Mooney mods

[TC19]

Been patiently looking for an F for awhile and I keep seeing a cheap G statesman in the classifieds. I know they’re useful load sucks and they’re slow (in Mooney terms) but it sent me down the rabbit hole curious if there were ever any upgrades done to these poor things as far as dropping something 200-300hp in them? It also got me wondering what the K started out as? Was it a J that developed into the 231, 252, 305 or the converted 261?? As a hypothetical project does anyone know of a modded statesman or just for fun what does everyone think about going crazy on a poor neglected G

[Guest]

I believe that LASAR had/has an STC to install a 200HP engine in C and G models.

Clarence

[KSMooniac]

I know of a G that has the J windscreen, cowl closure, wing root fairings and probably some other airframe mods. Tight baffling, one electronic ignition, and is well-rigged. Trues out at 148 or 149 knots now! That is way, way better than my only experience in a ragged-out G 20 years ago or more (135 kts).

All Mooneys are a bit different, but the potential is there. I would still choose an F or J or K, but a G is better than no Mooney! Especially if the price is right.

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk

[TC19]

16 minutes ago, KSMooniac said:

I know of a G that has the J windscreen, cowl closure, wing root fairings and probably some other airframe mods. Tight baffling, one electronic ignition, and is well-rigged. Trues out at 148 or 149 knots now! That is way, way better than my only experience in a ragged-out G 20 years ago or more (135 kts).

All Mooneys are a bit different, but the potential is there. I would still choose an F or J or K, but a G is better than no Mooney! Especially if the price is right.

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk
 

The price is right around where the C’s are. It needs some work and the instruments are dated but I always enjoy odd ball projects, I’d love an E but my wife and I are both tall and in the rare occasion the kids come home from college they are both 6’+ so a mid body is a must. I’ve decided It’s a Mooney or bust with the soul purpose of shutting up my cousin with his clapped out Bonnanza 35, and my buddy in his Comanche 250. It’s turned into a sub 100k friendly battle lol

[A64Pilot]

Almost always it much cheaper to buy the airplane you want as opposed to buying one and modifying it.

[Utah20Gflyer]

I have a moderately modded g model with everything essentially other than the J windshield.  It does 145 knots which is respectable considering the low fuel burn.  Useful load is about 865 lbs and increasing as I do upgrades.  I think by the time I’m done I’ll get it into the upper 800s.   I wouldn’t count a g model out as they are good planes and perform well considering the power plant.  It’s faster than any Piper Arrow even if it has the 200hp engine.   If you get one with the Johnson bar and in good condition they represent the least expensive to own and operate complex airplane that’s still fast enough to get places and has good backseat legroom.   They are in my opinion the most utilitarian model of Mooney ever produced and I am not biased at all…

[TC19]

4 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

Almost always it much cheaper to buy the airplane you want as opposed to buying one and modifying it.

I agree 100% however my situation is a little different than most. I build parts for a lot of experimentals, do quite a bit of airframe welding and I’m an automotive coach builder so I get calls once in awhile to make aluminum cowlings, fairings and other miscellaneous panels. I can keep most of the project in house. (Full machine, welding, paint, and upholstery shop).  the only tricky part would be finding the right STC’s for the mods. My local AP will help me out with most anything no matter how crazy it seems lol

[TC19]

1 hour ago, Utah20Gflyer said:

I have a moderately modded g model with everything essentially other than the J windshield.  It does 145 knots which is respectable considering the low fuel burn.  Useful load is about 865 lbs and increasing as I do upgrades.  I think by the time I’m done I’ll get it into the upper 800s.   I wouldn’t count a g model out as they are good planes and perform well considering the power plant.  It’s faster than any Piper Arrow even if it has the 200hp engine.   If you get one with the Johnson bar and in good condition they represent the least expensive to own and operate complex airplane that’s still fast enough to get places and has good backseat legroom.   They are in my opinion the most utilitarian model of Mooney ever produced and I am not biased at all…

That’s awesome! I’m pleasantly surprised to see both posts of the G’s doing far better than their published numbers. I see your in Utah, any chance I could come check it out? 

[TC19]

53 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

As you alluded to above, the biggest problem with the G model is that the factory entirely unnecessarily and seemingly punitively saddled it with a 50 pound lower gross weight than the C model with the same power has.  This gives them useful loads that don’t really allow their owners to take full advantage of their increased rear seat leg and luggage room.   It makes no sense to me why the factory did this other than to promote sales of their flagship F model at the time.   But it is what it is.

