Thinking about buying a Mooney.

[tshugart3]

Hello Mooniacs!

My situation: I currently own a nice 1980 Piper Archer II, pretty nicely equipped (2 G5s, GFC500 A/P, GNX375, etc.). It was my first airplane, owned it for about 2 years at this point. I've had decent success keeping on leaseback to flight schools. They've maintained it well, it's been basically free for me and I get to fly it when I want.

I'm thinking about selling the Archer and buying a Mooney, probably an M20J, mostly for the speed and additional range, understanding that it will not be appropriate for leaseback and I'll have to pay all the bills. The Archer can do about 128kts TAS at 9 gph, 48 gal tanks. Mission is me and the wife, maybe a couple of small dogs, taking trips to wherever. Perhaps an occasional biz trip for me. I live in Central TX (KILE) with very limited maintenance on field, and I'm on a very long waiting list for a hangar. We'll be moving in 2 yrs (for wife's work) to location TBD. I'm 5-6, pretty light, 600 hr comm pilot and CFI, 50 or so hrs in retracts, 1 hr in a M20J a few years back.

To me the advantages of the Archer are that it's a done deal, super easy to fly, cheap and very simple to maintain, great avionics, and it's pretty comfortable. Disadvantages are basically speed and range relative to the Mooney as far as I can tell.

Thoughts from the crowd? Is the Mooney speed and wow factor worth it for casual trips and buzzing around given the extra expense and complexity? (Insurance will be double at least from the quotes I've gotten.)

Any thoughts appreciated, thanks!

[carusoam]

Welcome aboard tsh!

Yes, it is worth it.

What do you do with the leaseback aircraft?

Does it make enough money to help support your Mooney fever?

Or does it get sold to pay for the new 2U aircraft…

Either way…

TX was enlarged enough for Mooney flights… 

Go Mooney!

Best regards,

-a-

[201er]

6 minutes ago, tshugart3 said:

The Archer can do about 128kts TAS at 9 gph, 48 gal tanks.

145ktas on 9gph in a 201. 155 on about 12. You do the math if that makes it worthwhile for you.

[carusoam]

Just now, 201er said:

145ktas on 9gph in a 201. 155 on about 12. You do the math if that makes it worthwhile for you.

Yeah…. But….

Has your Mooney ever seen the Arctic circle?  
Have you ever flown it to South America?

What about Cuba?  Did you actually touch the runway in Cuba?

Have you ever called  an MSer in Canada just because you were flying over his house?

Is your Mooney a long distance flyer only?

Would it be possible to fly your Mooney from one side of Manhattan to the other?

What other fun things can you do in your Mooney…?

 

-a-

 

[toto]

1 hour ago, tshugart3 said:

Thoughts from the crowd? Is the Mooney speed and wow factor worth it for casual trips and buzzing around given the extra expense and complexity?

I own an Archer and a J model Mooney. The Archer is a 110-knot cruiser and the Mooney is a 160-knot (ish) cruiser.

If you’re just tooling around town, there’s no reason to sell the Archer. 

The Mooney costs more to maintain, more to insure, and it’s worse than the Piper at certain things. But it’s a *much* better cross-country airplane, and if you’re doing a 500-mile trip, you can be there before lunch in the Mooney but it might take two days in the Piper. You’ll have to stop for gas in the Piper, and it’s a very easy direct flight in the Mooney.

The only way I could get my Archer to cruise at 128 knots would be to mount a JATO to the side. I file 110 and that’s usually pretty close. It does 9gph or a bit less ROP, versus the Mooney at 11gph or a bit less ROP. But the Mooney is 50 knots faster, so it will embarrass the Piper on miles per gallon.

The Piper is better on grass, easier to load with its big cargo door at hip level, and the seating position is more natural for passengers than the Mooney.

There is absolutely no contest if you’re looking for a traveling machine. The Mooney wins hands-down. But the speed isn’t much value for tooling around town, and the wow factor is pretty much non-existent (the average non-flyer couldn’t tell the difference between the two). 

Anyway, I have one of each and I’m happy to chat about the relative advantages. But my basic advice is to keep the Piper unless you’re planning on doing a lot of cross-country flights.
 

[ArtVandelay]

145ktas on 9gph in a 201. 155 on about 12. You do the math if that makes it worthwhile for you.

