fuel. You can see my CG is aft of the envelope. It doesn’t really meet my intended mission. According to the original W/B data in 1966 it would have. Can’t take luggage for an overnighter.
 

 

[Hank]

Just now, Yourpilotincommand said:

Here is my loading with full fuel, a skinny co-pilot like me at 175lbs, front seats forward,  and 2 women in back at 145lbs each, no luggage, full fuel. You can see my CG is aft of the envelope. It doesn’t really meet my intended mission. 

Move a passenger to the right front seat, then put some bags in the rear.

[Hank]

Oops, just zoomed in on your graph. As I've heard many times, you can fill the seats or the tanks but not both. My longest 4-adult flight was limited to 34 gals, lasted ~1-1/2 hours, landed with lots of fuel.

How far do your 4 people want to go?

[Yourpilotincommand]

I have me and 3 passengers in the equation already. That gave me an idea.. my copilot will have a suitcase in his lap!

[Yourpilotincommand]

Just now, Hank said:

Oops, just zoomed in on your graph. As I've heard many times, you can fill the seats or the tanks but not both. My longest 4-adult flight was limited to 34 gals, lasted ~1-1/2 hours, landed with lots of fuel.

How far do your 4 people want to go?

Well, I can get the gross weight down easily by reducing to maybe 36 gals.  So this would be a short VFR trip, no luggage, with a very aft CG.  I’ve never flown with a CG that far back, but it is in the envelope... barely! I need to add an estimated 20lbs of lead ingots to the nose for carrying 3 passengers.

[McMooney]

10 hours ago, Hank said:

Exactly the opposite to my experience. Often CG shifts forward, and many short bodies with full fuel, two adults and no baggage (i.e., training, lunch runs, etc.) will be near the forward CG limit.

This is my experience, with front passengers and no baggage,  I def trend toward the forward CG.  I've started carrying extra tools and such in the baggage compartment just to push the cg back.

[gsxrpilot]

1 hour ago, Yourpilotincommand said:

Here is my loading with full fuel, a skinny co-pilot like me at 175lbs, front seats forward,  and 2 women in back at 145lbs each, no luggage, full fuel. You can see my CG is aft of the envelope. It doesn’t really meet my intended mission. According to the original W/B data in 1966 it would have. Can’t take luggage for an overnighter.
 

 

I've seen a lot of Mooney W&B sheets. (UL is always a topic with Mooneys) But I've never seen one look like this. I'd almost want to go back through the setup and calculations again. This doesn't look right.

[Andy95W]

13 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

I've seen a lot of Mooney W&B sheets. (UL is always a topic with Mooneys) But I've never seen one look like this. I'd almost want to go back through the setup and calculations again. This doesn't look right.

⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️

I agree with Paul.  Somebody screwed up a calculation years ago and nobody caught it.

[Yourpilotincommand]

41 minutes ago, Andy95W said:

⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️

I agree with Paul.  Somebody screwed up a calculation years ago and nobody caught it.

I had a fresh W/B a few months ago.  It wasn’t much different from the previous W/B... and not from incrementals through the years.  We know those are always prone to errors. The Empty CG is 47.1” from the datum. Btw, I only have a few items in the tail.. electric step, magnetometer,  ADSB unit, and a GAD29, that’s all. I don’t think the electric step adds much from the original one. Here is my setup...

 

 

 

 

[carusoam]

Verify your app is working properly...

Add 20 pounds at a time to the front seats....

By the time you have two 280 pounders up front, you should be well off the back line...

The graphics should change each time....

 

Run enough experimental loadings to find out what it takes to move around inside the box...

 

I used an example of three people riding in my M20C... everyone weighed about 180#s I think we each got 20#s for baggage and the rest was 52g of fuel... we planned one stop between NJ and FL...

We re-did the math for each hour of fuel burned...

PP thoughts only, not a CFI...

Best regards,

-a-

[JamesMooney]

Hi all - thanks for all the input and advice. This was all really helpful!

Unfortunately it was indeed too good to be true - within one day, that M20E sold.

So, it's back to the search! Continuing to look for the right M20E,F,J.... right now Controller and TAP are pretty thin pickings. Looking at one M20F but its probably a bit high priced ($90-100k). Most other aircraft are missing something from my list: either WAAS, autopilot or an engine monitor, or have run-out high-time engines. The search continues.

If anyone knows of an off-market plane available, I'd appreciate it! 

Otherwise, I'll post here any others that come into my crosshairs - really appreciate the MS group's feedback and experience!