Help point me to the best model for me.....

[Bostonpilot]

Hi All-

I'm new to these forums, and the Mooney world in general, and I'm hoping you can point me in the right direction.

First, some context.....I'm a comm/multi/instrument pilot (~500 hrs TT) who hasn't been flying for quite a while after 'life' got in the way.  I'm now fixing that and getting back into the air and looking for aircraft options, and Mooney has been on my mind.  That said, other than a couple of hours in the backseat of a 231 many years ago, I'm essentially clueless in all things Mooney.  I've got plenty of high performance/complex time, so I don't see that being an issue from an insurance and/or capability standpoint.

Mission wise.....

Ideally, I'm looking for a plane that would work for a small partnership group (~3-4 people) that I could use for local flying and occasional trips.   Local flying will mainly be boring holes in the air + approaches.  My primary trip profile will be from my home base in MA up to a vacation home I have on an island off the coast of Maine.   Its a short (~175nm) trip but the airport there has a 2700' runway with some trees around it, so something that will safely get in/out of that airport is key.  There will likely be longer (300-750nm) trips a few times a year too.  Most flights will be 1-2 people.  I want something that is IFR capable, efficient, safe, fun to fly, etc.  Ideally something with more modern avionics, or that I can update within the budget.

As I've looked at options, the PA28 & C172/182 options don't appeal too much to me due to speed, unless I find a great opportunity.  A SR-22 would be great, both because of the avionics, but also the parachute induced spousal comfort level, but the price premium is hard to swallow.  This is what has had me thinking of options in the Mooney and Bonanza worlds.

Price wise...I'd like to stay below a top level of $150k-200k combined between the purchase price + renovation costs for avionics, etc. Lower cost is obviously nice, but I also don't want something on the extreme low end that I have to invest tons into making it a mission capable plane for my needs.

I'd love any suggestions and advice as to where I should and should not be looking for models, etc.

Thanks!

 

[Fly Boomer]

2 hours ago, Bostonpilot said:

airport there has a 2700' runway with some trees around it, so something that will safely get in/out of that airport is key

I’m sure others will say “I do it all the time” but that would be a no go for me.

[201er]

7 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said:

I’m sure others will say “I do it all the time” but that would be a no go for me.

Not a no-go in a M20J but definitely an "it depends." With 1-3 people, low fuel, and the right conditions that's doable. Any heavier and you'd better be wearing depends. Add hot summer day, wind shift, mag failure, or just a little bit of pilot imperfection and it could be a problem.

Flew to 57B Islesboro island in Maine for camping with just 2400ft but took it as light as possible.

 

[ilovecornfields]

Have you looked at Skywagons? Fast + short field is challenging as @Fly Boomer pointed out.

[Rwsavory]

Travelling 175 nm the difference between a C182 and the faster models is probably 12 minutes or so.  Considering you will have multiple owners and pilots, need good dispatch reliability and are flying to a 2700 foot field with trees it's going to be hard to beat a C182.  

[kortopates]

I don't know, as it will will depend entirely on the trees at the approach and departure end and their required gradient to clear, since an unobstructed 2700' runway isn't really a short field for any Mooney. (*Even a longbody ground roll at max landing weight is 2000' upto 4000' msl DA)

[Niko182]

A missile or a mid 90s slovation would probably do the trick. The O with 310hp will operate out of the 2700ft runway just fine even on a hot day at full gross.

[201er]

3 hours ago, Rwsavory said:

Travelling 175 nm the difference between a C182 and the faster models is probably 12 minutes or so.  Considering you will have multiple owners and pilots, need good dispatch reliability and are flying to a 2700 foot field with trees it's going to be hard to beat a C182.  

 

5 hours ago, Bostonpilot said:

There will likely be longer (300-750nm) trips a few times a year too.  Most flights will be 1-2 people. 

As I've looked at options, the PA28 & C172/182 options don't appeal too much to me due to speed, unless I find a great opportunity.  

Most Mooney’s excel at these missions. The place Mooney is not a great idea is a club/rental situation where some fliers aren’t really super on top of things. 

[ArtVandelay]

You don’t need a turbo, so a NA F/E would be my recommendation given the price range, you should be able to get a nice one.

[M20F]

3 hours ago, Rwsavory said:

Travelling 175 nm the difference between a C182 and the faster models is probably 12 minutes or so.  Considering you will have multiple owners and pilots, need good dispatch reliability and are flying to a 2700 foot field with trees it's going to be hard to beat a C182.  

This would be the correct answer. 

[Hank]

8 hours ago, Bostonpilot said:

Ideally, I'm looking for a plane that would work for a small partnership group (~3-4 people) that I could use for local flying and occasional trips.   Local flying will mainly be boring holes in the air + approaches.  My primary trip profile will be from my home base in MA up to a vacation home I have on an island off the coast of Maine.   Its a short (~175nm) trip but the airport there has a 2700' runway with some trees around it, so something that will safely get in/out of that airport is key.  There will likely be longer (300-750nm) trips a few times a year too.  Most flights will be 1-2 people.  I want something that is IFR capable, efficient, safe, fun to fly, etc.  Ideally something with more modern avionics, or that I can update within the budget.

