20C vs later versions, including 20J

[WildBlue]

All,

Did a cursory search of forums on this and Google. Now time to ask the experts….

 

While I’ve been looking at the joy of a 201, a 20C seems to be a fraction of the cost. So, from a pilot perspective, what would I be trading out and its implications:

- 180 hp vs 200 hp: fuel usage favorable in 180 hp; for about 20 knots less? (One particular 20C I’m lookin at says it has a lot of mods and arrived at same location with same settings as a 20J in negligible time)

— any option to upgrade to 200 hp during next engine overhaul?

 

- carbureted vs fuel injected: my buddy told me he much preferred a fuel injection during an IFR flight last winter

— Any option to change to a fuel injected during next engine overhaul?

 

- manual vs electric landing gear: I read the posts on here about false sense of security with the green landing gear light…. What else should I be thinking about? I would imagine the manual is much cheaper on maintenance too (as I’ve read)

 

- shorter second row in 20C: mission is primarily my wife and I. Maybe a once in a while trip with a person or two in the back

 

- “safety” differences?: wife is ok with spending more in the interest of “safety” (I have to explain how much more twins are to maintain, and that even they can be more dangerous in the wrong hands at low airspeeds!)

 

- what else am I missing in my considerations??

 

Thanks for the insight!!!

 

- Brian

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Browncbr1]

Brian, the cost of converting a o-360 to an io-360 doesn’t makes sense.  Lots of cowl work. 
 

an E model makes sense for your mission if you want LOP, better climb and speed than a C.  They are as fast and some faster than J models.  Manual gear is better and less MX IMHO. 

[DXB]

@WildBlue ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS:

- 180 hp vs 200 hp: fuel usage favorable in 180 hp; for about 20 knots less? (One particular 20C I’m lookin at says it has a lot of mods and arrived at same location with same settings as a 20J in negligible time)

[Not quite 20kts difference even between the stock planes - and my well modded C has become a solid 150-155kt cruiser with just an O-360]

— any option to upgrade to 200 hp during next engine overhaul?

[There's no 200 hp upgrade to the carb'd engine itself - a Powerflow exhaust does give the carb'd planes a substantial power increase, not so much for the fuel injected ones - that's probably the simplest path to more horsepower for the O-360-A1D.  Electronic ignition (Surefly) with timing advance can also a bit of horsepower in cruise]

- carbureted vs fuel injected: my buddy told me he much preferred a fuel injection during an IFR flight last winter

[Misinformation from your friend.  All you need is a carb temp gauge and run carb heat partially open with carb temp above 40F in the clouds/rain. Even if you forget, the O-360-A1D carb configuration is very ice resistant. I fly mine in IMC all the time - no issue at all]

— Any option to change to a fuel injected during next engine overhaul?

[An STC does exist to put an IO-360 in a C model but obviously requires changing many other components beyond the engine, which makes it impractical cost wise]

- manual vs electric landing gear: I read the posts on here about false sense of security with the green landing gear light…. What else should I be thinking about? I would imagine the manual is much cheaper on maintenance too (as I’ve read)

[J bar has a steeper learning curve, but most who fly regularly with a J bar are passionately devoted to it and finds problems with it to be rare. The manual gear is a tad easier to maintain, but I think the real difference is that most folks who fly the electric gear experience some kind of in flight drama with it eventually.]

- shorter second row in 20C: mission is primarily my wife and I. Maybe a once in a while trip with a person or two in the back

[The short body planes are perfect for up to 3 people unless both front seaters are tall. The rear seat passenger can sit side saddle for extra leg room if needed.  Carrying 4 takes too much careful weight calculation and becomes a total drag for two adults in the back for a longer trip.]

- “safety” differences?: wife is ok with spending more in the interest of “safety” (I have to explain how much more twins are to maintain, and that even they can be more dangerous in the wrong hands at low airspeeds!)

[Carb'd O-360 is considered slightly more bullet proof than IO-360 - no chance of clogged injector drama, which leads to much more distress in a 4 cylinder than a 6 cylinder if it happens]

- what else am I missing in my considerations??

