Acclaim useful load

[pkofman]

Too all those that know what is the approximate average useful load for an acclaim with tks

I would expect about 900 lbs. Looking for "average" here!

I have a bravo and it is just under 900 with 87 gallon tanks. 

I just need some insight 

Peter

[aggiepilot04]

Not sure if this is helpful or not, but mine is 949.  Type S, no TKS, no A/C.

[LANCECASPER]

21 minutes ago, pkofman said:

Too all those that know what is the approximate average useful load for an acclaim with tks

I would expect about 900 lbs. Looking for "average" here!

I have a bravo and it is just under 900 with 87 gallon tanks. 

I just need some insight 

Peter

I wouldn’t expect much difference. The Max Take-off weight on long bodies is 3368. In theory an Acclaim might have a few more pounds useful since no vacuum pumps and a lighter prop, but different engine with 2 turbos/inter coolers, so they must be pretty close.

[exM20K]

4 hours ago, pkofman said:

Too all those that know what is the approximate average useful load for an acclaim with tks

I would expect about 900 lbs. Looking for "average" here!

I have a bravo and it is just under 900 with 87 gallon tanks. 

I just need some insight 

Peter

There's really not much variability because there are not many options.  Mine (09 Type S) no active traffic is about 880#. A friend has noe for sale with FIKI and A/C, and I think his UL is 830ish.

 

Kelley Aerospace A/C is lighter than the factory system if A/C is a must, and it doesn't throw another load on the starter adaptor like the factory system does.

-dan

[StevenL757]

For comparison...my Ovation equipped as follows (only showing what is likely relevant to weight savings):

• IO550N8B engine (lighter by a few pounds than the "G" engines)
• Type-S prop (F7498)...lighter by 7 pounds than the F7693 DF-2 Hartzell
• GFC500 autopilot (4-servo) - replaced a KFC150 (3 servos)
• G500TXi, GTN650Xi, GTN750Xi (lighter than many of the G1000 LRUs in the avionics bay + the GDU1040/1042/1044 displays)
• TKS full FiKi install
• All Whelen LED lighting (removes heavier strobe light heads and power supplies)
• Removal of both vacuum systems and related components
• No air conditioning installed
• Airwolf air/oil separator removed (generates excess crankcase pressures)

Current useful load - 1007.58lbs.  You'd be surprised how many "little" upgrades save weight.  Some at a cost...unfortunately.

[pkofman]

Its so true.  We spend  all this money making the plane lighter,  just to fill the baggage compartment with all sorts of stuff I never use and probably adding 25 lbs. 

This all started as I was interested in an acclaim S  with a low useful . So I wondered what the book numbers are  vs reality

My m20m plane at 87 gallons and two people is basically a 3 hour airplane when accommodating legal Canadian  ifr limitation pre the regs 

[Davidv]

Just now, pkofman said:

Its so true.  We spend  all this money making the plane lighter,  just to fill the baggage compartment with all sorts of stuff I never use and probably adding 25 lbs. 

This all started as I was interested in an acclaim S  with a low useful . So I wondered what the book numbers are  vs reality

My m20m plane at 87 gallons and two people is basically a 3 hour airplane when accommodating legal Canadian  ifr limitation pre the regs 

My Bravo is 1011 useful, I gained about 75 lbs removing all the old avionics and wiring and replacing with glass...

[Schllc]

My acclaim, type s prop, no ac, no fiki, 965#. 
I owned another with ac that was 912#. 
and an ultra with ac that was 895#

[Niko182]

Where did the weight gain come jumping from the Bravo GX to the Acclaim? If I recall, @Danb has a Bravo GX that has a 1K+ useful load.

[Davidv]

7 hours ago, Niko182 said:

Where did the weight gain come jumping from the Bravo GX to the Acclaim? If I recall, @Danb has a Bravo GX that has a 1K+ useful load.

I believe the Acclaim engine weighs about 60lbs more than the TIO-540.

[mike_elliott]

13 hours ago, Schllc said:

My acclaim, type s prop, no ac, no fiki, 965#. 
I owned another with ac that was 912#. 
and an ultra with ac that was 895#

the extra door hole adds weight. 17# seems about right.

