What M20 is right for me?

[WeldWade]

Hello everyone,

I am new to this forum. I am currently working on my PPL and it is going very well. I am 49, kids are grown and I am divorced. I live in NE Arizona at 7300' elevation. I also have a home in Tucson AZ. My business is growing and I would like to be able to fly back and forth as needed, weather permitting. I am planning to purchase and airplane within the next 12 months and I am trying to educate myself as to what aircraft would be best for me for the next 6 to 10 years. 

This is what brings me to looking for a Mooney M20(?). I live at high elevation in the west and all of my flying will be in the mountainous west. My youngest lives in Utah, I have family in Colorado, New Mexico and Idaho. My sons live in Mesa AZ and I also do business in many states all west of the Mississippi. I am not trying to fool myself that I can just jump in and go and everything will be just peachy. I have three mentors that all have extensive aviation background. One is a retired airline pilot with over 30 years of experience. One is a CFI and the other is a RV pilot with 5000+ hours. All have been invaluable with their help and experiences. I am truly lucky to have them to help me!

Is the Mooney M20(?) right for me? I love the aircraft, the value, styling, speed, economy, community, and the safety of the Mooney M20's. The simplicity and reliability of the manual landing gear and hydraulic flaps is what draws me to the M20's. And the tail! IMO the Mooney tail is a masterpiece! The airplane will fit my mission and will be a great platform for me to become proficient in. I am not ready for a Twin and want to have a capable aircraft that will allow me to transition to a twin in the future. From the little I have learned so far, the J or K would be right for me. Probably would be best to get a K. My future plans will be to get into a twin that can operate into IMC but that is honestly years away. Since I am just staring into the GA ownership, I feel that the J or K would be a great place for me to start. I can afford either model and build hours and ratings in either. Having a turbo at my elevation would be best but my questions about the K, at this point, are concerning temps, CHT's and oil temps. Is the K my best option or would a J and slightly different flight planning be a better option. Or should I be looking for a M? I eventually want to purchase a twin and I think the M is far out of my experience zone as a first airplane. I would rather put that higher cost towards a twin in the future. And the last consideration I have is that I will most likely keep the Mooney as long as I am a pilot. I am a collector and I know within the next five years I would have way more into my Mooney than its worth. I am perfectly fine with that and look forward to it.

My business keeps me extremely busy through the fall, winter, and into early spring. I would probably only get about 4 to 6 hours a week on average during my busy season, if weather cooperates. So at this point I think the Mooney would be a great aircraft for me to purchase. Is the J or K right for me? Or should I be looking at another model or a different airplane?

Thanks in advance!

[Niko182]

I'd say either a 252, a S/R with the 310HP, or a M/TN, all with FIKI. Probably the worst one would be the R/S, and they still do pretty good at altitude. Just not like a turbo charged. Even a Rocket wouldn't be bad. I just recommend having a turbo or a lot of power, since you are at 7300. My Ovation does great at high altitude, but as I've started getting more comfortable flying in the flight levels, and talking off out of high density airports, I understand the value of a turbo a lot. I'd advise against the J. It can be done, but you won't have the same dispatch rate, especially compared to a FIKI Turbo aircraft.

[WeldWade]

FIKI would not normally present a useful load challenge for me at this point or within the next several years. It was not something I was considering due to being new and completely inexperienced. I will not be flying when icing would be remotely possible at this point or for a while to come. An IFR rating and or flying into known icing will be down the road for me but, I would much rather have it and not need it! I can see that FIKI should be a requirement for any aircraft I am considering. It will be a long time before I am able, or would, fly in those conditions. Buy once, cry once, right! 

The Lycoming in the Bravo is not as fuel efficient as the Continentals from what I am reading. The 252 has a lot of things I like. Looks like a 60K price tag to add FIKI... I have not seen a 252 for sale that is TKS/FIKI equipped. I am thinking an Acclaim is looking better now!!! I'm rambling... but I'm starting to understand the give and take a lot more now. I am just a fan of the older aircraft and the entire process of making it into something that is exactly what I want. 

