Your thoughts on this vs a 252?

[M016576]

9 hours ago, donkaye said:

The $65K was for the Reman Engine only.  The R&R plus hose replacements, dual alternator overhaul, and other things would bring it all in to about $80,000.

Wow!  an engine for a bravo... (6 cylinders, a turbocharger+equipment and a wet head).....for the cost of a *nice* F, or run out J... or a tricked out Tesla.  General Aviation...go figure... not for the light wallet.

Edited January 17, 2021 by M016576

[MATTS875]

3 minutes ago, M016576 said:

Wow!  an engine for a bravo... (6 cylinders, a turbocharger+equipment and a wet head).....for the cost of a *nice* F, or run out J... or a tricked out Tesla.  General Aviation...go figure... not for the light wallet.

Yes. Looks like I will not be flying in the FL for a while. 80k for an engine overhaul seems absurd but it is aviation after all. 

[gsxrpilot]

13 minutes ago, M016576 said:

Absolutely correct.  I personally enjoy the long range, fuel economy, speed and useful load of a missile @Missile=Awesome @Seth. Although I’m sure if a bravo or acclaim owner were so inclined they could “pull it back” and get similar performance.  Albeit not with the same useful load as an Eagle or Missile.  I still think the 252 encore conversion that @Parker_Woodruff and @kortopates completed are the pinnacle of all things Mooney... perfect balance of power, speed, useful load and efficiency.  The hard part is finding one... they are like a unicorn.  I’ve heard of them, but they aren’t easily seen in the wild!!!

The Encore conversion on N252AD is in progress and hope to be completed and flying in a few more weeks. 

When I first signed on to MooneySpace years ago, @Parker_Woodruff was talking about his Encore conversion... it's been a long road, but I'm excited to be so close to owning an Encore myself... finally.

[Niko182]

15 minutes ago, MATTS875 said:

Yes. Looks like I will not be flying in the FL for a while. 80k for an engine overhaul seems absurd but it is aviation after all. 

I will also add that if you don't plan to fly higher, it doesn't make sense to go to a 252 considering you came from a J. below 10ish thousand feet they are nearly the same airplane.

[Schllc]

While I have no bravo time, I have a large amount of ovation and acclaim time.  
To say that they are basically the same plane below 10,000’ just is not accurate. 
They can be flown at near identical numbers if the acclaim is babied, and the 310hp ovation will absolutely outclimb the acclaim maybe to 2000’, but they are even at that point with the acclaim steadily pulling away. 
I also disagree that a turbo is useless below 12k.  At 12k the ovation may squeak out 21” while the acclaim can produce 33”, or 30.5 at max cruise. This means better climb, and more speed. 
The acclaim can also be flown almost identical to an ovations fuel numbers, only burning slightly more at LOP or ROP, but having much more speed and climb available at any moment. 
The turbo is not necessary of course, but aviation is all about trade offs, and once you become accustomed to a turbo, you have a very hard time going back. 
Lastly, I have not found the maintenance to be a great deal more in the three that I have owned, and aside from more frequent oil changes, is well worth the expense. 
I know the bravo is not as fast as the acclaim, but would think it’s more like the acclaim than not.

If speed is irrelevant, you ever won’t go anywhere near weather, and don’t live near mountains, you may never wish you had a turbo, but no matter what your mission, if you flew one for 100 hours and had to go back to NA, chances are you would be disappointed.  Point being, a turbo provides options and advantages unavailable to a NA plane and anytime the airframes are the same and a turbo is the distinguishing difference, the turbo will outperform the NA in nearly every aspect. 
 

Almost all the people I have spoken to about turbos who rag on them have never owned one, and just gave second hand anecdotal hangar talk.  
Talk to someone who owns and knows how to fly a turbo, and you will hear the straight dope.  They almost all love them!

[carusoam]

Yellow flag thrown...  Five yard penalty issued!

For feeding the addiction...

For crazy climb power up to the FLs... opt for the 310hp Acclaim.

Its been done before.

Best regards,

-a-

[Niko182]

18 minutes ago, Schllc said:

While I have no bravo time, I have a large amount of ovation and acclaim time.  
To say that they are basically the same plane below 10,000’ just is not accurate. 
They can be flown at near identical numbers if the acclaim is babied, and the 310hp ovation will absolutely outclimb the acclaim maybe to 2000’, but they are even at that point with the acclaim steadily pulling away. 
I also disagree that a turbo is useless below 12k.  At 12k the ovation may squeak out 21” while the acclaim can produce 33”, or 30.5 at max cruise. This means better climb, and more speed. 
The acclaim can also be flown almost identical to an ovations fuel numbers, only burning slightly more at LOP or ROP, but having much more speed and climb available at any moment. 
The turbo is not necessary of course, but aviation is all about trade offs, and once you become accustomed to a turbo, you have a very hard time going back. 
Lastly, I have not found the maintenance to be a great deal more in the three that I have owned, and aside from more frequent oil changes, is well worth the expense. 
I know the bravo is not as fast as the acclaim, but would think it’s more like the acclaim than not.