[LANCECASPER]

2 hours ago, Davidv said:

I believe the Acclaim engine weighs about 60lbs more than the TIO-540.

Makes sense since in the Acclaim, instead of one, there are two turbos, two intercoolers and a starter adaptor plus whatever weight difference in just the engine itself. They cleaned up the aerodynamics a little from the Bravo to the Acclaim, especially the cowl, eliminating cowl flaps. The prop is more efficient and the Acclaim has 10 more hp (270 to 280 from the Bravo). Of course the STC can be added togo to 310hp, which can be used at take-off but will eat up cylinders if you keep it firewalled. 

@pkofmanif you are trading because of speed there won't be a lot of difference, maybe +/- 5% in real world flying. Just keep in mind that (1) the G1000 is tied to the type certificate in the Acclaim (and GX Bravos) so you won't be able to change avionics without Mooney getting together with Garmin and (2) the Bravo with a Lycoming that has oil cooled exhaust valve guides stands a much better chance of making TBO without new cylinders half way through than the Continental TSIO550.

[Davidv]

1 hour ago, LANCECASPER said:

Makes sense since in the Acclaim, instead of one, there are two turbos, two intercoolers and a starter adaptor plus whatever weight difference in just the engine itself. They cleaned up the aerodynamics a little from the Bravo to the Acclaim, especially the cowl, eliminating cowl flaps. The prop is more efficient and the Acclaim has 10 more hp (270 to 280 from the Bravo). Of course the STC can be added togo to 310hp, which can be used at take-off but will eat up cylinders if you keep it firewalled. 

@pkofmanif you are trading because of speed there won't be a lot of difference, maybe +/- 5% in real world flying. Just keep in mind that (1) the G1000 is tied to the type certificate in the Acclaim (and GX Bravos) so you won't be able to change avionics without Mooney getting together with Garmin and (2) the Bravo with a Lycoming that has oil cooled exhaust valve guides stands a much better chance of making TBO without new cylinders half way through than the Continental TSIO550.

Very true on the difference in "real world flying".  I tend to obsess way to much about 4-5 knots but it makes almost no difference.  Realistically speaking the acclaim is probably 7-10 knots faster at any given high altitude.  If we take a 400 nm trip at 18k feet 40-50 miles is eaten up in climb (Acclaim may get there 10 miles quicker) and both aircraft have to start their descent at around 100nm out so it becomes around 250nm in cruise.  The Acclaim will beat the Bravo by probably 5-10 minutes.

[pkofman]

@LANCECASPER thanks for the DM. I know you are correct on the speeds etc. I was looking to upgrade as my bravo is 98 and 2000 hours and about 600 on the engine. 

I was simply looking to get something newer but to be honest my plane with all of the improvements I've made to date could be a nice platform for years to come. 

1998 in airplane years is not that old!!

This all started as I was looking at an acclaim that has tsk,a/c and 130 gallon tanks, which only leaves enough useful load for a small animal who also needs to be a pilot!

I was thinking I could buy that plane, remove the a/c ( I need tks in toronto) and fly around with the 89 gallons of stock fuel ( with one other person)

I thought about it but it is going to take allot of work and money

Thanks for the comment above 

Peter

 

 

[pkofman]

2 minutes ago, Davidv said:

Very true on the difference in "real world flying".  I tend to obsess way to much about 4-5 knots but it makes almost no difference.  Realistically speaking the acclaim is probably 7-10 knots faster at any given high altitude.  If we take a 400 nm trip at 18k feet 40-50 miles is eaten up in climb (Acclaim may get there 10 miles quicker) and both aircraft have to start their descent at around 100nm out so it becomes around 250nm in cruise.  The Acclaim will beat the Bravo by probably 5-10 minutes.

Thanks David . Thats allot of "$$$$"   im going to have to spend to gain the 10 minutes. For me , my Bravo is a 1998 and 500 on the engine. the airframe has many more ( 1900 )hours. Just wanted newer and an acclaim or "s"would work if I could find the right one

[aggiepilot04]

For those familiar, does FIKI really add 109 lbs?  Or in practice, do you not fill it full of fluid...so like 75-ish lbs?

[exM20K]

5 hours ago, aggiepilot04 said:

For those familiar, does FIKI really add 109 lbs?  Or in practice, do you not fill it full of fluid...so like 75-ish lbs?