As far as power is concerned, a PowerFlow exhaust can make up a good percentage of the delta between the G and the F models.  You’ll never be able to fly LOP, though, which is what I miss post about my previous J model.  64 gallon bladders can give you the F’s fuel capacity, but at the expense of useful load, which G owners can least afford.  I have a PowerFlow exhaust and 64 gallon bladders on my current C model and still have over 1000 pound useful load, on the other hand, but I’ll never be able to take full advantage of it because I’m 6’4” and my C model is a three seater at best with me at the controls.  

I would buy a G model in a minute because I don’t need to carry over 850 pounds anyway, but that being the case the G’s increased rear seat leg and baggage room would be wasted on me so I’m glad I have a C. I’m guessing this very conundrum is why the G only lasted a few years.  At his point, though, airframe condition / lack of corrosion is really the most important factor.   If you find a clean and well maintained G I certainly wouldn’t rule it out.

Oh, the performance delta between all of the four cylinder Lycoming-powered Mooneys, includIng the J model, is exaggerated.  Don’t worry so much about that.

Most of my flying will be just the wife and I, when I do take the kids I’ll just have to add a couple fuel stops so I can deal with the useful load being light. I would love a 67F with the twisted wing and flush rivet’s, Really the G being a misfit might work to my advantage being on average 40k cheaper than an comparable F. I’m hoping I can find an STC to drop in sometime around 210-230hp. like I mentioned above I’m locked in a friendly battle with a couple friends and they would never expect to get spanked by a Statesman haha! This is all just thinking out loud but I’d like to see 175-178kts… that being said I haven’t looked to see what the VNO or VNE are lol

[Fly Boomer]

1 hour ago, TC19 said:

I’d like to see 175-178kts

Unlikely without a turbocharger.

[MikeOH]

28 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said:

Unlikely without a turbocharger.

I'm just going to go with "unlikely" regardless!  To get there you're going to need ALL the mods to turn it into a 201/231 airframe.  Even if that is possible, the time and effort required with the owner doing ALL the work....how long is that going to take???  Maybe, if you just 'love working on stuff' more than flying, it's a good plan??

These threads seem to show up occasionally, but it always seems the 'just below the surface' goal is to 'save money' by putting in sweat equity.  I doubt that works out very well most all of the time.  But, if it does, in the scheme of aircraft ownership and operation, it's going to be a pittance; the 'buy in' price is just the beginning!  IMHO, up-front money to get what you want is the smart move.  We're not flipppin' houses, here

[TC19]

1 hour ago, Fly Boomer said:

Unlikely without a turbocharger.

 

40 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

I'm just going to go with "unlikely" regardless!  To get there you're going to need ALL the mods to turn it into a 201/231 airframe.  Even if that is possible, the time and effort required with the owner doing ALL the work....how long is that going to take???  Maybe, if you just 'love working on stuff' more than flying, it's a good plan??

These threads seem to show up occasionally, but it always seems the 'just below the surface' goal is to 'save money' by putting in sweat equity.  I doubt that works out very well most all of the time.  But, if it does, in the scheme of aircraft ownership and operation, it's going to be a pittance; the 'buy in' price is just the beginning!  IMHO, up-front money to get what you want is the smart move.  We're not flipppin' houses, here

Seems like this comment is just standard operating procedure for most pilots to post on any discussion for vintage planes. Did you miss the part that I build parts for experimentals, coach smith, own a machine shop, upholstery shop, welding shop, paint shop and the major of the build would be done in house? I’m not “flipping houses” I’m in the performance industry. 

[David Lloyd]

Wish mine would go that fast.  Not impossible but a lot of work.

 

Brian Seeley Mooney.pdf

[MikeOH]

2 hours ago, TC19 said:

 

Seems like this comment is just standard operating procedure for most pilots to post on any discussion for vintage planes. Did you miss the part that I build parts for experimentals, coach smith, own a machine shop, upholstery shop, welding shop, paint shop and the major of the build would be done in house? I’m not “flipping houses” I’m in the performance industry. 

Nope.

Did you miss the part about, "Do you want to work on a plane, or FLY one?"  I think you underestimate the difference in proper documentation/DER/paperwork for a CERTIFIED aircraft vs. experimentals or autos.  An example: you can't change SUN VISORS without an STC and logbook entry.