Edited June 12, 2021 by WeldWade
edit mistake

[Niko182]

7 minutes ago, WeldWade said:

FIKI would not normally present a useful load challenge for me at this point or within the next several years. It was not something I was considering due to being new and completely inexperienced. I will not be flying when icing would be remotely possible at this point or for a while to come. An IFR rating and or flying into known icing will be down the road for me but, I would much rather have it and not need it! I can see that FIKI should be a requirement for any aircraft I am considering. It will be a long time before I am able, or would, fly in those conditions. Buy once, cry once, right! 

The Lycoming in the Bravo is not as fuel efficient as the Continentals from what I am reading. The 252 has a lot of things I like. Looks like a 60K price tag to add FIKI... I have not seen a 252 for sale that is TKS/FIKI equipped. I am thinking an Acclaim is looking better now!!! I'm rambling... but I'm starting to understand the give and take a lot more now. I am just a fan of the older aircraft and the entire process of making it into something that is exactly what I want. 

The lycoming is more fuel hungry, but usually they tend to make TBO better than their TCM brothers, however many TCM engines still make it to TBO. 252 with TKS is a rare breed. It is however pretty easy to find a bravo or an Acclaim with TKS. Just depends what your budget is. Acclaim will also give you speeds faster than a good chunk of piston twins. I wouldn't exclude a nice F33 or V35 with Fiki and the TAT WW3 turbo normalizer either.

[WeldWade]

The V35 is a beautiful bird!!! I am also looking at the Beechcraft's for sure. I am more of a Mooney fan though. I had no idea that there was an STC for turbo normalizing a Beech. Now I am really scratching my head... 

[A64Pilot]

Forget fuel burn, in the real world of aircraft ownership the difference in fuel burn in one Mooney to the next is insignificant, and if it does become a issue, slowing down can save quite a lot of fuel.

‘Most Bonanza’s are getting old, real old so be careful on inspecting, but parts are available which sort negates the age thing in my opinion, except for the magnesium skinned flight controls. I don’t believe any of those have been made in along time. They are not a tie it down outside airplane, although you see it done of course.

‘I looked hard at an S35, they are slightly lighter and faster than a V, look the same of course.

‘Your altitude can be done in a NA, but can be done so much better with a turbo, your the reason they exist mostly. I wouldn’t want a turbo, but I live at sea level, and pretty much never use O2, so for me it’s unnecessary expense and increased maintenance.

Edited June 12, 2021 by A64Pilot

[PilotX]

Just get a Bravo. Everybody really wants a Bravo, even if they deny it. 

[carusoam]

Welcome aboard WW!

Key word here is probably Suitability...

GA airplanes come in a variety of complexities...

Mooneys simplify the choices down to speed and efficiency...

Mooneys have both....

How far do you want to go?

How fast do you want to get there?

With great speed... comes great responsibility...  (Spiderman’s CFI)

Some people take a year to figure out how they are going to use their plane...  others have been in and around flying their entire lifetime...

Some people like the simplicity of a normally aspirated, carbureted, 180hp O360...

Others prefer the challenge of controlling TIT, while leaning LOP, in the flight levels... their discussions include manifold pressure controllers, intercoolers, and letting the turbo cool down before getting to the ground... not afterwards...

 

When selecting a Mooney that is suitable for you...

Do you like the challenges of operating a powerful engine in a complex environment, to get the most True airspeed, in a great moving airmass?  

Do you prefer simplicity, the basics of flying quickly, no Oxygen required...

Or something in between..?

1) Pick your engine

2) Pick your back seat

3) Pick your instrument panel

4) Pick your budget

5) Pick your desire to learn

 

Don’t be in a rush... the current oldest Mooney pilot is more than twice your age... there is plenty of time to get this all figured out...  

PP thoughts only...  Rockets and Screamin’ Eagles are a lot of plane for low time pilots...

Best regards,

-a-

[WeldWade]

41 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

Forget fuel burn, in the real world of aircraft ownership the difference in fuel burn in one Mooney to the next is insignificant, and if it does become a issue, slowing down can save quite a lot of fuel.

‘Most Bonanza’s are getting old, real old so be careful on inspecting, but parts are available which sort negates the age thing in my opinion, except for the magnesium skinned flight controls. I don’t believe any of those have been made in along time. They are not a tie it down outside airplane, although you see it done of course.