[See my summary below, pasted from another thread]

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

IO-360 E model with balanced injectors

Pro: 20 more horsepower, can lean an extra 1 gph in cruise running LOP

Con: potentially harder to start hot, risk very bad day from from clogged injector, replacement cylinders cost extra 1K ea over O-360, substantially higher overhaul cost

O-360 C model

Pro: tad more "bulletproof" without injectors, more economical to replace cylinders or overhaul, trivially easy hot starts

Con: 20 less horsepower, can't reliably run LOP, need for more careful attention to CHTs due to crappy baffle design, carb heat management (though pretty much a nonissue, particularly if you have a carb temp gauge)

Edited October 9, 2021 by DXB

[ArtVandelay]

The J was only 12 knots faster in ROP cruise.  159 KTAS vs. 147.  Both were stock aerodynamically but our C has a PowerFlow exhaust and a fresh roller cam engine, which between them added 4 knots to the C.  The J’s engine was running strong but approaching TBO when I sold it.  I generally flew the J LOP at 140 KTAS or a little better at 8 GPH and I get around 135 KTAS at 9 GPH at peak in the C.

There was something wrong with your J, I had similar performance before I overhauled my engine, I’m now closer to book, but still a few knots less.
I would expect 150 KTAS at 8GPH at 12000’ running LOP.
BTW, The best way to test your engine (and eliminate most of aerodynamic drag) is to try to climb to your service ceiling. Because you’re going slow it’s just a function of engine HP.
If the C or E is modded, because of its lighter weight, it can really perform well.

[MikeOH]

Others above have provided good answers.

When I was shopping I was asking the same questions you are.  I ended up with an F and electric gear.  As I researched I found that I liked the idea of LOP and the extra 20 HP; so, that narrowed it to an E, F or J.  The J just didn't seem like the efficient price/performance combination; read that as I am too cheap to pay a premium for a few knots!

I was pretty hard-over with having  manual gear but, after seeing too many dogs, when my F came up for sale I made the concession to electric gear.  I could have gone E or F.  As far as maintenance, I suppose the inspections do add some cost over that for manual gear but the difference, in my case, has been lost in the rounding.  IOW, if that kind of cost difference is a big deal then, IMHO, ownership is not for you!  I flew a rental M20B for many years and absolutely loved the manual gear so, yeah, every time I flip the gear switch on my F I hold my breath, even after 4 years of ownership!  Thing is, I'm beginning to believe that the electric gear failures we hear about are because owners skip the gear inspection/lube service.  Like any other piece of machinery, proper PM is essential to reliability.

My F has most all of the mods: gap seals all around, cowl mod, 201 windscreen, dorsal fin, power flow exhaust.  Anyway, I see about 143 kts between 8K-10K, WOT, LOP at 8-9 gph.  Probably 5-10 kts slower than a J.

With no real data to back up my opinion, I can't imagine there is a statistically significant safety difference between ANY Mooney model.  That is a consideration I never even thought of, let alone took into account when shopping.

Good luck!

[Hank]

We both love our C. It has the 201 windshield and wingtip, but runs regularly 145-148 KTAS at altitude. Mostly I get 9gph block time, but on 3 hour XCs at 8-10K, that can drop to ~8.5 gph.

Electric gear and flaps became standard in 1969, and my C has both, along with higher V speeds (flaps = 125 mph; gear = 120 mph; yellow = 175 mph; Vne = 200 mph). It's nice keeping my drink and lunch between the front seats!

Just find one regularly flown and well taken care of, and a C / E / F / J will do you well.

[ArtVandelay]

Js will appreciate better because of all the models C thru J, J is the most iconic and is considered the first modern Mooney.
So if you plan on upgrading it (it’s your forever plane), I would get a J.
There’s a 66 C available for $37K, and 2 78 Js for $160K and $170K to give you an idea of the price range.

[MikeOH]

An F gets you >95% to a J, so compare F and J pricing and ask yourself if the premium is worth it.  If it's a 'forever' plane then resale shouldn't enter into the evaluation.

[201er]

8 hours ago, WildBlue said:

- what else am I missing in my considerations??

You’re missing a lot. For one thing the panels will be totally different. Most C models will have the cluster panel and lack much avionics, engine monitors, auto pilot, etc. Depends on your mission. If you’re looking to do casual VFR weekend flying for 1-2 people, the C is great. If you intend to be doing a lot of IFR, flying more people, etc you may want a later plane.