But, prove me wrong: come back in 6 mos. with a gorgeously restored G that trues out at 175kts and only cost you $10K in parts...and I'll happily eat my words

[TC19]

45 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

Nope.

Did you miss the part about, "Do you want to work on a plane, or FLY one?"  I think you underestimate the difference in proper documentation/DER/paperwork for a CERTIFIED aircraft vs. experimentals or autos.  An example: you can't change SUN VISORS without an STC and logbook entry.

But, prove me wrong: come back in 6 mos. with a gorgeously restored G that trues out at 175kts and only cost you $10K in parts...and I'll happily eat my words

100k budget not 10 and I mentioned that I need to look into the STC’s. Starting with a 40-45k G leaves a lot of room to play, excluding work to the panel,  but that goes a long ways for motor, paint, interior and speed mods. Most motors in question can be bought in the 45k range. The plane I’m looking into already has a new 3 blade hartzell prop,  I found an SCT to put a 200hp lycoming in the G which would get around 155-160kts which would be OK but wouldn’t really fit in with my mission (to destroy a bonanza at 100k) it’s a little  slow, but I’ve read that there’s an STC to turn an F into a missile which trues at 180kts. That’s why this I started out asking about all the different conversions G,F,J,K, there’s got to be something kicking around after 5 decades for the G. If not I’m not opposed to taking it experimental there’s a lot more freedom going that route. 

[jetdriven]

2 hours ago, TC19 said:

100k budget not 10 and I mentioned that I need to look into the STC’s. Starting with a 40-45k G leaves a lot of room to play, excluding work to the panel,  but that goes a long ways for motor, paint, interior and speed mods. Most motors in question can be bought in the 45k range. The plane I’m looking into already has a new 3 blade hartzell prop,  I found an SCT to put a 200hp lycoming in the G which would get around 155-160kts which would be OK but wouldn’t really fit in with my mission (to destroy a bonanza at 100k) it’s a little  slow, but I’ve read that there’s an STC to turn an F into a missile which trues at 180kts. That’s why this I started out asking about all the different conversions G,F,J,K, there’s got to be something kicking around after 5 decades for the G. If not I’m not opposed to taking it experimental there’s a lot more freedom going that route. 

im not sure where you found these STC's but the missile conversion is for J models and, if you could buy the STC from Rocket, would cost 100K+ to do.

[T. Peterson]

2 hours ago, TC19 said:

100k budget not 10 and I mentioned that I need to look into the STC’s. Starting with a 40-45k G leaves a lot of room to play, excluding work to the panel,  but that goes a long ways for motor, paint, interior and speed mods. Most motors in question can be bought in the 45k range. The plane I’m looking into already has a new 3 blade hartzell prop,  I found an SCT to put a 200hp lycoming in the G which would get around 155-160kts which would be OK but wouldn’t really fit in with my mission (to destroy a bonanza at 100k) it’s a little  slow, but I’ve read that there’s an STC to turn an F into a missile which trues at 180kts. That’s why this I started out asking about all the different conversions G,F,J,K, there’s got to be something kicking around after 5 decades for the G. If not I’m not opposed to taking it experimental there’s a lot more freedom going that route. 

Sounds like you are a can-do fella! I am rooting for you!

Torrey

[Utah20Gflyer]

23 hours ago, TC19 said:

That’s awesome! I’m pleasantly surprised to see both posts of the G’s doing far better than their published numbers. I see your in Utah, any chance I could come check it out? 

Absolutely, I’d be happy to take you up and you can get a chance to fly one.  Message me and we will get something arranged.  I’m stationed at the Tooele airport so if your in the wasatch front area it would definitely be worth the drive to get some real world data.  

[A64Pilot]

You can’t go Experimental, some will argue that of course but the FAA isn’t just letting someone take a Certified airplane and placard it Experimental so that you can get around their regs, you need to have a reason that they will agree with, unless your a manufacturer.

In my opinion your not going to “destroy” a Bo with any four cylinder NA Mooney. My J would need at least 10 kts to do that, and 10 kts is a whole lot harder than it sounds, takes a lot to get 10 kts. Of course if you found a 1% Mooney speed wise and the Bo was a pig then yeah maybe.

You might could find a Meyers 200, they are faster than a Bo, but they are few and far between. I wanted one but a good one wasn’t available when I was looking.

Might get a Harmon Rocket in your budget, maybe?