‘I looked hard at an S35, they are slightly lighter and faster than a V, look the same of course.

‘Your altitude can be done in a NA, but can be done so much better with a turbo, your the reason they exist mostly. I wouldn’t want a turbo, but I live at sea level, and pretty much never use O2, so for me it’s unnecessary expense and increased maintenance.

There are a couple of options for added fuel capacity if needed and slowing down is the easiest and cheapest option. 

I'm glad this forum exists! I am grateful for all the advice. 

[WeldWade]

4 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Welcome aboard WW!

Key word here is probably Suitability...

GA airplanes come in a variety of complexities...

Mooneys simplify the choices down to speed and efficiency...

Mooneys have both....

How far do you want to go?

How fast do you want to get there?

With great speed... comes great responsibility...  (Spiderman’s CFI)

Some people take a year to figure out how they are going to use their plane...  others have been in and around flying their entire lifetime...

Some people like the simplicity of a normally aspirated, carbureted, 180hp O360...

Others prefer the challenge of controlling TIT, while leaning LOP, in the flight levels... their discussions include manifold pressure controllers, intercoolers, and letting the turbo cool down before getting to the ground... not afterwards...

 

When selecting a Mooney that is suitable for you...

Do you like the challenges of operating a powerful engine in a complex environment, to get the most True airspeed, in a great moving airmass?  

Do you prefer simplicity, the basics of flying quickly, no Oxygen required...

Or something in between..?

1) Pick your engine

2) Pick your back seat

3) Pick your instrument panel

4) Pick your budget

5) Pick your desire to learn

 

Don’t be in a rush... the current oldest Mooney pilot is more than twice your age... there is plenty of time to get this all figured out...  

PP thoughts only...  Rockets and Screamin’ Eagles are a lot of plane for low time pilots...

Best regards,

-a-

Thank you for the welcome!

I have at least a year before I buy. I am in no hurry at all to make the decision or buy.

It would be foolish for me to be overconfident. However, I have operated complex and deadly heavy equipment my entire adult life without incident. I am confident that I will gain experience and ratings in the future safely and responsibly. I am not the type to push beyond my limits. 

I will not be financing my purchase. So it may take more than a year to have the cash to buy depending on what model and equipment I decide on.

[jrwilson]

Just wanted to clarify… you mention you like the simplicity of the manual gear and flaps, but then mention the M20J or K would be a good fit.  Just making sure you know the J and K both have electric gear, not the Johnson bar.   For the manual gear you need an earlier C/E or F.  Later models are all electric gear.

[Hank]

41 minutes ago, jrwilson said:

Just wanted to clarify… you mention you like the simplicity of the manual gear and flaps, but then mention the M20J or K would be a good fit.  Just making sure you know the J and K both have electric gear, not the Johnson bar.   For the manual gear you need an earlier C/E or F.  Later models are all electric gear.

Many C, E and F models are also electric gear and flaps. These were options up through 1968, and standard equipment beginning in 1969, because so few J bars were sold in '68.

[RJBrown]

Lived in Denver, now in Phoenix on an Airpark. 
bought a 231 in 93 converted to Rocket when engine needed work.

I flew all around the country and put 1000 hours on her. Loved that plane. I consider the Rocket the ultimate Mooney.

I sold it to finance work related real estate. Later bought a J as my “forever” in retirement plane.

I was based at Centennial and had MEAs of 16,600 10 miles west of my house. Every time I flew the J all I could think of is what it couldn’t do.

sold it

Flying throughout the inter mountain West you really need a turbo. Altitude and rate of climb are your friends. Never missed a flight because I didn’t have TKS in the Rocket. I also never flew in the North east.
Missed flights in the J because of weather that would not have been an issue in the Rocket. 
Pilot X said everyone wants a Bravo. That’s true but only because there aren’t enough Rockets or Acclaims to go around.

Yes, what everyone wants is a Big Block Turbo, the ability to get high and go fast. Even if something else fits them better…..

At Centennial parked next to me in the shelters was a Bonanza. I always ask him why he spent so much to go so slow.
 

[smccray]

18 minutes ago, RJBrown said:

 

At Centennial parked next to me in the shelters was a Bonanza. I always ask him why he spent so much to go so slow.
 