Price wise...I'd like to stay below a top level of $150k-200k combined between the purchase price + renovation costs for avionics, etc.

Your price will easily afford a C, E or F with a nice panel. I'd hold out for one with electric gear and flaps.

I got my license in old, tired 172s at a 3000' field with trees at both ends, and based my C there for 7 years. Never had any trouble going on vacation with the wife, luggage and full fuel, she's off the ground in about 1000' and usually came back with full luggage and much less fuel.

This was the preferred runway, notice the extra power to level off on short final because of the trees; landing the other way, the threshold was displaced. 

C and E are short bodies, with limited back seat legroom. The F is a midbody, same up front but 5" more room for back seat leg space and baggage area (but the same 120,b weight limit). The C is 180 hp with a carb, the E / F are both 200 np fuel injected.

Happy shopping! 

[hubcap]

Based on your mission, I would definitely agree that you do not want anything with a turbo. Personally, I fly a K and my personal minimum for runway length is 3000'. I can and have certainly landed much shorter than that and do regularly, but with obstacles and a potentially unfavorable wind or density altitude and a little too fast on the approach and a little heavy and I might have a problem...but that's just me. It sounds like a 182 would fit your mission quite nicely.

[Schllc]

I have landed many times in both an acclaim and an ovation at X01 which is 2400’x50’.  Zero displaced threshold and water on three sides, with room to spare. 
You must be on your numbers!

That being said (I’m throwing up a little in my mouth as I say this)….
Your mission, and multiple owners, and budget, sounds like a Cessna 182 is a much better option. 

[carusoam]

Wait a sec….

OK, I’m back….

We are still calling this site MooneySpace…  
 

1) BostonPilot you have been approved…!

2) Go look at all the Mooneys you want…

3) Decide what your club is going to use it for…

4) My M20C used go in and out of Falmouth Airpark, Hopedale, and Norfolk….

5) My M20R included Norwood and Falmouth Airpark…

6) You won’t need to be a super human test pilot…

7) You will need to use your plane properly….

 

If you are relatively new to Aviation… Norfolk no longer exists on the charts… it stopped operations 20+ years ago…

Welcome aboard!

Best regards,

-a-

 

[Bostonpilot]

Hi all

Wow!  I go off for a few hours to work and then look back at the post and there’s a ton of great feedback. Thanks. Lots to think about. 
 

A few comments after a first read through.   Fair point on the 182, but it’s really not what I want.  Like many, I did my private in a 150 and a 172 and they served their purpose and then I’ve got a bit of time (20-30 hrs) in 182 & 177s.  They just aren’t my thing…..that said Penobscot Air flies 206’s into 57B stuff full of people and cargo every day so it’s not a bad idea.  
 

Also fair point on the minimal 12 min savings on that trip in a Mooney vs a 182.  But, honestly if we are bringing practicality into the equation, I should just drive.  I’m suspending practicality in favor for finding something I want to fly.   Sort of the same logic I used when I bought my sailboat……
 

As I consider the feedback, it doesn’t seem to make sense for a Mooney given my criteria above.  I’m not worried about flying my numbers etc.   Not that I’m discounting that seriousness, I mean that it’s a hyper focus for myself in my flying.  I am worried though if there is any element of ‘pucker factor’ getting in/out of there due to a nervous wife which will mean a rapid end to the fun. 
 

I need to do some more research on the reality of a <3,000ft runway for the sr-22, etc to see what subset may make sense - other than the 182…

So, let’s change the mission then for discussion sake.  What if I take the short field off the table?  Agreed that a turbo isn’t needed given my flying.   What models should I be eyeing for the sweet spot of price, performance, panel, etc?

Thanks again.  

[carusoam]

If your team likes speed and efficiency…

Go Mooney!  

You have selected two competitor aircraft… see what engine they are using….

Find the Mooney with the same engine…

The Mooney won’t cost any more, so the added performance is free!

By doing the engine comparison… you have cut the list down about 66%

Does your team prefer to load all four seats?

Each plane including the one with the parachute is going to be weight limited… so be ready to run the WnB numbers…. Efficiency becomes really important for you…

 

How we’ll do you know the other team mates…?

You want the sports car….   All it takes is one spouse that says we have to have the parachute….  
 

How do you cut that spouse loose? 
 

How are you going to find an SR22 in your price range… is that possible?

Best regards,

-a-

[ZuluZulu]

24 minutes ago, carusoam said:

How are you going to find an SR22 in your price range… is that possible?

