Mooney TLS/Bravo - Why would I want one?

[Red Leader]

I am toying with the idea of selling my M20K (with all the performance updates) and replacing it with a Mooney TLS/Bravo. I have done lots of research and have determined that there are differences in panel height, fuel burn and (most importantly) speed. My K is plenty fast (about 165kts at 65% at 12,500) and at about a 12gal/hr burn rate - very efficient but I have a desire to go faster. I would go from a mid-body to a long body and (finally) get folding rear seats. Is the Bravo such a better machine that it would make sense for me to get one? My mission is strictly personal. The wife and I like to go different places and I recently flew my 231 across the country where it performed beautifully. I guess I am asking if it would be worth the switch? I can afford it, should I?

[N252MK]

I am toying with the idea of selling my M20K (with all the performance updates) and replacing it with a Mooney TLS/Bravo. I have done lots of research and have determined that there are differences in panel height, fuel burn and (most importantly) speed. My K is plenty fast (about 165kts at 65% at 12,500) and at about a 12gal/hr burn rate - very efficient but I have a desire to go faster. I would go from a mid-body to a long body and (finally) get folding rear seats. Is the Bravo such a better machine that it would make sense for me to get one? My mission is strictly personal. The wife and I like to go different places and I recently flew my 231 across the country where it performed beautifully. I guess I am asking if it would be worth the switch? I can afford it, should I?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KSMooniac]

It's a substantial increase in fuel burn, especially since most M's won't run well LOP. So long as you're prepared for that...as you put it, why not? If you travel far, regularly, it likely will reduce your trip times. It sounds like you have an early K, so you'll get all of the improvements that a newer Mooney offers, plus more cargo space. Getting one with the modern fiberglass interior would be especially nice...that's what I would want, but not a G1000 bird, and especially one without WAAS.

One potential negative...the devil you know vs the one you don't. If your K is de-squawked and reliable, you might have to make some effort to get the next plane to that status. You're also trading at peak market, and the more expensive plane will cost more. But if you can, why not?

Sent from my LM-V450 using Tapatalk

[DCarlton]

Good question.   Bravos often seem like a good deal relative to other Mooney's on the market; and some seem to take a while to sell.  I've wondered if higher maintenance requirements and maintenance costs make them less desirable unless you really need or want the performance.  Would be interesting to hear real world experiences.  BTW, would appreciate your 231 experience as well relative to maintenance requirements.  Really curious if you have a freshly overhauled turbo engine if you can get 1000 hours out of it without a lot of maintenance hassles.  I'm considering my best and last airplane options.   

[N252MK]

I am toying with the idea of selling my M20K (with all the performance updates) and replacing it with a Mooney TLS/Bravo. I have done lots of research and have determined that there are differences in panel height, fuel burn and (most importantly) speed. My K is plenty fast (about 165kts at 65% at 12,500) and at about a 12gal/hr burn rate - very efficient but I have a desire to go faster. I would go from a mid-body to a long body and (finally) get folding rear seats. Is the Bravo such a better machine that it would make sense for me to get one? My mission is strictly personal. The wife and I like to go different places and I recently flew my 231 across the country where it performed beautifully. I guess I am asking if it would be worth the switch? I can afford it, should I?

Here’s my .03. My previous Mooney was a 252/Encore. Boy do I want it back! When it was time for engine work my new partners said let’s get something newer and liked the Bravo we found. I don’t notice the speed delta of about 10-15 kts on the typical missions I fly so that’s not a big issue for me. Useful load is less in the Bravo. Landing the Encore was easier for me but eventually I’ll likely get as proficient. The taller panel looks more airliner like but I don’t see that as a plus or minus. The Bravo does seem to have more ramp appeal. There is a Delta of 5gph unless we run LOP in which case you’re down to Encore/231 speeds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Red Leader]

Good points so far, keep 'em coming! To answer some questions, I just had the interior re-done and someone recently said it looks like the inside of her boss's Bentley (it really does). As far as de-squawking, it is about as good as it gets. I wanted a newer engine monitor and perhaps some instrumentation upgrades, but all my local shops are returning quotes that seem stratospheric. I have an engine with about 1300 hours on it with the jugs and turbocharger replaced about 250 hours ago. It just completed an annual with almost no issues. Compressions are "freakin' fantastic" (a quote from the shop owner) - all 78-80/80. It burns just about no oil and I am eagerly awaiting the results of my oil analysis. BTW, it is a 1981 model.

