Non-turbo Mooneys; your preference if you could find it.

[DCarlton]

A lot of great discussion here.  The trade space has been very well defined.  I didn't realize how much folks appreciated the useful load on the F's and yes it meets my mission.  Continuing to make this plane better would be enjoyable.  But putting future money into a newer airframe would be satisfying too.  I enjoy the hardware and maintenance as much as the flying.  My mechanic has been fantastic for many years, but I think I need to considering taking my '67 to a well established MSC for a complete Mooney focused inspection (not an annual) and then make recommendations as to where they would make improvements.  I have a laundry list as well.  Then decide whether to put the money, into a known or a newer unknown.  Fuel tank reseal, panel improvements (not necessarily avionics but sheet metal), blasting and panting the steel parts (gear, elevator attachments, etc) and replacing the fasteners are on my current to-do list.  At some point I need to fly a long body too.  It may come down to opportunity and right now there's not much; good Mooneys are flying off the shelves.  Appreciate the discussion.   

[Niko182]

2 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

A lot of great discussion here.  The trade space has been very well defined.  I didn't realize how much folks appreciated the useful load on the F's and yes it meets my mission.  Continuing to make this plane better would be enjoyable.  But putting future money into a newer airframe would be satisfying too.  I enjoy the hardware and maintenance as much as the flying.  My mechanic has been fantastic for many years, but I think I need to considering taking my '67 to a well established MSC for a complete Mooney focused inspection (not an annual) and then make recommendations as to where they would make improvements.  I have a laundry list as well.  Then decide whether to put the money, into a known or a newer unknown.  Fuel tank reseal, panel improvements (not necessarily avionics but sheet metal), blasting and panting the steel parts (gear, elevator attachments, etc) and replacing the fasteners are on my current to-do list.  At some point I need to fly a long body too.  It may come down to opportunity and right now there's not much; good Mooneys are flying off the shelves.  Appreciate the discussion.   

Im up the street from you and in okb or crq every 2 to 3 weeks. Shoot me a pm

[Shadrach]

26 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

A lot of great discussion here.  The trade space has been very well defined.  I didn't realize how much folks appreciated the useful load on the F's and yes it meets my mission.  Continuing to make this plane better would be enjoyable.  But putting future money into a newer airframe would be satisfying too.  I enjoy the hardware and maintenance as much as the flying.  My mechanic has been fantastic for many years, but I think I need to considering taking my '67 to a well established MSC for a complete Mooney focused inspection (not an annual) and then make recommendations as to where they would make improvements.  I have a laundry list as well.  Then decide whether to put the money, into a known or a newer unknown.  Fuel tank reseal, panel improvements (not necessarily avionics but sheet metal), blasting and panting the steel parts (gear, elevator attachments, etc) and replacing the fasteners are on my current to-do list.  At some point I need to fly a long body too.  It may come down to opportunity and right now there's not much; good Mooneys are flying off the shelves.  Appreciate the discussion.   

I can tell you without doubt that it only makes financial sense to renew an old airplane if you enjoy and have some aptitude for restoration work. Much of the free time in my adult life has been spent bringing old things back to some semblance of their original form.  I would be bead blasting, painting and turning wrenches with or without an airplane so there is little downside for me.

[brad]

Great discussion.  I had my first 1975 F in 2001.  Upgraded to 231 in 2005.  Market tanked.  Sold 231 to guy across the taxiway.  Flew my sons Grumman til market came back.  Bought back my 1975 F in 2011.  Since then, upgraded paint, interior, avionics, Marquis engine.  I ask myself often if I should move back up.  My trips are mostly under 300 NM with an 800 NM to Mexico twice a year.  For the Mexico 400 NM legs, I leave before the 231 and land within minutes of him.  So, after looking at Ovations, 252s, Bravos, I have finally (today anyway) decided the F is my lifetime plane.

[Shadrach]

18 hours ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

Exact same here, Ross.  If you don’t enjoy restoration and making things better you really are better trading up.   
 

To @larryb’s point above, he is exactly right. Having owned a J for 12 years and now the C that my dad and I together have owned for almost 40 years, rear seat leg room notwithstanding, it was the little intangible things about the J that really made it better than the C, at least for my mission requirements.  Not the windshield and cowling and extra 12 knots.  But those subjectives are real. Whether they are worth what they cost is a question that only we individually can answer.  

True but many of those little intangibles are low hanging fruit.  A vintage Mooney with a 5 year old interior upgrade is going to be better than just about any J with original interior. Any one flying a 20+ (much less a 50+) year old airplane with original sound proofing is way past due for an update. Insulating/Sound proofing the cabin was one of the biggest bangs for the buck of any upgrade. On Saturday, my back seater was comfortable in shirt sleeves at 9500'.