I can do 152 ktas on 9gph at 7500’, but I have the 205 speed mods and slick paint job and that’s still under book speeds. Archer book max is 129, Mooney is 175…both came from their respective marketing departments. I’ve done S. Florida to New Mexico or Minnesota in a single day. Cross country trips are its speciality.

My range exceeds my personal limits, 6 hours is my personal record…but don’t ask 201er…he’s got long range tanks and higher personal limits. ;-)

[tshugart3]

8 hours ago, toto said:

I own an Archer and a J model Mooney. The Archer is a 110-knot cruiser and the Mooney is a 160-knot (ish) cruiser.

...

The only way I could get my Archer to cruise at 128 knots would be to mount a JATO to the side. I file 110 and that’s usually pretty close. It does 9gph or a bit less ROP, versus the Mooney at 11gph or a bit less ROP. But the Mooney is 50 knots faster, so it will embarrass the Piper on miles per gallon.

The Piper is better on grass, easier to load with its big cargo door at hip level, and the seating position is more natural for passengers than the Mooney.
 

Thanks for the great reply. I've been honestly surprised at how fast my Archer is given many who'd had similar experiences to yours, but it does an honest 128 TAS in cruise. I think the last couple of years of the Archer II were a bit faster with better wheel pants, and prop pitch went from 60 to 62. YMMV of course.

What is it about seating position that feel less natural in the Mooney?

[toto]

34 minutes ago, tshugart3 said:

Thanks for the great reply. I've been honestly surprised at how fast my Archer is given many who'd had similar experiences to yours, but it does an honest 128 TAS in cruise. I think the last couple of years of the Archer II were a bit faster with better wheel pants, and prop pitch went from 60 to 62. YMMV of course.

What is it about seating position that feel less natural in the Mooney?

Yeah, dunno about the cruise speed. I see 110 knots even with speed mods like gap seals installed. (I’m talking about a regular <75% power setting, which is like 2525rpm at 8k.)

The seating position of the Mooney is often described as “more like a Corvette” - your legs are out in front of you, the yoke is in your gut, and your seat back is often reclined. In the Piper, you’re basically sitting upright with the yoke above your knees.

[1980Mooney]

2 hours ago, tshugart3 said:

Thanks for the great reply. I've been honestly surprised at how fast my Archer is given many who'd had similar experiences to yours, but it does an honest 128 TAS in cruise. I think the last couple of years of the Archer II were a bit faster with better wheel pants, and prop pitch went from 60 to 62. YMMV of course.

What is it about seating position that feel less natural in the Mooney?

It sounds like you have a gem of an Archer.  I would not count on 160 kts in the typical J that you might be able to purchase - more like 155. 

And it sounds like you have the perfect ownership situation - the plane costs you almost nothing.

Your plane is dead simple and rugged with the O-360.  The Mooney is going to need more maintenance.  You mention that there is little maintenance on your field.  A Mooney that is waiting for a mechanic or at a remote field to be maintained will not be faster than your Archer that is always ready to go.....

You mention the double cost of insurance.  You will be paying all the cost of the Mooney and maintenance where your Archer is currently basically free.  Annuals will be more because of the gear, etc.  Expect to deal with wing fuel tank leaks on the Mooney at some point - costly and a pain.

Now on that hypothetical 500 nm flight, your Archer will only take about 45 minutes more than the typical J.  

The cost and all the extra time and effort to have a Mooney properly maintained at a limited service airport may be worth it to you.  It just depends upon your mission.

Now 20 years ago I took a J and added 300 hp. IO-550 - I got speed for cross country flights.  I got higher fuel consumption.  I got higher Annual costs and higher maintenance.  I also got a plane that has limited prop clearance, a lot of weight on the nose gear.  It fit my mission for the time.  But that time may be coming to a close.

 

[toto]

1 hour ago, 1980Mooney said:

Now on that hypothetical 500 nm flight, your Archer will only take about 45 minutes more than the typical J.

The problem with the Archer isn’t the speed so much as the tank size. At 9gph, unless there’s a tail wind I’m stopping for fuel on a 500-mile trip, while the Mooney can do 500 miles without blinking, even in a moderate headwind, and have plenty of fuel to spare.

