Why go with a J????

[67M20F]

OK flame suit on,

If the J model only has a useful of around 814, why would you choose it over an F, mine has 1025.

Cruise of 140ish with the three blade prop, WOT 2400 at 10.5 11.5ish.

[Theo]

Quote: 67M20F

If the J model only has a useful of around 814, why would you choose it over an F......

[mjc]

Quote: 67M20F

OK flame suit on,

If the J model only has a useful of around 814, why would you choose it over an F, mine has 1025.

Cruise of 140ish with the three blade prop, WOT 2400 at 10.5 11.5ish.

[Mooney13]

I started out looking for a good F model, I figured they basically looked like the J if you just added a few mods....then I started pricing mods and realized I was creeping into J price ranges. So I did the math and factored in a few other things like instrumnet panel being a little nicer on the J (at least ones I looked at), landing gear speed a little faster and oil cooler location, etc.

I found a good deal on a J and decided I would pay just a little more and not have to deal with any down time on the mods, etc. My useful is 985lbs, which works fine for me and I cruise around 150-155@ 9.5-10.5 GPH

I also looked at a couple K's but the couple I looked at had too low of useful for me 750ish..if I remember right..Sure would love that turbo though!

Bottom line....if it's any Mooney, no matter which one it is ..it's COOL!

[Piloto]

I agree with Michael on preference for the M20J over M20F. Basically both planes share the same airframe but there are significant differences among them:

1. M20J electric gear

2. M20J electric flaps

3. M20J modern style instrument panels and yokes. Allows for easy upgrade of avionics

4. M20J windshield and cowling for faster speed.

5. M20J improved overhead ventilation.

True that you can upgrade an M20F to an M20J but it would be cheaper to get an M20J vs modifying an M20F. Besides, no matter how much you put in an M20F the certificate will not change to an M20J. 

José

 

[GeorgePerry]

Quote: JimR

 I think that the F model represents great value.        

[Parker_Woodruff]

And FWIW, that's by far the lowest useful load (814lbs) I've ever heard of on an M20J.  Prior to that it was a 1984 model with 845 useful.

[LFOD]

 I owned an F before I bought the J.  I am very happy with the purchase.  The updated fuel system, one piece belly, ventilation system (HUGE DIFFERENCE), electric flaps, interior, split seats have all greatly increased my satisfaction and utility over the F model. You could certainly add all of those things to an F, but you might as well buy the J in the first place. 

[Chris White ex-N205KD]

We had a '68 F for two years or so before we got 205KD, a 1987 J.  When we went to start up and taxi 5KD for the first time, I remember distinctly the stark difference in smoothness and just *niceness* between the two.  Even though 5KD had a 1600hr motor compared to the F's 300hrs SFRMN, it was the difference between a tractor and a Lexus.  I turned to my partner and just said "Wow". 

 

But, it ain't free.  All It Takes Is Money .

 

Parker:  5KD's useful was 833lbs when we got it!  GTOW increase and avionics upgrade has taken it to 1013lbs.  Not bad!

[Parker_Woodruff]

Quote: mooney205kd

Parker:  5KD's useful was 833lbs when we got it!  GTOW increase and avionics upgrade has taken it to 1013lbs.  Not bad!

[Parker_Woodruff]

Quote: JimR

How much weight did the starter downgrade cost you, Parker?  What did you have and what did you go to?

Jim

[Parker_Woodruff]

Quote: JimR

[GeorgePerry]

I replaced my old bendix starter (which now serves as a boat anchor) with a skytec and have never regretted it...Makes hot starts, dare I say, easy.

[Rustler]

In December, the Prestolite starter on my '80J began having problems, and we installed a SkyTech 149-NL, at a total savings of about 2.5 pounds. The SkyTech, I think, has no Bendix, which helps reduce its weight. I have found it to be very reliable and much more powerful than the original (when it was working properly).

[KSMooniac]

Jim, I think there are different starters that might be on our planes vs. the original heavy ones.  I currently have a "Magnaflite" (I think that is what it is) and one mechanic buddy thought it was a lightweight starter.  I haven't seen enough of them and just assumed mine was an OEM heavy one but it might not be the case.  Perhaps the Prestolite that Michael replaced could be similar. 