Best regards,

-a-

@carusoam with an excellent point, as usual.  The absolute cheapest SR22 I can find on Controller right now starts at $229.5k, already well out of your budget.  It's a 2002 model with the old MFD, six-pack (but upgraded with an Aspen PFD!  wow!), chute repack due in less than a year ($$), a history of problem cylinders requiring either at least two to be overhauled or replaced within the last several years ($$), no ADS-B in unless you use a portable (which means you don't get traffic on that big MFD), and oh by the way it's more than 800 hours past TBO ($$$$).  You probably don't want to own any SR22 that budget can buy because it's going to have expensive issues to fix sooner rather than later.

[T. Peterson]

Sounds to me like a J model would be an excellent all around choice, though I cringe to think of any Mooney in a club setting. Transition training for all the pilots is a must. One bad porpoised landing and your airplane will be grounded for a long time.

Mooney’s are wonderful airplanes and have enabled my wife and me to visit grandchildren and other family to a degree that was utterly impossible in a car. We are comfortable, but not wealthy so the efficiency of our plane is also a significant consideration for us. 11 gallons an hour in cruise is a beautiful thing!

We have a 1979 K model which suits our mission to a “T”. Our closest son is over 400 miles away so the turbo makes sense for us.

Good luck in your hunt!

Torrey

[Pinecone]

Shorter trips do not show a big difference between a faster and slower airplane.

A friend was in a partnership with a C, and that seemed to work out for them.  But you need the right people.

[haymak3r]

I may be biased, but a nice J would be what I would choose

[ArtVandelay]

I may be biased, but a nice J would be what I would choose

But that likely blow his budget, a E or F with nice paint, interior, and modern avionics will stay within their budget.

[Skates97]

22 minutes ago, ArtVandelay said:

But that likely blow his budget, a E or F with nice paint, interior, and modern avionics will stay within their budget.

I would include C's in the hunt if there's a nice one out there.

[carusoam]

This post has a list of key points of each of the Mooneys built over the years…

Starting with A) Wood wing…. Ending with V) Acclaim with a second door….  
 

And a list of the most popular specialized Mooneys…

Best regards,

-a-

[A64Pilot]

Ref the 2700 ft runway, my home field has two runways, (97FL) 2400 and 3700. I normally use the 3700 as it usually is in the prevailing wind, but use the 2400 when it’s in the wind, the 2400 due to the slope on the field and needing to maintain clearance over the road if landing East at its edge has you touching down mid field and it’s still not scary.

Oh, and it’s grass too.

My J is heavy with bladders and every bit of avionics available in the 80’s. There is an IO-540 Mooney with a turbo based here and he only uses the short runway as he lives at the end of it, and it appears he needs more runway to get off than my J, I assume due to weight.

The other thing is our DA here in Fl especially in Summer is kind of high, but we are at sea level. I can see where if at higher elevations especially on a hot day that 2700 could be dicey or just unsafe, but assume Maine is low altitude and not as hot as Florida?

A lot of short field has to do with your experience with it, I have a not inconsiderable amount of Ag plane time and am used to short fields, The guy with the TLS is out west right now flying an AT 802 FireBomber so he’s used to short fields too.

2700 in a J even with normal trees shouldn’t be a problem, but I’d suggest some spot landing practice first, many people new to a Mooney seem to float a long ways down the runway and maybe touch down faster than optimum. 

I think it’s largely due to the wing length, we have three ft more wing than a Bonanza, and that long wing gives us the capability to fly slower than many other aircraft, especially in ground effect. If you shoot the approach like a “normal” aircraft, once you flare you will carry a three ft altitude a long ways down the runway. Low time Mooney drivers seem to have more problem getting in short than getting out short.

Finally instead of leaving over gross, consider shipping the heaviest bag, it’s not really expensive and if it’s a vacation home, you probably will have a lot of what you need there anyway.

If your looking at a Cessna, I’d tell you to look at a C-210, the L model I used to fly was surprisingly a very good STOL airplane, if not overloaded at least as good as a 182, But just don’t do rough field as your restricted to 6” tires. It was as fast as my J. It’s a better airplane than a Bo in my opinion, slightly slower but can haul stuff like a pick up truck, where a Bo due to CG can’t, and a Bo doesn’t have as much wing, also with the Flint tanks carried 120 gls of fuel with a gross weight increase if there was fuel in the tanks so the tanks didn’t limit useful load 

[Mufflerbearing]

The op had some interesting thoughts.  One of which I picked up on was his desire to enjoy flying a such or such plane.  He doesn't like the Cessna's as they are what he trained in and with his experience, wants something else.  He mentioned Cirrus but we all know that the Mooney is superior in every way.  That really leaves him the Mooney and with a long legacy of planes and there are those that fit his mission perfectly.  I would suggest a nice F would fit him nicely.  As far as landing a short distance, with practice and his attention to speed, this shouldn't be a problem even with a long body.  A Cessna may fit part of his mission, but if flying it leaves him wanting more or dissatisfied, that is a kind of hell I would personally rather not be in.

 

Go Mooney!