 

I do like my K but to upgrade it as much as I want would cost more than just buying an M. I am not happy with the increased fuel burn of the M but know that the speed improvement would be about 30-40kts over what I have. Moreover, I get a larger storage area and folding seats (which I really want). My current plane has a brand-new paint job and really shines, so that, and the new interior, make me inclined to keep it. I haven't had it long enough to have maintenance issues (less than a year) and from what I read, the maintenance with the Bravo isn't that much different than my K. Still wrestling with this decision. Thoughts?

[LANCECASPER]

20 minutes ago, Red Leader said:

I do like my K but to upgrade it as much as I want would cost more than just buying an M. 

 . . . which may then have to be upgraded to have it the way you want it

Trading a known for an unknown isn't always the best choice

[donkaye, MCFI]

As of last week, I've owned my M20M Bravo for 30 years.  I closed on it on August 28, 1992.  If there is anyone who has owned their's longer, I'd be interested in knowing.  I'm on my 3rd engine.  I've flown my airplane over 4,000 hours.  It still seems like new to me.  My panel has been upgraded to the limit of what is available for a Mooney.  Better than the Acclaim Ultra G1000 Nxi, in my opinion.  I've flown and taught in nearly every Mooney model over the past 28 years that I've been a CFII, and more specifically a Mooney specific CFII.  I like them all, but the Bravo is the airplane for me.  

Owning an airplane that is properly maintained is costly, and the Bravo is no exception.  Mine gets what it wants with no exceptions.  The most expensive of the variable costs are: 1. Engine overhaul.  2. Proactive Turbo and Wastegate overhaul about every 1,300 hours.  3. Prop Overhaul every 2,500 hours.  4. Complete Fuel Tank Reseal after 24 years of ownership. 

One of the most irritating recurrent costs for me has been the maintenance of the prop deice.  The brush blocks need replacement after about 5-600 hours.  And recently all the boots needed to be replaced because of an installation error on the part of the prop shop.  Although the warranty had expired, they agreed to cover the replacement because it was clearly their error.  After only 390 hours, due to not securing the wires properly, centrifugal force caused the wires to slam into the screws of the propeller cone and short every boot.  However, most Bravos never had the prop deice option installed.

In short, after flying all the other Mooney models I have flown, I love getting back to my airplane.

[carusoam]

To entertain a minor upgrade like a highly developed K to an M…

You have dough to spend, and like the size of the baggage compartment…. 

In other news... my M20C covered my favorite flight in only 15 more minutes…. Than my M20R…

 

Congrats on buying such a fine aircraft to begin with…

Why would you only move up to the Bravo, when your team can consider the Acclaim…?

I really like the LB more than I expected to…

I really like the intake system on the IO550 more than I expected to…

I would be really happy if I had to step down to the M20C again….

A - V there isn’t a whole lot of difference…. Between each one…

Select the one that is best for you for today, and the long run…

It can be surprisingly disappointing to find how much it costs to move up the alphabet…

 

Is this a forever plane?

Best regards,

-a-

 

[milotron]

You had noted a speed improvement of 30-40 kts. Is that really the case at responsible power levels?

I also have a K and have considered some upgrades both within and outside of the Mooney family. It is pretty tough to justify the extra costs and the jump without a pretty decent speed and/or payload improvement and (aside from an Aerostar...  ) I haven't found one worth making the jump for, based on additional utility or the additional risk of fixing unknown mechanical issues.

[carusoam]

M20C… 150mph

M20R… 175kts

28% difference in speeds between my short body and long body experience… both are NA engines…

Real life experience…

To get to the next level… includes turbos, intercoolers, pressure controllers, Fiki, O2, and some serious update to training….

 

Ask yourself how worth it… is it to you?

Don’t be surprised if it isn’t…

None of this makes sense to everybody….  

It only has to make sense to one person…

 

In case you think it’s the pilot…. It is often the finance administrator… 

If you are fortunate… your finance administrator is a pilot…. 

Best regards,

-a-

[carusoam]

The cool thing about forever planes….

Cost accounting…

Divide the total cost of the aircraft ownership…. (Not the operations…) by the number of years of ownership…

My M20C was about 1AMU per year…. Bought near 30amu, sold near 20amu…. A decade later…

Not a great investment… but not a terrible loss either..

 

Expanding that ownership over 30years….

 

One would need to take inflation into account… then opportunity lost costs…

Then know our favorite accountant around here… also flys a Bravo….  
 

Keep an eye on operations costs… but not too closely…

Nobody really wants to fly at Vz for 1knm… unless you are trying to demonstrate the efficiency of your Mooney…

 

The curvy intake tubes on the six cylinder engine provide the ability to fly LOP over a wide range of power settings….