Edited November 25, 2021 by Shadrach

[Shadrach]

5 minutes ago, brad said:

Great discussion.  I had my first 1975 F in 2001.  Upgraded to 231 in 2005.  Market tanked.  Sold 231 to guy across the taxiway.  Flew my sons Grumman til market came back.  Bought back my 1975 F in 2011.  Since then, upgraded paint, interior, avionics, Marquis engine.  I ask myself often if I should move back up.  My trips are mostly under 300 NM with an 800 NM to Mexico twice a year.  For the Mexico 400 NM legs, I leave before the 231 and land within minutes of him.  So, after looking at Ovations, 252s, Bravos, I have finally (today anyway) decided the F is my lifetime plane.

This is the case under most scenarios. Beyond bragging rights, there is not a huge delta for most missions.  The caveat being that mountains and weather can make what are small differences under normal conditions much more significant under conditions where there is a need for high altitude climb performance or an unexpected icing encounter.

[DCarlton]

Who would you guys recommend in the West as the most knowledgable Mooney shop to perform a thorough airframe inspection on my '67 and make suggestions for phased improvements?  Not an annual but an inspection focused on the airframe and gear?  I'm aware of a few but I also know there have been ownership changes.  

Back when Russel was still with us I made a couple of trips to SWTA but haven't been to a Mooney shop since.  Thanks.  Again, appreciate the discussion.  

Edited November 24, 2021 by DCarlton

[ilovecornfields]

5 hours ago, DCarlton said:

Who would you guys recommend in the West as the most knowledgable Mooney shop to perform a thorough airframe inspection on my '67 and make suggestions for phased improvements?  Not an annual but an inspection focused on the airframe and gear?  I'm aware of a few but I also know there have been ownership changes.  

Back when Russel was still with us I made a couple of trips to SWTA but haven't been to a Mooney shop since.  Thanks.  Again, appreciate the discussion.  

I would be pretty comfortable with Top Gun in Stockton or Advanced Aircraft in Troutdale doing a prebuy. 

[M20F-1968]

21 hours ago, Shadrach said:

 There are faster, more capable Mooneys that look like a huge upgrade on paper. However, in terms of performance yield for a given input the performance is similar. Some just have the ability to go a bit faster on a lot more gas. For most missions, I think the real world differences from the lowest to the highest powered N/A M20s aren't that huge. The good news is the large displacement birds can be throttled back to near the same speed/efficiency ratio.   If all weather capability is needed, that changes things a bit.   There are no low performance Mooneys. Just trade-offs in space, speed, fuel burn and UL.  If you have one the currently works well for your mission, it's probably the right one.  

My F (functionally really a J) is a great combination of efficiency, simplicity and economy.  The vintage systems, Johnson bar and hydraulic flaps, side-step the complexity and maintenance troubleshooting of the more modern systems.  (I just sent my Precise Flight series 2000 speedbrakes in due to a sensor failure.  Turns out, Precise Flight has had problems with the sensors and has gone to microswitches.  Cost for repair about $2000.)  I am on the edge between continuing to work and simply retiring.  My present plane is likely the best of the choices for a retirement plane.  The turbonormalizer turns it into a very different airplane than either the original F or J.  The turbonormalizer should be brought back at a reasonable cost as it is a viable choice v. trading for a factory turbo.  Maintenance of a turbonormalized airplane is much less than a turbo boosted airplane.  The operating costs make it easier to continue flying.  At 10,000 feet it is a 160 kt airplane at 75% power, 10.5-11.0 gph.  With everything full forward it is a 168 kt plane.  At 17,000 - 18,000 it is in the 170 - 180 kt plane.  With 90 gallons it has long legs.  LOP of course range is much less.  UL 993.  Yes it is slower than an Ovation, but not considerably slower.  When considering it against a Brand P (I do not want to use that word on this forum) Arrow using essentially the same engine it is about 30% faster.  I am still impressed with what the The Mooney brothers accomplished in their day which has stood the test of time.

John Breda

[M20F-1968]

1 hour ago, M20F-1968 said:

  LOP of course range is much less.  

John Breda

How did I make that error.  Of course, LOP range is considerably more!

John Breda

[Brian E.]

21 hours ago, Shadrach said:

A vintage Mooney with a 5 year old interior upgrade is going to be better than just about any J with original interior. Any one flying a 20+ (much less a 50+) year old airplane with original sound proofing is way past due for an update. Insulating/Sound proofing the cabin was one of the biggest bangs for the buck of any upgrade. On Saturday, my back seater was comfortable in shirt sleeves at 9500'.

@Shadrach Ross -- do you have any details of your soundproofing/insulating project?  Who did you buy the materials from, how long did it take and any pics?

 

[DCarlton]

Continuing this thread a little more if folks are interested...  I've noticed that there seems to be no preference or mention of more desirable production years for the J or Ovation.  Are there any years that are considered the holy grail; the ultimate keeper?  Or has it been too long to matter because condition and modifications overshadow the production year.   

[Shadrach]

3 hours ago, Brian E. said:

@Shadrach Ross -- do you have any details of your soundproofing/insulating project?  Who did you buy the materials from, how long did it take and any pics?

 

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/soundproofinstall.php
 

I used this in 3/4”. It would take a photo (which I don’t have) to see how thorough we were. The only uncovered area is where steel meets aluminum.