If speed is irrelevant, you ever won’t go anywhere near weather, and don’t live near mountains, you may never wish you had a turbo, but no matter what your mission, if you flew one for 100 hours and had to go back to NA, chances are you would be disappointed.  Point being, a turbo provides options and advantages unavailable to a NA plane and anytime the airframes are the same and a turbo is the distinguishing difference, the turbo will outperform the NA in nearly every aspect. 
 

Almost all the people I have spoken to about turbos who rag on them have never owned one, and just gave second hand anecdotal hangar talk.  
Talk to someone who owns and knows how to fly a turbo, and you will hear the straight dope.  They almost all love them!

Comparing an ovation to a bravo, and an ovation to an Acclaim is the difference here. 310hp vs 270hp instead of 310hp vs 310hp. An acclaim will do 205 knots at 10k. A bravo will do 180 at 10k, and an ovation will do 180 knots at 10k.

My statement was that at below 10k a bravo and a 310hp ovation are the same. That is most definetely not the case for a 310hp acclaim at 10k.

[donkaye, MCFI]

13 minutes ago, Niko182 said:

Comparing an ovation to a bravo, and an ovation to an Acclaim is the difference here. 310hp vs 270hp instead of 310hp vs 310hp. An acclaim will do 205 knots at 10k. A bravo will do 180 at 10k, and an ovation will do 180 knots at 10k.

My statement was that at below 10k a bravo and a 310hp ovation are the same. That is most definetely not the case for a 310hp acclaim at 10k.

Wastegate, Controllers, and turbocharger overhaul approximately 5K.  Double that for an Acclaim with twin turbos.  From my experience these need to be done mid-engine time.  For the airplane cost difference and the extra engine maintenance I have heard on the Acclaim, for a little less speed, the Bravos are the bargains out there now in my opinion.

[kortopates]

The Bravo seems to be the most under valued airframe in the fleet for some time now. It doesn't make sense IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[philiplane]

N200CT spent time in South Florida, four hangars down from me. It's a decent plane. Older paint in good condition, original interior in good condition. The engine ran fine, the compressions were good, and there was no corrosion pitting in the cylinder bores. It had the Bravo conversion done at 822 from new, so the complete top end is only at half life. No fuel leaks in the wings either. From the hours listed in the ad, the plane has flown 28 hours since November 2018.

So the question is at what price will it finally sell for?

Edited January 18, 2021 by philiplane

[LANCECASPER]

While I strongly believe, that over time, the market is always what determines the price. I do believe however that the market values the Bravo where it is because it's "misunderstood". 

The engine will cost about $20,000 more for a factory rebuilt than for a factory rebuilt for an Ovation ($65,000 vs $45,000, R & R labor should be close to the same). However if you do a lot of cross country travel in the teens, conservatively, you should have at least a 20 knot advantage, meaning that for every hour on the Bravo engine time you've traveled an additional 20 nautical miles. So you are traveling more miles between overhauls which cuts down some of the cost per mile over time. Also if you manage the temperatures well, there's a strong chance you can go to TBO with the Lycoming Bravo cylinders. It's almost a given that the Continental cylinders will need to be overhauled or replaced at around half TBO. So the operating cost difference in real life is much less than what people would think.

People will also say you don't need a turbo if you live here or there, but having the turbo gives you many options no matter where you live since you still have excellent climb performance as far up as the service ceiling will take you. In the summer you can quickly get over a lot of the buildups in the mid afternoon for a smoother ride. In the winter, flying eastbound, you can get up to an altitude where you have near-turboprop ground speeds (I've seen 300 kts groundspeed a few times up at FL250 in the winter.). Even flying into a headwind, if you need to do it in the lower teens for weather, is a lot more tolerable with the TAS advantage of the Bravo.

So are they "undervalued"? The market is what the market is, but for a serious prospect who does their homework and doesn't just go off of conjecture I think they are a good value comparatively. I can't think of more speed for the dollar in certified airplanes.

[Steve Dawson]

On 1/16/2021 at 9:31 PM, carusoam said:

Disclosure is everything... 

Entrapment isn’t a very good sales technique...

The new buyer is going to find out, sooner or later, as he is spending the PPI dollars...

Or as a surprise... finding out after the sale...

A good sales organization knows how to handle enlightening the client, without causing damage to the sale, or reputation...

Looks like Jonás’ seller didn’t achieve this...

20 year old details aren’t as pressing as just repaired yesterday...  most often, the details are readily available in the log books...

On a 40 year old plane, this could take a lot of speed reading while putting an offer together...

As PIC... reading the logs is a big responsibility, before pushing the ‘buy now’ button...

Most things come out in conversation with the sales guy... when you ask... tell me about the damage history on this plane/car/house.... standard things for used stuff...  similar to what upgrades does it have...

Less valuable sales guys don’t know much about what they are selling... As buyers, these guys make your work even tougher...