39.8# empty

[carusoam]

When doing the UL calculations... don’t forget to account for the Charlie weights...

If I add a FIKI system to my tail cone... a couple of lead bricks get removed...  pound for pound...a pretty good swap...

Refreshing an aged long body would make a great project...  the latest in avionics... new paint... new interior...  Many months of down-time....

Some MSers really know Mooneys...  +1 for Mike knowing how much a door hole weighs...   

The Acclaim would get my preference vote... Running LOP, the oil stays much cleaner, longer.... the ultimate Mooney...

Best regards,

-a-

[pkofman]

15 hours ago, exM20K said:

39.8# empty

In the Bravo I keep the tks topped up in the winter. ( im in toronto ) . Im surprised how quickly that stuff can get used, even on "normal " ( you have to be judicious)  setting so im probably carrying around an extra 50 lbs all winter. 

[MIm20c]

If the thin blade top prop ever gets certified for the bravo I think it will help to close the gap as well.  The bravo is a great plane although the prices have really gone up along with the ovation. If there was ever a time to upgrade a long body to a twin (value wise) now is the time. 
@pkofman The only way I would upgrade to a newer aircraft from yours is an Ultra or a very good condition 2015+ model. To be honest an Ultra in the 500-550 range (some are getting close) is not that bad of a deal especially since I don’t think they will every make anymore of them.  

[pkofman]

21 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

If the thin blade top prop ever gets certified for the bravo I think it will help to close the gap as well.  The bravo is a great plane although the prices have really gone up along with the ovation. If there was ever a time to upgrade a long body to a twin (value wise) now is the time. 
@pkofman The only way I would upgrade to a newer aircraft from yours is an Ultra or a very good condition 2015+ model. To be honest an Ultra in the 500-550 range (some are getting close) is not that bad of a deal especially since I don’t think they will every make anymore of them.  

Interesting,btw my Bravo is a great plane with all sorts of new tech ( 750xi, aspen, lynx 9000+, flightstream 210 etc etc ) some of which a 2000 + acclaim does not have due to the  g1000. . So reading this thread I would say that the general feeling is that spending the additional $$ is probably not really worth it. to move to an acclaim.. For me , as I said before just looking for something newer. ( faster is also good!)  Ill just save the $$ unless some incredible deal comes along that has a useful around 850-900 min

[philiplane]

21 hours ago, Davidv said:

Very true on the difference in "real world flying".  I tend to obsess way to much about 4-5 knots but it makes almost no difference.  Realistically speaking the acclaim is probably 7-10 knots faster at any given high altitude.  If we take a 400 nm trip at 18k feet 40-50 miles is eaten up in climb (Acclaim may get there 10 miles quicker) and both aircraft have to start their descent at around 100nm out so it becomes around 250nm in cruise.  The Acclaim will beat the Bravo by probably 5-10 minutes.

The Acclaim has to be faster, since it needs to spend that time saved, in the shop...

Edited April 29, 2021 by philiplane

[mike_elliott]

1 minute ago, philiplane said:

The Acclaim has to be faster, since it needs to spend that time saved, in the shop...

Why is that? 

 

[philiplane]

1 minute ago, mike_elliott said:

Why is that? 

 

Replacing cylinders for burned exhaust valves/loose guides, Kelly turbochargers that leak between the hot/cold sections, starter adapters that slip, push rod seals, rocker cover gaskets, tappets, etc etc... All the Continental weak points compared to the Lycoming engine

[LANCECASPER]

55 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

If the thin blade top prop ever gets certified for the bravo I think it will help to close the gap as well.  The bravo is a great plane although the prices have really gone up along with the ovation. If there was ever a time to upgrade a long body to a twin (value wise) now is the time. 
@pkofman The only way I would upgrade to a newer aircraft from yours is an Ultra or a very good condition 2015+ model. To be honest an Ultra in the 500-550 range (some are getting close) is not that bad of a deal especially since I don’t think they will every make anymore of them.  

Which Ultras are getting close?

https://www.controller.com/listings/search?Category=6&ScopeCategoryIDs=13&Manufacturer=MOONEY&Model=ACCLAIM TYPE S|ACCLAIM ULTRA|ACCLAIM&sort=1