Potential new mooney buyer/owner with model questions...

[Subternal]

On 3/24/2021 at 6:12 PM, "Chocks" said:

I’ll just add some notes to your general inquiry and hope it helps. Others on here are much smarter than I with specifics for the Ovations, and costs to operate. 
But, I think I can offer some good ideas for you generally.

First I think you would be extremely happy in any Mooney choice. Just find one that’s easy to manage for you. So it doesn’t matter if it’s a short body, fuel injected E model all the way up to a long body turbo. It’s finding one that you can go do your work and play with and not feel stressed about mx, upgrades, repairs, etc. Wherever that level is for you. 

Next, I would recommend that you find some Mooney drivers and get them to take you flying in their different models. We’re everywhere! And I know most of us HATE empty front seats. So we’re begging for people to fly with us. The short body and mid body are very similar to me in the way they fly, and for the most part, the caretaking of them. The long bodies, i.e. the ovations and others are a different animal in a lot of respects. From high end avionics suites, to some mx pitfalls that can be annoying. But they are fekkin fast and amazing up high. Additionally while all Mooney’s are designed for cross country travel, I believe the short and mid bodies are much better across-the-board for time building, short flights, formation flying, tooling around, etc. - in addition to the cross country flying. And it sounds like you’re wanting to do both of those things equally, for now.

But I think all of this will really start to get cohesive for you after you fly in a few. Get the feeling of the different models and see which one fits you the best, because I promise there is a Mooney model that will fit you and when you know, find one and buy it.

I hope that helps a little bit. Good luck, and welcome!

Really solid info. Thanks.

I think flying in a few is probably the best idea. Even if it was simply sitting in the pilot seat and feeling what a X model sight picture would look like or how much room is in the front or back, would be very helpful.  And thank you @Mufflerbearing, @carusoamand @gsxrpilot as well as everyone else for the insightful info. I really do/did take it to heart to think about future decisions. If anyone is in the Norther VA or WMA area it'd be cool to reach out to you!

[Schllc]

Completing the training and especially the instrument rating in your primary aircraft is the definition good training practice. 
I bought my ovation 3 two weeks before my ppl check ride.  
I did all of my instrument training in my ovation and 700+ hours later, I am very comfortable and proficient, which I personally equate with safety, in my aircraft.  
I don’t believe flying two completely different airframes, engines and avionics over two years and transitioning into yet a third as a new pilot is safer or smarter. 
Point being, people are successful with both methods, and if one’s decisions in aviation are purely driven by budget, it’s probably not a good hobby to choose.

A hangar, annuals, oil changes, tires etc,  pretty much the same for any plane.  
Even insurance on a 100k plane to a 400k plane isn’t more than probably 2k annually.  
I have not found aircraft ownership to be cheap nor punishingly expensive.  Of the five airplanes I’ve owned, all mooneys, and all 2005 or newer, I haven’t had any real expensive issues to fix, just regular wear and tear things. 

[Subternal]

Its been several months since I initialy made this post and Ive done some reflection. Im hoping to run some ideas past those who were very insigthful previously. If anyone cares to weigh in:

Although I still do desire the ovation/bravo/long bodies, I've come to terms with a few things: !) Much higher price tag, initially. 2) considerably higher insurance premiums (High hull value)  3) If that was going to be a 'last' plane, wouldn't something more manageable be more appropriate first?

After someone on here pointed out that insurance could be a somewhat contentions subject, I did some digging and quote finding and it appears that just because I can afford my dream plane initially, doesn't mean I wouldn't get eaten alive by premiums. Insurance, just like many have pointed out on here, will come down with increased hours and additional ratings/training. But if I wanted to train in my own A/C this is a problem. At this point I'm only PPL, I wanted to get my IR in an AC that I could fly often and consistently. And I though it maybe better to transition into a 'starter' plane first.  Apparently, the biggest jump down in insurance costs seem to come with 50-100 hours PIC of the type of AC you want to insure, then and additional bump with IR.  I thought maybe finding a smaller (HP) make/model that was still complex would help with the transition so I initially looked at the piper PA-28R-201 (Arrows) but then I moved onto the M20J/Ks .  From the insurance quotes the lower I can make the hull value the lower the premiums will be. 

