2004 Bravo DX - FIKI - 405HRS TT - FRESH ANNUAL

[V1VRV2]

Found this on my FaceBook feed this morning. Hasn’t flown much in the last 18 years. With FIKI seems like a good price. I wonder how much time you’ll get before it’s time to overhaul the engine. I have no affiliation with this aircraft or it’s broker... just thought I’d pass it along.

Logbooks and Pics... https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ktpu3j9om4sqjz1/AABgX1Nd8WZRfj0z6PYa22lja?dl=0&fbclid=IwAR1JeS4cbwUbQm3NFeLT7wJd3Hkv4IQXvVG_pTtQdW5dNye_tbUiY75NjC8

 

[Schllc]

Out of annual for the last five years. And a few times in the middle if I’m not mistaken. It is now current...

I looked at it, in person.  
It looks to be in very good condition, but the new owner has not, and is not flying it.  It was purchased at a bank auction a few months ago.  
My concern is the engine of course. I don’t believe problems as a result of sitting show up immediately all the time, and given the asking price, it should have a better history.
The owner is a broker, and claimed not to own the plane but it’s registered in an LLC the broker owns.  Claims it’s flown 9 hours, but flight aware only shows one flight and it’s inside a class bravo airspace.
I didn’t appreciate being lied to...

 

caveat emptor

[MediumSpeedAluminumTubing]

@Schllc Did the plane do most of it's sitting down in Florida? If so, that's a pretty good recipe for corrosion.

[Schllc]

No, it was near Atlanta. Not a dry climate there either.  Hot and humid. 
It was the subterfuge and lack of candor that turned me off.  

[mike_elliott]

7 hours ago, MediumSpeedAluminumTubing said:

@Schllc Did the plane do most of it's sitting down in Florida? If so, that's a pretty good recipe for corrosion.

Sitting outside in Fl is as bad as sitting outside in AZ. Both will trash a plane. Some of the nicest Mooneys shapewise I have seen are "sitting down in FL" but are well taken care of and not left to the elements to claim. They wont last long anywhere just hanging out on a ramp. Airplanes corrode out not wear out I have heard. Having them buried under a foot of snow in Buffalo might not be the best environment either.

[Schllc]

It appears to have lived most of its life in Georgia and does not appear to have been left outside for any significant period of time. 
the paint and interior are in excellent condition. 
The only dings if you’d want to be picky is it still has the Moritz (sp?) gauge set, the unknowns of an engine with less than 30 hours over the last seven years, and probably some latent maintenance on systems that just haven’t been exercised much less used.   
In. other words, nothing to prevent a buyer from taking on, at the right price of course. 
When someone isn’t forthright with one question, it makes the rest very suspect.
At least to me it does, however to each their own....

[pkofman]

I looked at this this morning as well. I don't know , for me it was interesting as a move from my Bravo which is older and more hours ( but about 400 hours on my engine ) , Three years ago,  I purchased a Mooney  Bravo TLS  that had been flown allot but then sat for a while in a hangar in BC and had  not flow for several months ( or a few each month ). I ended up with a bag of minor snags , and as we all know, there is very little in  aviation ,( even when minor) , that does not end up as  $$$$. To me this plane with so little time would be a potential  pass, so im still looking for an upgrade... Market is super thin so its worth checking out every opportunity.  What im not sure about is what was the main difference between my plain Bravo TLS 98 vs the DX?

[Robert C.]

Model designator DX for Ovations and Bravos started with in the 2004 model year when the glare shield/panel height was lowered/reduced by 1 or 2 inches (sorry forgotten the exact number). Also thought that the Moritz engine gauges were new at that time?  

[LANCECASPER]

9 minutes ago, Robert C. said:

Model designator DX for Ovations and Bravos started with in the 2004 model year when the glare shield/panel height was lowered/reduced by 1 or 2 inches (sorry forgotten the exact number). Also thought that the Moritz engine gauges were new at that time?  

Moritz gauges started in 1999. The DX was started toward the end of 2004 to differentiate it from GX which had G1000 avionics. The glareshield was lowered by an inch and a half.

[HH60HLDG]

Seller also confirmed 89 usable for fuel, so not very long legs!  Is Monroy still doing new LR tanks, & for how many AMU's?

[Davidv]

11 minutes ago, HH60HLDG said:

Seller also confirmed 89 usable for fuel, so not very long legs!  Is Monroy still doing new LR tanks, & for how many AMU's?

No, there's no telling if and when they will start installing them again.  It could happen, just not certain when and at what price.  Won't be cheap.

[HH60HLDG]

Just now, Davidv said:

No, there's no telling if and when they will start installing them again.  It could happen, just not certain when and at what price.  Won't be cheap.

Thanks, anybody else providing better tankage to the Mooney world?  Not to mention the amount of unusable fuel the Bravo (& other models?) seem to carry?