Dave Morris on the email list has reported very favorable performance with his new Kelly e-drive starter...I know that is unusual to find a good Kelly product these days, but that might an option worth considering.  I haven't started researching these things yet since mine still starts.  <knocking on wood>

If you want to remove a few more pounds up front, consider doing the ram air-delete Service Instruction.  I'm wrapping that up now and expect there is at least 2 pounds of stuff between the ram air intake/valve assy and cable.  I'll try to weigh it tonight.

[Rustler]

I erred. The starter changeout netted me 5.9 pounds. The 2.5-pound difference occurred when we changed the alternator to a Plane Power when doing the engine overhaul and had to use a different bracket. That's the one that disappointed me, not the starter.

 

 

[KSMooniac]

The motivation for me to remove it came this year when I priced a replacement seal for the ram air/cowl interface...something like $300+.  Crazy.  So, I just added some more silicone to the old one and limped along until painting last month.  My A&P wants me to revise the W&B so I guess I'll weight all the components today and get a good, actual number.

Like you, I couldn't really detect any MP gains on my OEM gauge.  I could see a 0.1 to 0.2 GPH boost in fuel flow, though, at cruise.  But that tiny bit of power was not worth a difficult $300 seal and 2 lbs. 

[PTK]

Go with the J man! Go with the J.

[scottfromiowa]

Hmmmm

-Smooth belly, check

-201 windshield, check

-cowl closure, check

-light weight starter, check

-No extra back windows, check

-201 speed, check

-Modified left pilot panel and upgraded avionics, check

-Over 950lb's useful load, check

Stone simple Johnson bar gear and mechanical flaps...no motors, actuators, tough manual action...check

M20E-the "Every mans" 201.

But the 201 cowl and mods ARE pretty...Just not $40k pretty.  It's nice and cool at 7,500 feet. 

[Ned Gravel]

Scott:

Needless to say, some of us are biased the same way you are.  I like the term "stone simple" when considering the complexity of my manual landing gear.

I don't know if anyone else is familiar with the term "J killer."  That refers to an E model with all the goodies on it, making it the equal of a J model in terms of aerodynamics, and carrying about 100 lbs less empty weight.  Therefore, should be faster than a J.

Now putting all that stuff on it, may, or may not, cost more than the difference in price for similarly equipped J and E models.

But it is nice to think about.....

And there's that stone simple landing gear to go with it.....

[scottfromiowa]

I love my '66 E, but if money were NO object I would happily take a 1990 MSE...Love the fold/down removable rear seats and the ergonomic and aesthetic improvements are there BUT I will debate the merits of the manual gear and manual hydraullic flaps all day any day over the later electric gear...In this instance simple is IS simple does.  If I could open my garage door without getting out of the car...without an electric opener...I'd prefer that too.   But as a Cayman is superior to a 1960's 911...so is an MSE to an M20E...but the old 911 is still a blast to drive...and fast.

[KLRDMD]

Quote: edgargravel

Needless to say, some of us are biased the same way you are.  I like the term "stone simple" when considering the complexity of my manual landing gear.

[MooneyMitch]

I love the MSE.  We came very close to getting an absolutey gorgeous '90 MSE.  In fact, I was just about to step on United to head East for the pre-buy, but things went South with the engine inspection.  The aircraft was very well taken care of with relatively low time and fine avionics.  It was gorgeous!  This is where DLK Aviation saved me.  It was just fluke that the issue was found and it had absolutely nothing to do with previous maint. on the plane.  I am thankful.

Great airplane and the J MSE gets my vote!!!

[Ned Gravel]

Jim:

Yeah, yeah, I know.  As Scott mentioned, it takes perhaps more money to do the mod thing, than it does to buy up.  I have a friend who owns an MSC and this is what his E model project looks like now.  Difference between he and I?  He gets to do his own work, and I would have to pay someone else to do mine.

[Ned Gravel]

Quote: JimR

So true.  Very nice.  Is that an MT prop?

Jim