Turbo VS non-turbo maintenance costs

[A64Pilot]

You know Retracts are more complex and cost money to maintain, same for a constant speed prop.

But if I had to fly a 172, I’d just about rather drive, but many love their 172’s.

Turbo is just another thing to maintain, like the gear and the prop, for me as I live in the SE and only very rarely go on long trips, a turbo would be about ad useful as TKS.

So it’s not just money, it’s would you really use it enough to justify it, for me the answer is no, and we always travel with the little dog, and while dog 02 masks exist, I don’t think we will go there.

[AGL Aviation]

On 3/17/2022 at 11:05 AM, aviatoreb said:

In the rocket at least, the turbo is in such an annoying difficult to get at location, the the hours to r&r are greater than the cost of the overhaul itself.  So I would say at least double what you just quoted for cost.

You are right about the difficulty. What I quoted for cost was: for the inspection only in increased time and the cost range for whoever the turbo is sent to based off ones we have sent off thus far. R&R is an additional cost and varies from aircraft to aircraft. Certainly a beast.

[Tx_Aggie]

I’ll participate on the non-turbo side. I bought a 1980 J model while also looking K models. I initially flew in the 9-11k altitudes to get above the Texas turbulence, so I figured a K would be great. However this plane is my first owned plane and I didn’t want it to be a money pit that would sour me on ownership. 
 

I decided to go with J because of the 155 ktas / ~11 gph performance, and figured if it didn’t work out I could sell a J faster than I could sell the K. 
 

I couldn’t be happier with the J, now two years in. Fortunately it was well taken care of before me and engine recently overhauled. Also with a family now and oxygen being thinner at the higher altitudes, the highest we go now is 9k. We mostly fly in the mornings also to reduce contending with turbulence. Often times I find decent tail winds in the 5-7k range in the morning anyway, and at those altitudes everyone is happy. 
 

My annuals for regular items have been very reasonable with Don Maxwell now since I bought it. It’s important to have a reputable Mooney shop regularly wrench on it - that plus learning optimal engine settings will cause maintenance to be reasonable affordable. 
 

if I had to do it all over again, knowing what I know now, I’d still go with the J model. I think now that I know what to expect on maintenance and cost, I could sell and buy up; but I am content with the bird. The J is excellent at the performance metrics mentioned above and it’ll grab every bit of tail wind that exists. I frequently see gs of 170-180 kts when heading east and respectable performance in headwind scenarios. 
hope that helps. 

[M20F]

If you got the money (Don Kaye formula) do what you shall.  
 
For the vast majority on this forum though a C172 is the more practical airplane.  Most of us though don’t buy planes to be practical. 
 
It really boils down to mission.  Turbos generally don’t do much for you till you get in the flight levels or if you are operating maximum gross weight out of Leadville at 90F consistently.  I pick up 20-30KTS of TAS at FL190.  Unless have favorable winds and a long distance though it isn’t worth it.  I have a F with a RayJay so the expense is pretty negligible.  I see little value though moving up to a turbo Mooney for my mission.  
 
If you want a Mooney the J is probably the penultimate product they made.  Everything after that is just a lot more money for very little ROI (including the Ovation).  Then again as I said most don’t buy based on anything but what they want which is cool.