It would be great if we could get the experimental curvy tubes that Lycoming has… in the certified category…

 

Get a Bravo because you want one… 

Not because somebody else wants you to have one…

unless it’s your financial administrator telling you… 

Best regards,

-a-

[Niko182]

I think the jump would be worthwhile to an acclaim type s and only that. Maybe if other variables were included like wanting tks or ac that might help, but in the end, if its just speed, the difference isnt big enough to justify an upgrade from a 231 to a bravo in my opinion, unless youre looking for money to burn. If youre looking for money to burn, just send it.

 

[carusoam]

Wait a second…

We left out the TLS…

The Turbo Lycoming Sabre….

 

This is a hint of how new the OP is in researching his next plane… 

There are very few TLSs that have not been brought up to Bravo status…

The Bravo adds the wet heads and provides awesome cylinder life compared to the TLS’s heads…

Small, expensive, upgrade… don’T accidentally pay full price then have to add this upgrade to have things where you want…

 

Best regards,

-a-

[Red Leader]

Well, I am both the pilot and the finance administrator. Although I do have money to spend, I don't have it to burn (so why do I fly if I don't need do, I keep asking myself). Will it be my forever plane? Not including ultralights, I have had four airplanes in the last three years, so probably not. I like my 231 for its best combination of speed and efficiency. If I move up to a Bravo, I will be changing the previous ratio - gain some speed but lose (more than) some efficiency. Both the aircraft I have and the one I am wanting are turbocharged, so with the exception of engine size, I do not see much difference in maintenance costs (or am I kidding myself?). The beautiful instrumentation in the M pictured by Donkaye looks highly upgraded. Although I want some similar upgrades, I doubt I would be willing to part with the money it cost him to do something that comprehensive to my bird. From my research, I could likely sell my K for about 150k (no pun intended) and get into the Bravo aircraft for a range starting at 200k. The 50k difference is worth it to me for newer instrumentation and other performance and interior upgrades I have previously mentioned. Increased maintenance costs are concerning. Increased fuel burn, although expected for the improved speeds, is a bit off-putting but not a deal breaker. Once the M20M purchase price exceeds 250k, I feel the expense would be too great to justify upgrading. This price level limit is why I am not considering an Acclaim. Also, I have been spoiled by the Turbo engine and (although my other plane isn't) am not interested in buying a non-turbo'd Mooney like the Ovation.

[donkaye, MCFI]

3 hours ago, Red Leader said:

Well, I am both the pilot and the finance administrator. Although I do have money to spend, I don't have it to burn (so why do I fly if I don't need do, I keep asking myself). Will it be my forever plane? Not including ultralights, I have had four airplanes in the last three years, so probably not. I like my 231 for its best combination of speed and efficiency. If I move up to a Bravo, I will be changing the previous ratio - gain some speed but lose (more than) some efficiency. Both the aircraft I have and the one I am wanting are turbocharged, so with the exception of engine size, I do not see much difference in maintenance costs (or am I kidding myself?). The beautiful instrumentation in the M pictured by Donkaye looks highly upgraded. Although I want some similar upgrades, I doubt I would be willing to part with the money it cost him to do something that comprehensive to my bird. From my research, I could likely sell my K for about 150k (no pun intended) and get into the Bravo aircraft for a range starting at 200k. The 50k difference is worth it to me for newer instrumentation and other performance and interior upgrades I have previously mentioned. Increased maintenance costs are concerning. Increased fuel burn, although expected for the improved speeds, is a bit off-putting but not a deal breaker. Once the M20M purchase price exceeds 250k, I feel the expense would be too great to justify upgrading. This price level limit is why I am not considering an Acclaim. Also, I have been spoiled by the Turbo engine and (although my other plane isn't) am not interested in buying a non-turbo'd Mooney like the Ovation.

Inflation is running rampant and in my opinion likely to continue at least for the next 2 years.  If you are interested in upgrading airplanes there is no better time than now.  Planes will only increase in cost due in part to decreasing supply of Mooneys and decreased value of the dollar led by large scale inflation.  My first panel upgrade completed in 2014, and I continued modifying it as Garmin kept coming out with new products.  My costs were decreased by $30,000 by Garmin rebates at the time and sales of removed avionics.  Had I waited till now to do the upgrade the increased costs would be astronomical in addition to not even being able to get the products I wanted.  For example I reviewed what I paid for the GTN 750 back then.  My price was $13,675. Now it lists for $18,995, a 38.9% increase, and you can't even get one for 4-5 months.  The same goes for all the other equipment.  And forget about meaningful rebates now.  Why should Garmin give rebates when they can't even supply the market now?