Long story short, I came across a 1983 M20k (TT ~3300hr) with Engine past TBO but still good compression. The  ad indicated several avionics upgrades, wastegate, intercooler upgrades. But they wanted 100k for it. I liked this one from the avionics upgrades they did (Garmin gtn750/or Dynon comparable). Its something that I wanted to get used to working with but alot of people I talked to said to "buy a plane with the stuff you want already in it" vs buying and then paying to install it. Im not married to this deal, but I am curious as to whether or not deals like this are worth it? buy an AC knowing it may have things you want but you'll have to put a new(overhaul) engine in it, which of course will prob run upwards of 35-45k. But is that a good idea, does it make it a bad/good deal? Again, Im both asking about this ad and/or the practice of looking for a situation like this.  Any insight or experience would be very helpful. thanks again 

[MikeOH]

I would be more concerned about the condition of the rest of the plane.  If you are buying with a runout engine price there is nothing wrong with that, especially if the plane has seen continuous recent use.  I bought my plane with over 2000 SMOH, and I've put another few hundred hours on it with no problems.  I'll keep running it until it starts 'talking to me'

What concerns me, reading between the lines, is if you are worried about insurance premiums for the first year or two, can you afford to swallow a rebuild, or another major issue?

[Niko182]

1 hour ago, Subternal said:

Although I still do desire the ovation/bravo/long bodies, I've come to terms with a few things: !)

If thats what you desire, and you can afford it, i'd recommend that route. I started flying a long body mooney with 130 hours total time. Its a steep learning curve however its an amazing aircraft. 

[ilovecornfields]

Insurance is a funny thing. I had zero logged Mooney hours when I got my Ovation and figured the premium would go down every year as I accumulated more ratings (commercial) and time in type (over 500). Instead, it’s gone up every year. Never had a claim, fly regularly. I’m told that’s just the way the market is right now.

Make sure your budget includes a coupe of years of “catch up” annuals, the cost of a new engine (and installation and the other accouterments) and possible increase in insurance, despite your increasing experience (although I have been told that the IR does seem to help with premiums, unlike the commercial).

[Subternal]

16 hours ago, MikeOH said:

I would be more concerned about the condition of the rest of the plane.  If you are buying with a runout engine price there is nothing wrong with that, especially if the plane has seen continuous recent use.  I bought my plane with over 2000 SMOH, and I've put another few hundred hours on it with no problems.  I'll keep running it until it starts 'talking to me'

What concerns me, reading between the lines, is if you are worried about insurance premiums for the first year or two, can you afford to swallow a rebuild, or another major issue?

Yes, I didn't want to imply as if I wasn't going to pay attention to the rest of the plane. I haven't seen this particular tail, nor any other ones from ads, yet. My concern was with whether or not this was a 'wise' way of doing business (ie: buying a fix-r-upper/decent tail but with TBO in the hopes of overhauling and getting a good/decent deal). 

Could I afford a rebuild? yes. could I afford high premiums for a year or 2? yes. Do I want to? no.  I know this is not a hobby/passion for the faint of wallet, I get it. But I dont want to frivolously throw money at a situation just cuz I can. IF there is a smarter or wiser way of doing things, I'd rather take that route regardless of whether or not I have the time or money to NOT do it. 

[carusoam]

Do the math…

The difference in annual operating costs for a 50amu short body and a 200amu long body… are going to be so close together…

You will wonder what you did right to get such a financial opportunity…

The capital cost is a huge difference…

The fuel cost is a small difference…

Housing, insurance, and maintenance are near identical…

Caring for an older, very worn, machine gets a lot of replacement parts… where a newer less worn machine doesn’t.

 

Things that go wrong are the same and cost the same to fix…. GU landings and falling out of the sky (if that were to happen, don’t let it happen)

PP thoughts only, not a cost accountant.

 

Best regards,

-a-

[MikeOH]

5 hours ago, Subternal said:

Yes, I didn't want to imply as if I wasn't going to pay attention to the rest of the plane. I haven't seen this particular tail, nor any other ones from ads, yet. My concern was with whether or not this was a 'wise' way of doing business (ie: buying a fix-r-upper/decent tail but with TBO in the hopes of overhauling and getting a good/decent deal). 

Could I afford a rebuild? yes. could I afford high premiums for a year or 2? yes. Do I want to? no.  I know this is not a hobby/passion for the faint of wallet, I get it. But I dont want to frivolously throw money at a situation just cuz I can. IF there is a smarter or wiser way of doing things, I'd rather take that route regardless of whether or not I have the time or money to NOT do it. 

All good.