Let’s race. 700 lb load, 500 mile course   

 

I’m a fan of any plane with wings. I would look at long bodies or bonanzas- whatever sort you like!  

[RJBrown]

Just now, smccray said:

Let’s race. 700 lb load, 500 mile course   

 

I’m a fan of any plane with wings. I would look at long bodies or bonanzas- whatever sort you like!  

Did I tell you about the time I outran a Baron? Him at 10, me at 10.5. I was normal cruise 72% 200 k tas. I passed him without giving him a second thought, he was just “traffic” On the ground at Santa Fe he approached me after I got back from lunch to find out why he could not stay ahead no matter how hard he pushed. Had to be after lunch because he was just landing as we took the shuttle into town. That was a 600 hp “Bonanza” no aerodynamically challenged 300hp Beech will ever keep up with a 300hp Mooney. Too phat. Only way to go faster on that same power is to fly experimental plastic.
But you are right that Bonanza is a nice plane. Probably my second choice, I have no need for a 3rd row. Even a Malibu won’t keep up till they add kerosene. 

[carusoam]

Did I ever mention why I like my Mooney...?

1) Fastest

2) Factory built

3) Certified

4) Naturally aspirated

5) Four seater

6) On or off the planet!

 

If I were to take on Scott’s invitation (above)... I would kindly ask him to extend the distance to about 900nm...  Add in a stop if he needs one...  LBs gain even more speed by not stopping. 

 

Machinery guys make awesome MSers...   lots of similar knowledge with the addition of a different point of view...

We have a few MSers that use their Mooney to get to work... in various offices, or locations...

 

Let’s invite Rich to discuss flying a Mooney around Arizona... 

While I work on finding that address.... @N201MKTurbo

 

WW, what kind of machinery do you work with?

MS has a few people that work with race cars, race planes, fleets of trucks... and one MSer that builds trucks... and a whole bunch of other industrial machines...  

Its a bit of fun getting to know soooo many Mooniacs... from all around the Mooney World.

Go MS!

Best regards,

-a-

[WeldWade]

2 hours ago, RJBrown said:

Lived in Denver, now in Phoenix on an Airpark. 
bought a 231 in 93 converted to Rocket when engine needed work.

I flew all around the country and put 1000 hours on her. Loved that plane. I consider the Rocket the ultimate Mooney.

I sold it to finance work related real estate. Later bought a J as my “forever” in retirement plane.

I was based at Centennial and had MEAs of 16,600 10 miles west of my house. Every time I flew the J all I could think of is what it couldn’t do.

sold it

Flying throughout the inter mountain West you really need a turbo. Altitude and rate of climb are your friends. Never missed a flight because I didn’t have TKS in the Rocket. I also never flew in the North east.
Missed flights in the J because of weather that would not have been an issue in the Rocket. 
Pilot X said everyone wants a Bravo. That’s true but only because there aren’t enough Rockets or Acclaims to go around.

Yes, what everyone wants is a Big Block Turbo, the ability to get high and go fast. Even if something else fits them better…..

At Centennial parked next to me in the shelters was a Bonanza. I always ask him why he spent so much to go so slow.
 

The Bravo will most likely be what I choose. I will not rule out an aircraft that is not TKS equipped to begin with, as it can be added at a later time when I am rated and experienced. I am keeping an eye on the market and watching what is available to gauge what I will need to save for a purchase. I don't want to rush into anything and feel like I made a bad decision for me.

Experience is invaluable! I appreciate everyones thoughts and guidance. 

[smccray]

2 hours ago, carusoam said:

If I were to take on Scott’s invitation (above)... I would kindly ask him to extend the distance to about 900nm...  Add in a stop if he needs one...  LBs gain even more speed by not stopping. 

 

Deal.  Looks like right at 5 hrs flight time non stop, landing with 14 gallons.