Regarding the Acclaim Type S; the cost differential between it and the Bravo is significant and it has the G1000.  Its avionics can never be changed.  Mine can be changed at any time something new comes out--and it has been, as when Garmin came out with the G500TXi.  Out with the G500 and in with the G500TXi.  Out with the KFC 150 and its wing rock and in with the GFC 500.  And the touch screen units with simplified menus are sooo good.  I can't imagine going back to only have the use of knobs and buttons all over the place.  Having the option of either is so nice.  If you think having one turbocharger to maintain is problematic, how about 2 on the Acclaim?  No one is going to be able to convince me the Acclaim is the way to go.

[carusoam]

Pretty straight forwards…

Congrats… for being the finance administrator too! 

How does FIKI sound to you…?

How does the non-G1000 route sound to you…. (Some Bravos have G1000s as well)

How does AC sound to you….?

How does the thought of the future increase of MGTW for Long bodies sound to you…?

Would you like to have 130gal fuel tanks…

Allowing you and your SIC to travel 1k+ miles easily… ?

I am a big fan of the extra capabilities the Long Bodies have…

And saddened by the limited MGTW that some Mooneys are stuck at…

 

And when it comes to instrument panels… they all last 20 years, and really fade after 30….

Todays upgrades are incredible…

You can put 100AMUs in a short body Mooney and really like it….

Or put the same instruments into a LB… and like it there as well….

 

An easier way to make the decision….

If you had the stack of cash… and no plane….

Which plane would you buy….

Would you re-select the M20K because it has everything you need… or…

Go with the Bravo because it is the personal airliner that you want…?

I would want DK’s instrument panel, in my Ovation, with an Acclaim power plant behind my Acclaim’s TopProp prop…

If you say your M20K is still all you want…

Great exercise…!

Let’s focus on the instrument panel upgrade….   
 

There is plenty of UL to be gained by dumping ancient avionics and associated wiring…

Do you have a dead radar sensor in the wing?

Best regards,

-a-

[DCarlton]

6 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Pretty straight forwards…

Congrats… for being the finance administrator too! 

How does FIKI sound to you…?

How does the non-G1000 route sound to you…. (Some Bravos have G1000s as well)

How does AC sound to you….?

How does the thought of the future increase of MGTW for Long bodies sound to you…?

Would you like to have 130gal fuel tanks…

Allowing you and your SIC to travel 1k+ miles easily… ?

I am a big fan of the extra capabilities the Long Bodies have…

And saddened by the limited MGTW that some Mooneys are stuck at…

 

And when it comes to instrument panels… they all last 20 years, and really fade after 30….

Todays upgrades are incredible…

You can put 100AMUs in a short body Mooney and really like it….

Or put the same instruments into a LB… and like it there as well….

 

An easier way to make the decision….

If you had the stack of cash… and no plane….

Which plane would you buy….

Would you re-select the M20K because it has everything you need… or…

Go with the Bravo because it is the personal airliner that you want…?

I would want DK’s instrument panel, in my Ovation, with an Acclaim power plant behind my Acclaim’s TopProp prop…

If you say your M20K is still all you want…

Great exercise…!

Let’s focus on the instrument panel upgrade….   
 

There is plenty of UL to be gained by dumping ancient avionics and associated wiring…

Do you have a dead radar sensor in the wing?

Best regards,

-a-

Two eagles at GMAX now but I’m guessing you’d be up to 275k with the engines overhauled.  Ovations and eagles are gold.  Not 200k.  

[KSMooniac]

You mentioned rear seats in the original post and a reply... I get it.  I have a set to upgrade my old/early J.  It is possible to do so with your K with some salvage seats.  Mooney started including those in very late '81/'82 model year.  That is past the peak of annual production, but there are some out there if you're patient!  You'll likely want to rebuild/recover to match your new interior of course, but this might be a good option for you unless you've convinced yourself you need the extra space in the back of a longbody.  Nothing wrong with that.    I've volumed-out my J with the fixed back seat removed a few times (especially OSH) but not enough times to get me to trade.  I've got too much blood/sweat/tears into my J to want to let her go...

[donkaye, MCFI]

A few additional comments...  Truth be told all of our airplanes are good 2 place airplanes with all the baggage you want to carry. Yes, you can carry four people, but range is limited and close quarters are good for 2½ hours max.  If you want 4 people and baggage for a long cross country, a Mooney and most other single engine airplanes are not the airplanes to have.  If turbines are not included, probably  the first airplane that would be good to carry 4 people a long distance would be the Twin C310Q with 305 HP turbocharged engines.  In the turboprop, for me it would be the new Epic with 1200 HP, 34,000 ft ceiling, and 317 knot cruse speed on 50 gal/hr.