Age is another factor. You’ll find that C older models are more likely to be run out needing engine overhaul, paint, interior, tank reseal, etc. Many owners discover it’s cheaper to sell the plane and by one the way they want than to refurbish theirs. If you are content with it being an older and likely more worn out plane without upgrades, it’s a superb deal. However you might find that converting the engine, panel, etc to more modern may cost more than getting a plane that already has all that.

[Hank]

Cs received modern panels beginning in 1969. Many have been upgraded with WAAS GPS and other toys. Oscar's forever C is mostly glass panel, I believe--he flies it around Central America and overwater to Florida. 

Some have shotgun panels, some have been modernized. It all depends on the exact plane that you're looking at.

[201er]

3 minutes ago, Hank said:

Cs received modern panels beginning in 1969. Many have been upgraded with WAAS GPS and other toys. Oscar's forever C is mostly glass panel, I believe--he flies it around Central America and overwater to Florida. 

Some have shotgun panels, some have been modernized. It all depends on the exact plane that you're looking at.

I don’t disagree there’s a lot of nice ones. They’re just much less likely to turn up on the market or they sell for not all that much less than a J when they do. Point is you get what you pay for. 

[VinceCB]

I bought an E model last year and have been very happy with it. That said, it was built years before the Beatles split up (1966) and that does come with higher risk of corrosion and fatigue on the airframe. That risk can be mitigated but not eliminated with a good prebuy.
I would have like a J but they were frankly out of my budget. I'm happy to live with that risk if it means I can fly.

[ArtVandelay]

Remember a couple of things:
1. You’ll likely get the money if not more you paid to buy it when it comes time to sell. So you’ll only be losing whatever money you could have made if it was invested.
2. Much of the costs are model independent (except some maintenance items like gear, turbos, etc): hangar, insurance (model independent but price dependent), database updates, fuel, and much of the maintenance will be the same.

So in the end, if you buy a C or a J, fly it for 10 years and then sell it, the total out of pocket money will be about the same.

[DXB]

On 10/9/2021 at 8:02 PM, 201er said:

If you’re looking to do casual VFR weekend flying for 1-2 people, the C is great. If you intend to be doing a lot of IFR, flying more people, etc you may want a later plane.

Age is another factor. You’ll find that C older models are more likely to be run out needing engine overhaul, paint, interior, tank reseal, etc. Many owners discover it’s cheaper to sell the plane and by one the way they want than to refurbish theirs.

It's all about maintenance and upgrades. A C model is every bit as much a long haul IFR machine if it's been modernized over the years - that's how I treat my heavily updated C, which can also hit close to J speeds at this point.  And the stock avionics on a 70s or 80s J will look almost as long in the tooth at this point as those in a factory C, and they have the same maintenance gotchas.  

[skydvrboy]

On 10/9/2021 at 10:38 AM, WildBlue said:

- 180 hp vs 200 hp: fuel usage favorable in 180 hp; for about 20 knots less?

I'm not quite sure how you intended this, but just so you are aware, the 200 hp uses less fuel than the 180 hp because it can be leaned further.

 

On 10/9/2021 at 10:38 AM, WildBlue said:

mission is primarily my wife and I. Maybe a once in a while trip with a person or two in the back

This tells me any of the models are suitable for your mission.  You would do well to pay more attention to how each individual plane was maintained, flown regularly, and updated over the years than to worry about any minor differences between models.

[icurnmedic]

I have an F. My mechanic has a C. My payload with full fuel, 64 g is 649#. His payload with full fuel(50g I think)is 639#. Maybe a few knots slower but still darn good performance. 
Thomas Church 

[rbridges]

On 10/9/2021 at 8:13 PM, 201er said:

I don’t disagree there’s a lot of nice ones. They’re just much less likely to turn up on the market or they sell for not all that much less than a J when they do. Point is you get what you pay for. 

I agree.  A lot of nice vintage planes are "forever" planes because the owner knows they'll never get back their investment. Not as many of the really updated ones are as likely to hit the market IMO. 