[LANCECASPER]

On 5/2/2021 at 8:30 AM, pkofman said:

I looked at this this morning as well. I don't know , for me it was interesting as a move from my Bravo which is older and more hours ( but about 400 hours on my engine ) , Three years ago,  I purchased a Mooney  Bravo TLS  that had been flown allot but then sat for a while in a hangar in BC and had  not flow for several months ( or a few each month ). I ended up with a bag of minor snags , and as we all know, there is very little in  aviation ,( even when minor) , that does not end up as  $$$$. To me this plane with so little time would be a potential  pass, so im still looking for an upgrade... Market is super thin so its worth checking out every opportunity.  What im not sure about is what was the main difference between my plain Bravo TLS 98 vs the DX?

You have spent a few years taking care of all of the deferred maintenance and squawks on your airplane to get it where it is today. Just understand if you buy another used airplane, with no warranty, you will spend the next few years taking care of all of the deferred maintenance and squawks on that airplane to get it where you want it. The one difference will be that right now you will be buying at, what I think is, the top of the market. Hours don't mean everything, how it was flown and maintained during those hours is the intangible that you can't know for sure until you own it, and even then things happen.

[LANCECASPER]

Just now, Robert C. said:

89gl @ 14gph equals about 6.3 hrs @175ktas equals abt 1100 nm (w/o winds ofc).

I know of only one member here who who would consider that "not very long legs." Right Mike?

Bravos burn 18-20 gallons per hour at cruise and a lot more than that getting to cruise.

[Robert C.]

Just now, LANCECASPER said:

Bravos burn 18-20 gallons per hour at cruise and a lot more than that getting to cruise.

yeah, realized that we were talking about a Bravo just after I hit "post" Had already deleted it when you replied 

[daytonabch04]

I was intrigued by this plane as well as it had most I was looking for in an upgrade.  The TT was concerning, however, I got the same 'vibe' from the broker which turned me away pretty quickly.  They were very slow to disclose the logbooks which I think have been updated now, but made it rather known they received alot of interest quick and it was 'move soon'. 

[Schllc]

2 hours ago, daytonabch04 said:

I was intrigued by this plane as well as it had most I was looking for in an upgrade.  The TT was concerning, however, I got the same 'vibe' from the broker which turned me away pretty quickly.  They were very slow to disclose the logbooks which I think have been updated now, but made it rather known they received alot of interest quick and it was 'move soon'. 

He actually told me that it was “sold” the evening after I looked at it when I provided my offer. He claimed he got 260. 
I just don’t understand what they think they gain by not being honest. 
I’m  going to die naive....

[Schllc]

For those interested I would be happy to discuss what I saw.
I think the plane was about as clean as they come for a 17yr old bird.  The interior and exterior are truly a solid 9 and I am as picky as they come. 
my offer was predicated on the fact that I would not use the plane without an IRAN, which is a gamble.  Could be 20, could be 70. Who knows....

[Davidv]

2 hours ago, Schllc said:

He actually told me that it was “sold” the evening after I looked at it when I provided my offer. He claimed he got 260. 
I just don’t understand what they think they gain by not being honest. 
I’m  going to die naive....

that's interesting as I think he just listed it a few days ago for sale on Facebook, again.

[irishpilot]

On 5/3/2021 at 11:16 AM, Robert C. said:

yeah, realized that we were talking about a Bravo just after I hit "post" Had already deleted it when you replied 

My Bravo is currently for sale and listed on this forum. It's flown regularly. It burns 19 gph at 29/2400 and 17 at 2700/2400. If you are patient, you can stuff 100 gal in the plane. The only difference between the Bravo 89 gal tanks and the longer range tanks is the slit in the filler neck inside the tank. I've put just a tad over 100 and flew 5.3 hrs with 30 min reserve. That gets you just shy of 900 NM. Not bad for a day's flying. 

[pkofman]

Awesome what year is your bravo and how much  do the long range tanks weight empty. I’m curious. Thank you

[irishpilot]

2 minutes ago, pkofman said:

Awesome what year is your bravo and how much  do the long range tanks weight empty. I’m curious. Thank you

Mine is a 2000 and has the standard tanks. They should hold more if you take your time filling. It takes me about another 5-7 min to do so as you're going against gravity. I still adhere to the gross weight limit of 3368 lbs.

[carusoam]

Long body fuel capacity...

Expect the standard tanks to be nominal 44.5 Gal per side... 89gal total...

When carefully filled up to the wing’s skin... slightly more than 50 gal per side can be squeezed in on a level playing field...

If on an uneven playing field, more can be put in the downhill wing...

Turning the plane around, so the uphill wing is now downhill, could net a few more gallons...

 

If you have long fuel necks a vent hole may be required... many got slots... a few went without much of a neck at all...  the Eagles got the really silly long neck to limit filling the tank to match the lower output of its engine...

If the plane got the nominal 130gal Monroy extended range tanks...  the added weight of the tanks is a couple of pounds of sealant in a few key places... possibly need to remove some holes, and add a few in some ribs...

130gals is perfect for that couple that likes to fly really long X-countries...

PP thoughts only, not a mechanic...

Best regards,

-a-