I fly mine with 2 weight and balances; one with the back seats in and one without them.  In the last year I haven't flown with the back seats in.  1½ years ago I stuck one back seat in to take a couple of trusted contractors to San Diego to give me some bids.

Would I consider upgrading a none 252 K Model.  No.  The critical altitude without the Merlin waste gate and intercooler is 13,000 feet, not much better than a NA J Model.  Depending on the K and engine, I have found the K to be too susceptible to overheating in the climb, and some have had very anemic climb rates that sometimes have actually scared me.  I wouldn't want to take off over an obstacle in a few I have taught in.

For 2 people and going on long cross country flights for maximum single engine piston capability, I'm back to recommending the Bravo as the best value for the money.

I've made a bunch of comments above that some may disagree with.  How reliable are my comments for those who haven't flown with me?  If anyone is interested, I've attached a couple of spreadsheets to help make that decision.

Logbook 9:4:2022.pdf

Logbook Summary of Flight Instrucxtion Given 9:5:2022.pdf

[Steve Dawson]

Something that I've found flying my Bravo is the smoothness of the ride through turbulence and its much better then the "J" I used to own or the K's that I've flown in. The bravo or long bodies have a higher wing loading then the smaller models so they don't get pushed around as much. As for useful load mine has approximately 960 lbs and I have TKS. As for fuel efficiency I try to fly above 15K and at that altitude or higher and 65% power I can attain 180 kt TAS on 15.5 GPH. I did spend some time re-rigging the plane to fly level and without much rudder input. 

 

[Fly Boomer]

14 hours ago, Red Leader said:

from what I read, the maintenance with the Bravo isn't that much different than my K. Still wrestling with this decision.

I think you said "as good as it gets' earlier, and that's unlikely to be the case with a "new" airplane.  Even with the best interior, paint, panel, and a PPI performed by the best shop ever, there will almost certainly be a host of issues that no one can predict. 

[Red Leader]

33 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said:

there will almost certainly be a host of issues that no one can predict. 

That is true with any airplane. It was previously mentioned that it may be better to stick with the devil you know...

 

[Steve Dawson]

People mention about the economy of the J, S or R models but once you go turbo it's hard to move backward.  

[DCarlton]

11 hours ago, donkaye said:

A few additional comments...  Truth be told all of our airplanes are good 2 place airplanes with all the baggage you want to carry. Yes, you can carry four people, but range is limited and close quarters are good for 2½ hours max.  If you want 4 people and baggage for a long cross country, a Mooney and most other single engine airplanes are not the airplanes to have.  If turbines are not included, probably  the first airplane that would be good to carry 4 people a long distance would be the Twin C310Q with 305 HP turbocharged engines.  In the turboprop, for me it would be the new Epic with 1200 HP, 34,000 ft ceiling, and 317 knot cruse speed on 50 gal/hr.

I fly mine with 2 weight and balances; one with the back seats in and one without them.  In the last year I haven't flown with the back seats in.  1½ years ago I stuck one back seat in to take a couple of trusted contractors to San Diego to give me some bids.

Would I consider upgrading a none 252 K Model.  No.  The critical altitude without the Merlin waste gate and intercooler is 13,000 feet, not much better than a NA J Model.  Depending on the K and engine, I have found the K to be too susceptible to overheating in the climb, and some have had very anemic climb rates that sometimes have actually scared me.  I wouldn't want to take off over an obstacle in a few I have taught in.

For 2 people and going on long cross country flights for maximum single engine piston capability, I'm back to recommending the Bravo as the best value for the money.

I've made a bunch of comments above that some may disagree with.  How reliable are my comments for those who haven't flown with me?  If anyone is interested, I've attached a couple of spreadsheets to help make that decision.

Logbook 9:4:2022.pdf 66.1 kB · 9 downloads

Logbook Summary of Flight Instrucxtion Given 9:5:2022.pdf 53.21 kB · 5 downloads

You mentioned earlier, you've put three engines over overhauls in your Bravo over 4000 hours.  So roughly, 1300 hrs average actual TBO.  Can you provide any insight into engine maintenance requirements up to around 1000 hours.  Is it possible to zero time a Bravo engine, and make it to 1000 hours without a lot of unplanned maintenance?  Did you need cylinders mid time before you had to overhaul?  Anything major before a 1000 hours?  Thanks.  I've only experienced one newly overhauled NA engine in my flying time.