[201er]

7 minutes ago, toto said:

The problem with the Archer isn’t the speed so much as the tank size. At 9gph, unless there’s a tail wind I’m stopping for fuel on a 500-mile trip, while the Mooney can do 500 miles without blinking, even in a moderate headwind, and have plenty of fuel to spare.

I wouldn't be surprised if a really clean Archer has a better payload and the Mooney can't do 500 miles with the seats filled either.

On the other hand, mine with extended range tanks can do 8-12 hours nonstop no problem. As much as 1400nm. Or circumnavigate Cuba with stops but without refueling.

[toto]

10 minutes ago, 201er said:

I wouldn't be surprised if a really clean Archer has a better payload and the Mooney can't do 500 miles with the seats filled either.

On the other hand, mine with extended range tanks can do 8-12 hours nonstop no problem. As much as 1400nm. Or circumnavigate Cuba with stops but without refueling.

Certainly possible.  I'm just one (or, I guess, two) data points - in my case, the full-fuel payloads are about the same between the two aircraft.  (That's assuming a 2900GW J.). I got the Mooney specifically to handle frequent cross-country trips that couldn't be done in the Archer without a stop.

[201er]

4 minutes ago, toto said:

Certainly possible.  I'm just one (or, I guess, two) data points - in my case, the full-fuel payloads are about the same between the two aircraft.  (That's assuming a 2900GW J.). I got the Mooney specifically to handle frequent cross-country trips that couldn't be done in the Archer without a stop.

Vast majority of J's are 2740GW and 900-1000UL. However, that makes full fuel payload 500-600lbs with 64 gallon tanks.

[DCarlton]

I've owned my M20F for about 17 years (with all the J like mods).  It's hard to beat from a performance perspective when considering horsepower, fuel consumption and range.  With that said, I'm getting older, my mission has changed, and I sometimes (mostly during annual inspections) miss the simplicity of an Archer (or even better a Dakota).  I could see myself in one of those again.  Folks tend to fixate on speed, but it's the climb performance and endurance that's kept me in the Mooney.  Those factors equate to safety.   One more thing... a really nice newer J is next to impossible to find now; they sell very quickly.   

Edited September 27, 2021 by DCarlton

[toto]

2 minutes ago, 201er said:

Vast majority of J's are 2740GW and 900-1000UL. However, that makes full fuel payload 500-600lbs with 64 gallon tanks.

Yeah, my Archer payload is about 650 with full fuel.

[DXB]

15 hours ago, tshugart3 said:

Hello Mooniacs!

My situation: I currently own a nice 1980 Piper Archer II, pretty nicely equipped (2 G5s, GFC500 A/P, GNX375, etc.). It was my first airplane, owned it for about 2 years at this point. I've had decent success keeping on leaseback to flight schools. They've maintained it well, it's been basically free for me and I get to fly it when I want.

I'm thinking about selling the Archer and buying a Mooney, probably an M20J, mostly for the speed and additional range, understanding that it will not be appropriate for leaseback and I'll have to pay all the bills. The Archer can do about 128kts TAS at 9 gph, 48 gal tanks. Mission is me and the wife, maybe a couple of small dogs, taking trips to wherever. Perhaps an occasional biz trip for me. I live in Central TX (KILE) with very limited maintenance on field, and I'm on a very long waiting list for a hangar. We'll be moving in 2 yrs (for wife's work) to location TBD. I'm 5-6, pretty light, 600 hr comm pilot and CFI, 50 or so hrs in retracts, 1 hr in a M20J a few years back.

To me the advantages of the Archer are that it's a done deal, super easy to fly, cheap and very simple to maintain, great avionics, and it's pretty comfortable. Disadvantages are basically speed and range relative to the Mooney as far as I can tell.

Thoughts from the crowd? Is the Mooney speed and wow factor worth it for casual trips and buzzing around given the extra expense and complexity? (Insurance will be double at least from the quotes I've gotten.)

Any thoughts appreciated, thanks!

