keep M20J or build experimental…

[dominikos]

no, it’s not a bait topic but actual question I asked myself for sometime…

I really like idea of building a plane and not being restricted by FAA on what I do with it… I keep log of my under A&P supervision activities and have another 1,600 hours to meet &P part of the A&P certification.

I went to Oshkosh and there are three planes that keep getting me interested in experimental world… Velocity, RV 10/14 and Sling HW. All doable… but then the reality sinks in… Velocity and RV are the same engine tech as Mooney. Sling is slower but is HW which as I get older is not a bad thing and allows for easier access to the back seat. 

But coming from Oshkosh, the reality sinks in. I can get to M20J forever plane for under $200K - new paint, new avionics, refreshed interior and engine overhaul. Anything in experimental world is $250K, and will still have the same/worse performance. And design is still less robust than Mooney… So, came back home from Oshkosh, envious of Rotax 916 and planning my M20J interior upgrade and looking forward to Dynon AP. It’s hard to beat Mooney and that’s what I will stick with… and yes, I did fly non-stop from KOSH to 6R3 (Houston) on one tank in six hours and still had 9 gallons of fuel left. And my UL is almost 1050 lbs.

[PT20J]

Good decision. Nowhere in your analysis did you mention looking forward to spending years of nights and weekends building an airplane. It’s a big commitment, and only if you find the building at least as enjoyable (maybe more so) than flying are you going to enjoy the experience.

[KSMooniac]

I started building an RV6 more than 25 years ago, but let life get in the way, suffered mission creep (wanted 4 seats) and stalled out. I'm very happy I ended up choosing a J as it checks so many boxes. I've scratched the building itch a little with mods/improvements over the years, but of course haven't come close to a full build. Even if faced with the same dilemma today, I'm not sure I'd choose an RV10 at 2x the cost compared to my old J. (10 was not an option back then, only Lancair ES)

I'm now looking forward to building a dream hangar with room to eventually add another plane, or project, but will not get rid of the J. Building or restoring a fun plane should help me satisfy that urge, while getting to enjoy the Mooney for many more years.

Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk

[Utah20Gflyer]

I’ve considered this many times and always come to the conclusion it would be very difficult to build something as capable and well equipped as my Mooney for anywhere near what I’m into my Mooney.  

[EricJ]

I still think about this, usually either thinking toward an RV-14 or their new high-wing taildragger once it is available.   Flightchops recently put up a video that their costs for materials to build their RV-14 was $250k.   That's with a brand-new engine, a whiz-bang panel, and very nice paint and interior, so somebody on a budget could certainly do it for less.   Nevertheless, including tool/jig/material purchases, it's probably going to be in that region for most people.    So saving purchase/acquisition money is not a reason to build an experimental, it seems.

It'd be a lot of fun, though, and I think if I had a lot of extra space somewhere to do it I'd be building something.   One of the main things that worries me about my airplane is just the age.   It's hard to not anticipate that some wiring, hose, cable, or mechanical component is just reaching an age where it might cause a significant problem.    

[ttflyer]

We owned an RV-6 for four years before we bought our J.  The RV was fun to fly but I never really felt comfortable with it.  It very much had that "built in a garage" feel.  And ours was a VERY nice RV-6. 

I can't begin to tell you how much more "substantial" the Mooney is.  It's just a real airplane.  I feel confident in my chances if I end up off-airport.  I don't mind paying a bit more for maintenance knowing everything that's done is properly documented and faa approved.  It's just a peace of mind that I can't put a price on.  I'm much more relaxed in the Mooney for many reasons.

I would never go back to experimental.  Just my 2c....

[A64Pilot]

In truth I can’t imagine why anyone would want a Rotax over a Lycoming.

Best aircraft I’ve ever seen were home built, we have a Master builder in my neighborhood, apparently this year they hung one he built in the Smithsonian.

And the worst I’ve ever seen were homebuilt, many I wouldn’t fly in.

I can see the draw though with much less money in Avionics etc. but the buy in is years of nights and weekends, and I don’t have that kind of dedication.

I think if you counted your time that Experimental Home built is phenomenally expensive.

But I’m convinced it and LSA is the future, since the FAA was allowed to drop “promote aviation” and has only been required to regulate aviation I’ve gotten the strong impression that they want to get out of little airplanes completely, or nearly anyway.

Edited August 7, 2023 by A64Pilot

[DXB]

Then there's the path of buying an experimental that someone else built...  The economics might be more favorable there? I'm not sure.  That may require a new knowledge base and set of skills in prebuy evaluation and subsequent maintenance - I'm not sure I have the bandwidth, so I'm sticking with my Mooney for now. 

