What is the difference between the Mooney M20 and the Mooney Executive

[Hank]

1 hour ago, M20Doc said:

I’m saddened that you guys left out the best of all the Mooney designs……….the Piper Comanche!!

Classic, efficient design by Al Mooney. Drag added, tail ruined by William Piper.

[Hank]

1 hour ago, M20Doc said:

You’ll have to admit that they got the engine right in at least one model!

In a Big Daddy Garlits kind of way!

[Pinecone]

12 hours ago, natdm said:

Do you mean 310 HP?

Yes

 

[EricJ]

5 hours ago, M20Doc said:

You’ll have to admit that they got the engine right in at least one model!

Two engines, one crank. 

[N201MKTurbo]

8 minutes ago, EricJ said:

Two engines, one crank. 

Not nearly as good as a twinkie, you only get one oil pump, only two mags instead of four. One alternator instead of two. (I'm going to catch hell from @M20Doc for this)

[cliffy]

IIRC the turbo compound drive to the crankshaft produced about 150 more horse power for the crankshaft

The R-2800 was producing  a reliable 4,000 HP by the end of the war

Mooney had trouble getting the twin turbos to be nice to each other and called on Bob Minnis to solve the problem

Most of the naming on Mooney was driven by marketing desires. 

[N201MKTurbo]

2 hours ago, cliffy said:

IIRC the turbo compound drive to the crankshaft produced about 150 more horse power for the crankshaft

The R-2800 was producing  a reliable 4,000 HP by the end of the war

Mooney had trouble getting the twin turbos to be nice to each other and called on Bob Minnis to solve the problem

Most of the naming on Mooney was driven by marketing desires. 

You have said that before. I cannot find a production version of the R-2800 that made more than 2500 HP or an experimental version that made more than 3600 HP on a test stand.

Can you share documentation that an airplane ever flew with a R-2800 making more than 2500 HP?

[cliffy]

Don't know if it ever flew but I have a complete history of the R-2800 in BIG book form 

When I get home I will look it up and see if I can copy a reference. 

[EricJ]

37 minutes ago, cliffy said:

Don't know if it ever flew but I have a complete history of the R-2800 in BIG book form 

When I get home I will look it up and see if I can copy a reference. 

I have a copy of Graham White's book on the topic and the highest power production versions appear to be the R-2800-99W and -103W, which were both rated for 2500 hp takeoff power and 1900 hp normal.

I also have a copy of Jack Connors' book on P&W's overall history, and there were some production variants of the R-4360 that were rated for 3500 hp takeoff power.   There were a couple experimental applications as high as 4300 hp takeoff power, but I couldn't find any evidence of them going into production.

[cliffy]

I'll be home in a few days and will look it up in my book and report back 

I have a book on the 4360 and one on the 2800

[PT20J]

On 7/28/2023 at 5:56 PM, EricJ said:

I have a copy of Graham White's book on the topic and the highest power production versions appear to be the R-2800-99W and -103W, which were both rated for 2500 hp takeoff power and 1900 hp normal.

TABLE 9.2, p231 lists the -32W used in the F4U-5 as having a max SL hp of 2800.

[EricJ]

4 minutes ago, PT20J said:

TABLE 9.2, p231 lists the -32W used in the F4U-5 as having a max SL hp of 2800.

We must have very different editions of that book, as none of that lines up.   Both the texts I have show the -32W at 2300 hp at 2800 rpm.

[PT20J]

17 minutes ago, EricJ said:

We must have very different editions of that book, as none of that lines up.   Both the texts I have show the -32W at 2300 hp at 2800 rpm.

Interesting. Mine is copyright 1995.

[EricJ]

3 minutes ago, PT20J said:

Interesting. Mine is copyright 1995.

Weird, there must have been a major revision.   Mine is copyright 2001 (SAE), but there's no indication of a revision or edition number that I can see.

[glbtrottr]

I wonder how the aerodynamics would work in an M20 with a big rotary like that…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EricJ]

3 minutes ago, glbtrottr said:

I wonder how the aerodynamics would work in an M20 with a big rotary like that…

Or the W&B. 

[Huckster79]

6 hours ago, glbtrottr said:

I wonder how the aerodynamics would work in an M20 with a big rotary like that…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s what the guppy mouth is a remnant from  

[Aerodon]

On 7/26/2023 at 12:45 PM, Pinecone said:

M20F - 200 HP Lycoming, stretched 10 inches, Executive 21. First of the "mid body" models.  The ones before became "short body" models

M20L - aka PFM, Porsche 217 HP engine, stretched again to become the "long body" models, most converted to IO-550

So can anyone help refine this list.  First 'stretch' is 10".  How much more was added to the fuselage (cockpit area) in the M20L and is this the same until the end?  And is this stretch all in the fuselage, or some in the engine and spinner?

I like the way the major manufacturers post their information, 'X feet forward of the wing and Y feet behind the wing'.

Aerodon

[Hank]

13 minutes ago, Aerodon said:

So can anyone help refine this list.  First 'stretch' is 10".  How much more was added to the fuselage (cockpit area) in the M20L and is this the same until the end?  And is this stretch all in the fuselage, or some in the engine and spinner?

I like the way the major manufacturers post their information, 'X feet forward of the wing and Y feet behind the wing'.

Aerodon

I forget the exact figures, and am away from home. Long bodies have extra length in the cowling for the 6-cylinder engine, and added extra length in the baggage area. It's about 24" additional length.

Here's my C:

Here's a J that someone posted recently:

Does anyone have this page for a long body?

[Fly Boomer]

9 hours ago, Hank said:

Does anyone have this page for a long body?

Download a long body POH — I think they all have a similar diagram.

[Pinecone]

18 hours ago, glbtrottr said:

I wonder how the aerodynamics would work in an M20 with a big rotary like that…

FYI RADIAL engine, not rotary.  I will chalk that one up to posting from your phone.

 

[Fly Boomer]

18 hours ago, glbtrottr said:

I wonder how the aerodynamics would work in an M20 with a big rotary like that…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And, to add on to the post from @Pinecone above, with a rotary engine, the crank is bolted to the airframe, and the prop is bolted to the engine -- entire engine rotates.  Bizarre.

[EricJ]

2 hours ago, Pinecone said:

FYI RADIAL engine, not rotary.  I will chalk that one up to posting from your phone.

This is a rotary engine (from here:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_engine):

 

[MikeOH]

I'd bet p-factor is NOT to be ignored on rotaries!  

[PT20J]

50 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

I'd bet p-factor is NOT to be ignored on rotaries!  

Well actually, p-factor is a propeller effect, but we know what you mean 

All that rotating mass did create a huge gyroscopic effect which reportedly the pilots used to their advantage during dog fights. Left turns were a snap so to speak.

The rotary was very simple. All that spinning mixed the air and fuel so they didn't need carburetors. But that also meant that they didn't have throttles so they ran wide open and used a blip switch on the stick to cut out the ignition momentarily so they could land. They also used castor oil as a lubricant and the excess unburned oil exited the open exhaust ports and the pilots ingested it lubricating their digestive systems as well. According to one source, a bottle of blackberry brandy was often kept on board as an antidote. TBO was something like 50 hours.