Given how much more fun the Mooney is to fly than an Archer, I'm surprised your mind isn't already made up after 1 hour in a J model.  Also asking the question here is a bit like asking Jim Jones if Kool-Aid would be a good choice of beverage for you .   Seriously though, if you were just doing short hamburger hops the rest of your life, there would be a strong pragmatic case to stick with the Archer.  The Mooney does that well also but is a serious traveling airplane.  Even for trips confined to the vastness of Texas,  you will end up viewing the PA-28 with repugnance after enjoying the extra speed, handling, climb rate, range, and cool factor of the Mooney. Under any circumstances, it's hard to imagine a CFI and commercial pilot choosing an Archer if he could easily afford a Mooney as his personal aircraft - the Archer is a basic trainer; the Mooney is a pilot's plane.  Expect your overall annual operating cost to go up 20-30%, but you get a lot in return. With its excellent avionics, that Archer will bring top dollar, particularly in today's market. The hassle and expense of finding a suitable Mooney and getting it sorted, including possibly upgrading avionics to what you want, is the major downside. Consider the vintage (pre-J) Vintage Mooneys also - the Cs, Es, and Fs definitely meet your mission and may help limit costs somewhat if that's a major consideration.  The market is tight so some flexibility on airframe may make shopping a lot easier.

Edited September 27, 2021 by DXB

[aviatoreb]

20 minutes ago, DXB said:

Given how much more fun the Mooney is to fly than an Archer, I'm surprised your mind isn't already made up after 1 hour in a J model.  Also asking the question here is a bit like asking Jim Jones if Kool-Aid would be a good choice of beverage for you .   Seriously though, if you were just doing short hamburger hops the rest of your life, there would be a strong pragmatic case to stick with the Archer.  The Mooney does that well also but is a serious traveling airplane.  Even for trips confined to the vastness of Texas,  you will end up viewing the PA-28 with repugnance after enjoying the extra speed, handling, climb rate, range, and cool factor of the Mooney. Under any circumstances, it's hard to imagine a CFI and commercial pilot choosing an Archer if he could easily afford a Mooney as his personal aircraft - the Archer is a basic trainer; the Mooney is a pilot's plane.  Expect your overall annual operating cost to go up 20-30%, but you get a lot in return. With its excellent avionics, that Archer will bring top dollar, particularly in today's market. The hassle and expense of finding a suitable Mooney and getting it sorted, including possibly upgrading avionics to what you want, is the major downside. Consider the vintage (pre-J) Vintage Mooneys also - the Cs, Es, and Fs definitely meet your mission and may help limit costs somewhat if that's a major consideration.  The market is tight so some flexibility on airframe may make shopping a lot easier.

I like Koolaid.

Facts are facts - for most of us, an airplane is an expensive impractical thing to buy.  I own one because its fantastically interesting, fun and sometimes very convenient.  Last weekend, I picked my son up in Lancaster PA (a 7 hr drive from way upstate NY near Canada - but 1.5 hrs at 200kts) then we went to Shenendoah, VA (another Mooney 1 hr instead of 4 hrs drive) for fishing.  Then the next day we fished some more, then back to Lancaster on an IFR flight plan on top after blasting through some 1500 ft ceilings, we got some steamed crabs, ate them, and then I was home before dark.

I so much bought into wow - I got a rocket.  I figure its for the wow, and this airplane floats my boat.

 

[Amelia]

I had the opportunity to fly a Cherokee 180 across the country and back twice, as a very partisan turbo Mooney pilot. The Piper was comfortable, but slow. Three hours was just about its limit. It gasped for air at 10,000. But as a practical, economical short-leg trip, it was excellent. As somebody else is paying most of your bills, my inclination would be to stay right where you are. Got the instrument ticket? Get while it’s cheap. Then in a couple of years, when you relocate, reevaluate. Will you be able to continue to leaseback your Archer in the new location? If so, +1 to Piper. How’s the insurance? Probably another Piper advantage. Hangar? +1 to Mooney. Longer trips? Another +1 to Mooney.. Nicely equipped? +1 more. 
A Mooney is a thing of joy. I do love my fast, efficient, comfortable, load-hauling 20S+, but cheap, it isn’t.  Maybe you should be patient at least until you can hangar it.

[Hank]

1 hour ago, DXB said:

Given how much more fun the Mooney is to fly than an Archer, I'm surprised your mind isn't already made up after 1 hour in a J model. . . . Consider the vintage (pre-J) Vintage Mooneys also - the Cs, Es, and Fs definitely meet your mission and may help limit costs somewhat if that's a major consideration.  The market is tight so some flexibility on airframe may make shopping a lot easier.