My perspective on the high-time engine decision:  Buying a run-out that's actively been flown, for a run-out price, is a better deal than a low or mid-time IMHO.  You are going to pay a premium for the plane with hours left on the engine, but you do NOT know the history...it could tank right after you bought it and you'd be looking at an overhaul.  OTOH, the run-out doesn't owe you anything, BUT if it tanks right away YOU get to choose the shop and what's done; you KNOW the history and the price was already factored in.  And, if it hangs in there, like mine has done, you get some 'free' engine hours.

Good luck!

[Will.iam]

22 hours ago, Subternal said:

Its been several months since I initialy made this post and Ive done some reflection. Im hoping to run some ideas past those who were very insigthful previously. If anyone cares to weigh in:

Although I still do desire the ovation/bravo/long bodies, I've come to terms with a few things: !) Much higher price tag, initially. 2) considerably higher insurance premiums (High hull value)  3) If that was going to be a 'last' plane, wouldn't something more manageable be more appropriate first?

After someone on here pointed out that insurance could be a somewhat contentions subject, I did some digging and quote finding and it appears that just because I can afford my dream plane initially, doesn't mean I wouldn't get eaten alive by premiums. Insurance, just like many have pointed out on here, will come down with increased hours and additional ratings/training. But if I wanted to train in my own A/C this is a problem. At this point I'm only PPL, I wanted to get my IR in an AC that I could fly often and consistently. And I though it maybe better to transition into a 'starter' plane first.  Apparently, the biggest jump down in insurance costs seem to come with 50-100 hours PIC of the type of AC you want to insure, then and additional bump with IR.  I thought maybe finding a smaller (HP) make/model that was still complex would help with the transition so I initially looked at the piper PA-28R-201 (Arrows) but then I moved onto the M20J/Ks .  From the insurance quotes the lower I can make the hull value the lower the premiums will be. 

Long story short, I came across a 1983 M20k (TT ~3300hr) with Engine past TBO but still good compression. The  ad indicated several avionics upgrades, wastegate, intercooler upgrades. But they wanted 100k for it. I liked this one from the avionics upgrades they did (Garmin gtn750/or Dynon comparable). Its something that I wanted to get used to working with but alot of people I talked to said to "buy a plane with the stuff you want already in it" vs buying and then paying to install it. Im not married to this deal, but I am curious as to whether or not deals like this are worth it? buy an AC knowing it may have things you want but you'll have to put a new(overhaul) engine in it, which of course will prob run upwards of 35-45k. But is that a good idea, does it make it a bad/good deal? Again, Im both asking about this ad and/or the practice of looking for a situation like this.  Any insight or experience would be very helpful. thanks again 

I did this exact route. I bought a mooney near TBO with super avionics back in the 1990’s  but with the glass panels of today make them feel outdated. I have no problem flying 6-pack gauges as that is what i learned on before there was gps. But a 6-pack doesn’t fetch a premium like glass panels do which was to my benefit. The garmin 530 was a bonus and the garmin 345 was a requirement from the adsb mandate in 2020. I’m just glad the PO didn’t go cheap on the adsb. 
look up Mike Bush on his youtube videos about high time engines. It made a lot of sense to me. I bought the airplane knowing i could be paying for an overhaul the next day but that could happen with a recently overhauled engine too and that sure would be a pisser after you paid a premium for that low time engine.  By buying a plane with a worn out engine you get to choose what type of overhaul you want to do and you will know how that new engine was operated from day one. And when you go to sell the plane if it still has a low time engine from you overhaul you will get some of that investment back at selling time. Besides you would need to have at least 200 hours preferably 500 on the new engine or it might be harder to sell for other buyers fearing infant mortality on a new engine as well. My biggest concerns especially with a worn out engine was not the engine but corrosion, and how often it had flown. A good PPI should cover you for that and any AD’s not complied with or maintenance that was not done or done incorrectly so that you know if the asking price accurately reflects that. And right now it is a seller’s market. Had 3 airplanes get sold before i could even put a prebuy contract on them. The one i got had multiple buyers ready to put a prebuy contract on the plane the moment i walked away if i decided to do so.  

[Will.iam]

4 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

All good.

My perspective on the high-time engine decision:  Buying a run-out that's actively been flown, for a run-out price, is a better deal than a low or mid-time IMHO.  You are going to pay a premium for the plane with hours left on the engine, but you do NOT know the history...it could tank right after you bought it and you'd be looking at an overhaul.  OTOH, the run-out doesn't owe you anything, BUT if it tanks right away YOU get to choose the shop and what's done; you KNOW the history and the price was already factored in.  And, if it hangs in there, like mine has done, you get some 'free' engine hours.

Good luck!

Ah mike you beat me to the send button. Sorry for the repeat of what you already said.