If I'm still fit to keep flying by the time getting insured in a retract gets too hard, factory built LSAs will hopefully be far more capable, and I'll sell the Mooney to transition to one of those.

[JimB]

I went through this about 5 years ago when I was airplane shopping. Really wanted to build but after I priced out the kit, engine and avionics, I could have bought 3 or 4 M20Fs and I could fly anyone of them that day. With the RVs or Lancair I was looking at years before I could fly it and from what I can tell, an experimental is never going going to be worth what you put in it. So I found a nice sound M20F and have had a great time installing avionics and upgrading various stuff. But for me as an A&P/IA/DAR-T, I don't have to worry about doing the work myself, just the higher cost and availability of replacement components. 

[ArtVandelay]

Do you want to build or do you want to fly?

[RobertGary1]

Just add a 103 to your fleet and enjoy both. I literally needed a new nose wheel the other day and just ran over to tractor supply. The 103 world is simpler. 

[A64Pilot]

1 hour ago, DXB said:

Then there's the path of buying an experimental that someone else built...  The economics might be more favorable there? I'm not sure.  That may require a new knowledge base and set of skills in prebuy evaluation and subsequent maintenance - I'm not sure I have the bandwidth, so I'm sticking with my Mooney for now. 

If I'm still fit to keep flying by the time getting insured in a retract gets too hard, factory built LSAs will hopefully be far more capable, and I'll sell the Mooney to transition to one of those.

A good RV-7 and a good J model go for about the same price or did a couple of years ago when I was looking.

The J will be much older, the 7 well can have all kinds of homemade issues or may not, everything in the J better meet FAR standards the 7 won’t and that I think is the biggest draw, not having to be “airworthy”

I thought about it and if a good 8 was for sale I might have gone that route. We only need room for two, but since buying the J the extra room that the J has has really comes in handy, you can carry folding bikes, electric scooters, or just lots of luggage, bring things back from vacation etc that you can’t in an RV, plus flying a bubble canopy in Florida in Summer is crazy hot. The J is really a lot more comfortable than a 6 or 7. The 7 and 8 with 200 HP is faster, and aerobatic.

Based on the number of fatal accidents of nose wheel collapses of 6 and 7’s I wouldn’t consider the A models myself.

Van does I think the best job of any Experimental kit manufacturer of ensuring airworthiness, but I think it still falls short of a Certified airplane, which is a touchy subject with owner / builders so best not to bring it up with them

[gmonnig]

I think about this daily on my breaks at work, always shopping on Barnstormers. This last Oshkosh was depressing for a lot reasons (accidents, heat, loss of life, loss of the F model Mooney my wife and I walked passed everyday).  For me the lack of kit manufacturers and the lack of advancements in the GA made OSH even worse. It feels like general aviation is slowly dying out and kitplanes used to be the fire that kept it alive. Now we really only have three choices in touring kitplanes. Vans, Sling, and Velocity are basically the only ones. Unless you want to build a backcountry plane, then there are so few options. The Velocity is the only plane that would have a substantial performance gain over our Mooneys.

My wife loves the Sling TSI and HW but she asked a very direct question, "what does this plane do better than the Mooney?" The only thing I could come up with was two doors and more legroom for backseaters. For me, I could do away with two seats and would want a big performance jump. The Glasair III would be my dream plane or maybe the DarkAero. But building any new kitplane with be $200k and up. I could buy a Cessna 310 and annuals for 10yrs before I'd hit $200k.... 

[A64Pilot]

2 hours ago, RobertGary1 said:

Just add a 103 to your fleet and enjoy both. I literally needed a new nose wheel the other day and just ran over to tractor supply. The 103 world is simpler. 

I admit I must be stupid, what’s a 103?

[Fly Boomer]

4 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

I admit I must be stupid, what’s a 103?

14 CFR part 103

[A64Pilot]

You know I just think ultra light. May sound silly but lately I’ve been thinking about one as a toy.

I thought something like a Stinson 108, but couldn’t come up with 103

But didn’t that market die in the 80’s? They were popular then but seemed to just go away.

‘If I still had the physical ability I’d want one of the parachutes with a back pack motor, the trikes just don’t interest me.

Edited August 7, 2023 by A64Pilot

[Pinecone]

I love my 252,  But it is a traveling machine.  Not the plane to go to the airport just to fly for a hour.

So I am looking at picking up a tailwheel aerobatic plane for just plain screwing around with an airplane.