Since not everybody buys used machines for a living, or can read more than 20 log book pages in a day... there are services for this too.

We have a couple of pro log book readers offering services around here...  Savvy and AGL Aviation..

We also have a very reputable sales organization around here... known for shooting straight.

Quality costs money... lack of quality costs even more... (Old QC saying) 

Let me know if I can introduce you to any of the good people referenced above...

Best regards,

-a-

There's no entrapment here at all. The ad is limited to size but it clearly shows the log books are available to download with out talking to the gentleman. Not to mention you're doing your own due diligence and/or getting someone good to do a pre-buy if you feel comfortable. 

[Schllc]

7 hours ago, philiplane said:

N200CT spent time in South Florida, four hangars down from me. It's a decent plane. Older paint in good condition, original interior in good condition. The engine ran fine, the compressions were good, and there was no corrosion pitting in the cylinder bores. It had the Bravo conversion done at 822 from new, so the complete top end is only at half life. No fuel leaks in the wings either. From the hours listed in the ad, the plane has flown 28 hours since November 2018.

So the question is at what price will it finally sell for?

I seriously looked at this one last year.  I also agree that the bravos are the sleeper of the fleet because they are misunderstood.  This one shows well, is in good condition for its age, and looks well kept  

In my opinion, this plane would be a good candidate for someone who plans to own for 500+ hours because they would get their money out of the overhaul. 
if one were to buy, overhaul and sell under that, you would probably have a difficult time losing a little bit much less break even. 

 

ps.  I heard a rumor about a new cowling design for the bravo which would be interesting to see how much it would clean up the aerodynamics. 

[Brian E.]

On 1/16/2021 at 11:16 AM, Ron McBride said:

N number registered, located in Canada. What, if any headaches to import?  At TBO, needs updated radios/panel. 
 

Can we cross the border to pick it up?  Curious if a plane purchase qualifies as essential.  Wish I had the funds

[Rick Junkin]

3 hours ago, Schllc said:

ps.  I heard a rumor about a new cowling design for the bravo which would be interesting to see how much it would clean up the aerodynamics. 

@Schllc can you say more about this? Source of the rumor? Source of the cowling?

My cowl needs new paint but I’ll hold off if a new design release is imminent.

Cheers,
Rick

[Niko182]

2 minutes ago, Junkman said:

@Schllc can you say more about this? Source of the rumor? Source of the cowling?

My cowl needs new paint but I’ll hold off if a new design release is imminent.

Cheers,
Rick

More info is on the thread "hello, jonny"

Edited January 19, 2021 by Niko182

[Rick Junkin]

1 minute ago, Niko182 said:

More info is on the thread "hello, jonny"

Thanks!

[carusoam]

Just now, Junkman said:

Thanks!

There has been carbon fiber updates to the Ovations already...

Jonny made clear mentions of add on type improvements early on...

Check in with Lycoming to see if any of their IO540 upgrades are coming our way...

They have some fancy curvy intake pipes and modern instrumentation that was originally experimental...

+1 on a cowling update...

+1 on a prop update....

+1 on a curvy pipe update and maybe an electronic mag to go with that...

How much of Rick’s budget did I spend for him? 

Best regards,

-a-

[Rick Junkin]

8 minutes ago, carusoam said:

How much of Rick’s budget did I spend for him? 

Best regards,

-a-

Thanks Anthony, I promised Glennie “one thing at a time” and the cowling is probably the low hanging fruit at the moment if it truely comes to fruition (pun intended). 
 

Cheers,
Rick

[carusoam]

I got to pick up the top of a raw carbon fiber O cowl... at the last KOSH event... while speaking with Kevin Kramer...

Incredibly light...

For each pound up front, a similar lead weight comes out of the back... proper WnB calcs are important...

We would be double dipping in UL benefits! 

-a-

Edited January 19, 2021 by carusoam

[Bravoman]

On 1/16/2021 at 11:55 AM, kortopates said:

no less than 65K for the engine - with R&R labor, new hoses, engine mounts, other accessories expect to see it grow by another $10-15K. 40K won't by much of a panel. There is currently no onboard wx nor traffic either. 

I paid 65K for my factory reman back in 2016. I am assuming that an overhaul by a good shop would be somewhat less than that.

[Bravoman]

On 1/17/2021 at 5:05 PM, kortopates said:

The Bravo seems to be the most under valued airframe in the fleet for some time now. It doesn't make sense IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

After almost 8 years of ownership that is more incredible to me than ever!

[donkaye, MCFI]

26 minutes ago, Bravoman said:

After almost 8 years of ownership that is more incredible to me than ever!

After almost 28½ years of ownership and nearly 4,000 hours in my Bravo I concur.

[tls pilot]

After 28++years of ownership, I agree!

[donkaye, MCFI]

1 hour ago, tls pilot said:

After 28++years of ownership, I agree!

I didn't think there was anybody out there who owned theirs longer than I.  Congratulations!  We know the truth.