[Hank]

13 minutes ago, icurnmedic said:

I have an F. My mechanic has a C. My payload with full fuel, 64 g is 649#. His payload with full fuel(50g I think)is 639#. Maybe a few knots slower but still darn good performance. 
Thomas Church 

The useful load of my C is 969 lb. On the rare occasion I fill to the cap vs. leaving 1/2" down for thermal expansion, that takes 52 gal x 6 lb = 312 lb away; normally it's 300 lb of fuel leaving 669 lb useful load.  

[carusoam]

I traded out a fully tired M20C for a nicely appointed M20R…

The cost difference was about 10:1….

Stop, don’t look any further….

 

Getting the dilapidated M20C up to the spec of the M20R that day… would have brought that ratio back to 2:1…..

Many people are really happy with their M20Cs….

Many people also get their feet wet in airplane ownership with an M20C….

If you can’t see the value difference between an M20C and M20J… enjoy buying the M20C… don’t look any further…

 

Everyone is going to be different in how they decide what Mooney they are going to purchase…

Enjoy knowing you selected the plane you want, for the reasons you wanted it…

Oddly, some of the costs of owning an M20R are the same as owning an M20C…

Select the plane you think you can get a lifetime of ownership out of…. And you have a winner…. Judgement day on your choices are still decades away…

 

OK, now let’s talk opportunity lost costs…. With examples… (because Tom mentioned it…)

what do I miss out on if i spend a stack of AMUs on a machine…?

What if… I invested that same stack in the S&P500….

The S&P500 has gone up an average of 10.1% every year since 1928….

The rule of 72… tells us about how long it will take to double that stack of cash using the interest rate provided above… 72/int rate = years to double… (simplified equation, that really works, ask your MBA friends)

So, if I wait to buy the plane, invest while I wait… this stack will double in about 7+ years…

Buy the plane in 7+ years, and I still have the same stack of cash leftover….

For more info on the subject… look up compounded interest and how it works…

Hmmmmmm… sounds financially intelligent… but what did I miss out on over the ensuing 7+ years…

 

One has to live… life isn’t always going to be about building a stack of cash…

What it costs to raise a child in the USA… according to Alexa… 233amu (go ahead and ask her)

That doesn’t include college expenses…

Know that if you explain the rule of 72 to your children…

And how nice the Mooney could have been if you didn’t have children… and invested that money instead…

You won’t win any finance awards… and your horned parenting award may look really strange…

Go Mooney!

PP thoughts only, not a finance guru…

Best regards,

-a-

[Oscar Avalle]

On 10/9/2021 at 6:08 PM, Hank said:

Cs received modern panels beginning in 1969. Many have been upgraded with WAAS GPS and other toys. Oscar's forever C is mostly glass panel, I believe--he flies it around Central America and overwater to Florida. 

Some have shotgun panels, some have been modernized. It all depends on the exact plane that you're looking at.

Hank, indeed, my forever C is now totally glass. I fly it around the East Coast and while I am serving abroad in Central America. I was reading the posts and I was thinking what is it that I don't have in my C that I would like to have and  would motivate me to upgrade?

First: Space in the back seat... Would be nice, but my plane is OK for three. Four makes it a bit crowded and heavy. But then how often do I really need space for four... my wife hardly ever wants to fly with me. So it is mainly my two sons and I. 

Second: Speed. My C is among the slower ones in the group. I would love to be able to plan for 150kts... normally I plan 135kts. Have tried many things but until now no avail. But then, do you really need those knots... ??? 

Third: One thing that I really would like to have is a turbo. I feel that that upgrade would make a difference. I fly internationally quite often, and MEA of 10,000 feet are normal. If you add to that temperature you normal C runs out of power rather easily. I checked on the turbo upgrade and very hard to get...

Fourth: Panel... I decided that I wanted to have a solid IFR platform that would allow me to fly all around. My original C was not well equipped for that mission. So I started to upgrade the plane and here I am. I spend so much money on it that I would never be able to recuperate what I put into it, but then, I like flying around with all the available tools. 

Five: Looks. There are some very nice C around. I was lucky to get a good one, but after owning it for some years I decided to repaint it and upgrade the interior. It looks even nicer. 

To summarize: If I had to start from scratch I would try to extend myself and buy a E or a J, but otherwise, I am very happy with my C and I plan to playing and adjusting it over time to make it a even better platform for my mission.

Oscar 

[carusoam]

A perfect forever-M20C Oscar!

Best regards,

-a-