We really enjoy our C, which seems to true at at 145-148 KTAS at 7500-10,000 msl. Overall I average close to 9 gph block time, but on a long trip up high, I've come in around 8.5 gph. My full-fuel payload is 670 lb. [I leave 1/2" gap in the tanks for thermal expansion, and to make the math easy--300 lb. fuel]. I've flown 4:45 twice, once low into strong winds, and once with two stops and no top-off; both times I had 1:15 fuel left.

Besides, the C is available with either electric gear or manual. Mine's electric. Not much extra expense at annual, either, just $200-300. Nothing in the long run . . . .

Plus, the C has the stone s imple, easy-to-start O-360 that you're used to! 

[201er]

Speed makes the biggest difference in headwinds. In calm winds the 201 works out to 27 knots faster (155 vs 128) at top cruising speed. That's 21% faster. In a stiff 40 knot headwind, those extra 27 knots make the Mooney 31% faster.

This is especially pronounced when comparing to a skyhawk or earlier cherokee that do about 100 knots in cruise. 1.5x faster without wind but twice as fast in a strong headwind.

[philip_g]

I'm with Amelia. You have it good now. Stick with what you've got.

Sell the Cherokee in two years when you have to move and look at buying a Mooney wherever you land, depending on hangar space.

Edited September 27, 2021 by philip_g

[Hank]

12 minutes ago, 201er said:

Speed makes the biggest difference in headwinds. In calm winds the 201 works out to 27 knots faster (155 vs 128) at top cruising speed. That's 21% faster. In a stiff 40 knot headwind, those extra 27 knots make the Mooney 31% faster.

This is especially pronounced when comparing to a skyhawk or earlier cherokee that do about 100 knots in cruise. 1.5x faster without wind but twice as fast in a strong headwind.

In my first 4:45 flight in my C, my groundspeed was rarely above 100 knots, almost never above 110 knots, and bottomed out at 68 knots while climbing over terrain. I was indicating 143 mph at 10,000 msl with 68 knot groundspeed. What would the Archer have done there???

[aviatoreb]

Just now, Hank said:

In my first 4:45 flight in my C, my groundspeed was rarely above 100 knots, almost never above 110 knots, and bottomed out at 68 knots while climbing over terrain. I was indicating 143 mph at 10,000 msl with 68 knot groundspeed. What would the Archer have done there???

That is exactly where a fast airplane shines, is in the headwinds, even though we enjoy looking at big numbers when there is a tail wind.

Three weeks ago I had a 50kts head wind flying from Hyannis Port eastward home, which was during a period a hurricane had just past by.  Took a huge hit on the ground speed, but ... I was still getting there!  

Once I had a friend who had a piper cub and he said lets go vtol on a very windy day...and we did!  We flew 2 miles from the airport to my house ...barely...into a fierce wind, while I called my wife on the cell phone and asked her to get the kids outside (then small!) and look up for a little yellow airplane.  The winds were high enough and the plane slow enough that we were able to stop the GS to zero a thousand feet over the house and even go backward a little bit.  Good times with a little yellow airplane.

 

[dlthig]

1 hour ago, Amelia said:

I had the opportunity to fly a Cherokee 180 across the country and back twice, as a very partisan turbo Mooney pilot. The Piper was comfortable, but slow. Three hours was just about its limit. It gasped for air at 10,000. But as a practical, economical short-leg trip, it was excellent. As somebody else is paying most of your bills, my inclination would be to stay right where you are. Got the instrument ticket? Get while it’s cheap. Then in a couple of years, when you relocate, reevaluate. Will you be able to continue to leaseback your Archer in the new location? If so, +1 to Piper. How’s the insurance? Probably another Piper advantage. Hangar? +1 to Mooney. Longer trips? Another +1 to Mooney.. Nicely equipped? +1 more. 
A Mooney is a thing of joy. I do love my fast, efficient, comfortable, load-hauling 20S+, but cheap, it isn’t.  Maybe you should be patient at least until you can hangar it.

Amelia is a wise woman. It would be a cheaper proposition to rent something faster and see if the speed is worth the cost. Build a dummy profile in your flight planning software and see what you get is another option. Also, you are going to be very unhappy if you move in two years and can't get a hangar for your new plane. I've been on the waiting list in Charleston, SC for 4 years. I'm still about 2 out. No airplane and not in a hurry, but I digress. The 180/181 is a good compromise. 

[steingar]

If the OP is looking to get talked out of a Mooney methinks he came to the wrong place.