Edited May 9, 2022 by A64Pilot

[DCarlton]

On 5/7/2022 at 5:27 PM, TC19 said:

100k budget not 10 and I mentioned that I need to look into the STC’s. Starting with a 40-45k G leaves a lot of room to play, excluding work to the panel,  but that goes a long ways for motor, paint, interior and speed mods. Most motors in question can be bought in the 45k range. The plane I’m looking into already has a new 3 blade hartzell prop,  I found an SCT to put a 200hp lycoming in the G which would get around 155-160kts which would be OK but wouldn’t really fit in with my mission (to destroy a bonanza at 100k) it’s a little  slow, but I’ve read that there’s an STC to turn an F into a missile which trues at 180kts. That’s why this I started out asking about all the different conversions G,F,J,K, there’s got to be something kicking around after 5 decades for the G. If not I’m not opposed to taking it experimental there’s a lot more freedom going that route. 

When you're done, your G will basically be an F with all the speed mods.  My 200 hp F has every possible speed mod (seals, fairings, cowl, windshield, antennas cleaned up, etc) and it's consistently a 153 kt airplane.  I have the SWTA cowl mod; with a factory J cowl you might do better.  I'm guessing you'd need a turbocharger or higher HP engine.  I never considered the 210 hp engine mod; figured I would just reduce engine longevity for a few extra hp / knots.   Likely the three blade prop will slow you down a little; consider a two blade for speed.  

[TC19]

19 hours ago, DCarlton said:

When you're done, your G will basically be an F with all the speed mods.  My 200 hp F has every possible speed mod (seals, fairings, cowl, windshield, antennas cleaned up, etc) and it's consistently a 153 kt airplane.  I have the SWTA cowl mod; with a factory J cowl you might do better.  I'm guessing you'd need a turbocharger or higher HP engine.  I never considered the 210 hp engine mod; figured I would just reduce engine longevity for a few extra hp / knots.   Likely the three blade prop will slow you down a little; consider a two blade for speed.  

I agree about the prop my thoughts were that it’s pretty new and my home airport KPUC sits at the base of a mountain range so the climb is from 5,600 to 9k+ rather quickly so the 3 blade would be nice for that. Your F looks really nice! If I decide to go the experimental route I will probably run a lycoming thunderbolt series 360 or 390 turbo normalized. They pull more power out of them and they’re a better built motor than the certified series. As for speed mods I’d probably go more towards the Mooney Cafe mods, they’re a bit more extensive but relatively simple to replicate and proven for the cruise rate I’m thinking. If your not familiar with the Cafe YouTube “Mooney cafe experimental” it was a super cool build! 

Edited May 10, 2022 by TC19

[carusoam]

things to consider…
 

For experimental use…

Be familiar with the 51% rule… (?)

It would be great to update the CAFE experiment… 

But in the end, you still want to fly the plane right?

The CAFE Mooney had to be returned to its AW conditions to go on flying….  
 

Going into an experimental category for a certified plane is not an open ended situation…

Not all experimental levels are the same for FAA rules…

The homebuilts follow the 51% rule…. So you might see a Mooney wing or tail get used…. Or possibly a fuselage…

 

Check in with the EAA for better guidance… the 51% is tough to define…

 

Some confusion often arises… when an individual does something like install a turbine engine on their plane…. And they write an STC to cover the technical issues…. And receive full FAA approval…

The engine install is beautiful with a perfect cowling integration…. And a nice five blade composite prop….

All done perfectly legally… An STC for one, 100s of AMUs spent, because they can…

Some things on the surface… don’t look as expensive as they really are….

PP thoughts only, not currently an EAA member…

Best regards,

-a-

[Guest]

On 5/7/2022 at 3:21 PM, Fly Boomer said:

Unlikely without a turbocharger.

The answer to turbocharging in case there isn’t an STC for a G model.

Clarence

[Fly Boomer]

2 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

The answer to turbocharging

That should do it!

[Utah20Gflyer]

A g model Mooney is a great plane if you want a honest  and efficient plane to get around.  If your highest priority is to be decisively faster than a Bonanza and Comanche I think you really need to look at a Bravo or Acclaim because those are planes that are actually faster than the planes you want to beat.   Turning a G model into a quasi J model is not going to be faster than your friends planes and you will end up spending as much as you could have bought a Bravo for.    That just doesn't seem like a great idea unless you have a trust fund you want to rid yourself of in short order.   Decide what you want and then buy exactly that.