That’s right at max range no wind. 190 ktas at 170 and 90 gallons of fuel. 
 

edit- wait- I don’t have to take my wife and daughters right? That would be at least 2 stops… 

Edited June 12, 2021 by smccray

[smccray]

2 hours ago, RJBrown said:

Did I tell you about the time I outran a Baron? Him at 10, me at 10.5. I was normal cruise 72% 200 k tas. I passed him without giving him a second thought, he was just “traffic” On the ground at Santa Fe he approached me after I got back from lunch to find out why he could not stay ahead no matter how hard he pushed. Had to be after lunch because he was just landing as we took the shuttle into town. That was a 600 hp “Bonanza” no aerodynamically challenged 300hp Beech will ever keep up with a 300hp Mooney. Too phat. Only way to go faster on that same power is to fly experimental plastic.
But you are right that Bonanza is a nice plane. Probably my second choice, I have no need for a 3rd row. Even a Malibu won’t keep up till they add kerosene. 

Doesn’t get any more efficient than the Mooney airframe. I find the beech more comfortable than my old J, that that’s personal preference.  Both companies make fantastic airplanes!

[WeldWade]

1 hour ago, carusoam said:

Did I ever mention why I like my Mooney...?

1) Fastest

2) Factory built

3) Certified

4) Naturally aspirated

5) Four seater

6) On or off the planet!

 

If I were to take on Scott’s invitation (above)... I would kindly ask him to extend the distance to about 900nm...  Add in a stop if he needs one...  LBs gain even more speed by not stopping. 

 

Machinery guys make awesome MSers...   lots of similar knowledge with the addition of a different point of view...

We have a few MSers that use their Mooney to get to work... in various offices, or locations...

 

Let’s invite Rich to discuss flying a Mooney around Arizona... 

While I work on finding that address....

 

WW, what kind of machinery do you work with?

MS has a few people that work with race cars, race planes, fleets of trucks... and one MSer that builds trucks... and a whole bunch of other industrial machines...  

Its a bit of fun getting to know soooo many Mooniacs... from all around the Mooney World.

Go MS!

Best regards,

-a-

I worked in mining for about 25 years. I spent many of those years as a crane operator as well as all sorts of various heavy equipment and machinery. I worked for Tucson Electric Power after mining and I have owned a trucking company since 2000ish. We haul propane in the lower 48 but do not get east of the Mississippi often. 

[EricJ]

There are lots of Mooneys all over AZ, including the northern parts and NE part of the state.   There was a very nice E model for sale in Williams (Clark Memorial, KCMR) a while back, but I suspect it is gone by now.   Thinking about it, all of the Mooneys I know of in the northern part of the state are naturally aspirated without turbos, so it's not a requirement by any means.   I have a J model and fly similar areas to what you mention without too much trouble, so your options are certainly correctly assessed from my perspective.

 

[WeldWade]

5 hours ago, jrwilson said:

Just wanted to clarify… you mention you like the simplicity of the manual gear and flaps, but then mention the M20J or K would be a good fit.  Just making sure you know the J and K both have electric gear, not the Johnson bar.   For the manual gear you need an earlier C/E or F.  Later models are all electric gear.

I honestly figured that out on my own last night while digging more into the models. Regardless, I am still a fan of the non strut Mooney landing gear and the gear design and operation. There is so much to like about the Mooney! But yes, I did have a misconception that all early models had a Johnson bar and manual hydraulic flaps. From what I've been able to learn so far, the Bravo has a "ripcord" like manual gear deployment system? Reminds me of starting my chainsaw after the winter. From what I can see it looks like it works easier than starting my chainsaw after a long winter!

[Niko182]

3 hours ago, RJBrown said:

no aerodynamically challenged 300hp Beech will ever keep up with a 300hp Mooney.

I don't know if I'd agree with that. The TAT WW III is significantly more sophisticated than the comparable turbo systems on the Mooneys, and a light turbod F33 or V35 would be able to keep up with a rocket, and will outrun a bravo.

[WeldWade]

15 minutes ago, Niko182 said:

I don't know if I'd agree with that. The TAT WW III is significantly more sophisticated than the comparable turbo systems on the Mooneys, and a light turbod F33 or V35 would be able to keep up with a rocket, and will outrun a bravo.

What would the price tag be for the TAT WWIII? Just curious.

[Niko182]

2 minutes ago, WeldWade said:

What would the price tag be for the TAT WWIII? Just curious.

It is 52 AMU installed.