 

[Hank]

3 hours ago, gmonnig said:

I think about this daily on my breaks at work, always shopping on Barnstormers. This last Oshkosh was depressing for a lot reasons (accidents, heat, loss of life, loss of the F model Mooney my wife and I walked passed everyday).  For me the lack of kit manufacturers and the lack of advancements in the GA made OSH even worse. It feels like general aviation is slowly dying out and kitplanes used to be the fire that kept it alive. Now we really only have three choices in touring kitplanes. Vans, Sling, and Velocity are basically the only ones. Unless you want to build a backcountry plane, then there are so few options. The Velocity is the only plane that would have a substantial performance gain over our Mooneys.

My wife loves the Sling TSI and HW but she asked a very direct question, "what does this plane do better than the Mooney?" The only thing I could come up with was two doors and more legroom for backseaters. For me, I could do away with two seats and would want a big performance jump. The Glasair III would be my dream plane or maybe the DarkAero. But building any new kitplane with be $200k and up. I could buy a Cessna 310 and annuals for 10yrs before I'd hit $200k.... 

 

1 hour ago, Pinecone said:

I love my 252,  But it is a traveling machine.  Not the plane to go to the airport just to fly for a hour.

So I am looking at picking up a tailwheel aerobatic plane for just plain screwing around with an airplane.

 

Check out Just Aircraft, way less than 200K. While much slower than even my little Mooney, they excel at back country landings. Their homepage shows one departing in 200', between trees and over logs.  . . .  Please don't try that in your Mooney!

I think they look fun, but I'm still traveling further than I'd want to in one. Just came home Saturday, my fuel stop was 411 nm away before I was allowed to deviate around the precious Atlanta Bravo airspace. Speaking of which, what nutcase in DC thought naming an intersection outside Atlanta "GRANT" was socially acceptable???? It is only marginally less offensive than "SHRMN" would be!

[gmonnig]

2 hours ago, Hank said:

 

Check out Just Aircraft, way less than 200K. While much slower than even my little Mooney, they excel at back country landings. Their homepage shows one departing in 200', between trees and over logs.  . . .  Please don't try that in your Mooney!

I think they look fun, but I'm still traveling further than I'd want to in one. Just came home Saturday, my fuel stop was 411 nm away before I was allowed to deviate around the precious Atlanta Bravo airspace. Speaking of which, what nutcase in DC thought naming an intersection outside Atlanta "GRANT" was socially acceptable???? It is only marginally less offensive than "SHRMN" would be!

Hey, that "GRANT" fix is mine. Actually the best fix I use is "SHART". Somewhere up Iowa but it gets a chuckle every time I use it. I love the Just aircraft but being a midwesterner, it would take days to get anywhere at 80-90kts with a 40kt headwind. Probably great in the Rockies but not good for flatlanders. Got my tail wheel in a supercub but I'll probably only sell my Mooney for a terrifyingly fast plane. 

[M20F]

You are really overlooking the larger opportunity which is to do both experimental and a M20J.  Drop at PT6 on it and maybe it can keep up with my Executive. 

[Pinecone]

12 hours ago, Hank said:

Check out Just Aircraft, way less than 200K. While much slower than even my little Mooney, they excel at back country landings. Their homepage shows one departing in 200', between trees and over logs.  . . .  Please don't try that in your Mooney!

But will it fly upside down?????

[A64Pilot]

I don’t have the stomach or desire for aerobatics anymore, but where I am an Amphib LSA looks like fun.

Searay’s are everywhere but they don’t impress me, they work but don’t seem well designed, sort of cobbled together and the wing is unimpressive

plus they won’t survive an inadvertent wheels down in water landing and as several will I think that’s something that I would want.

Neighbor has a Superpetrel which seems to be a good airplane, as his was used I think it was about half price of new. A few years old and maybe 200 hours on it I think.

https://superpetrelusa.com

It seems these aircraft depreciate HUGELY, I have no idea if new Certified do as well as one or two year old aircraft I’ve never looked at. I’ve always had a budget and the most I can get within budget means a much older aircraft.

‘Cubs here are very popular second aircraft, but darned if I can figure out why, they are overpriced and don’t do anything well

[A64Pilot]

13 hours ago, Hank said:

 Speaking of which, what nutcase in DC thought naming an intersection outside Atlanta "GRANT" was socially acceptable???? It is only marginally less offensive than "SHRMN" would be!

Well as any of  Military posts with Southern General names were renamed, surely they will this too?

Honestly I’ve never noticed, I don’t think average person does.

[Hank]

3 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

Well as any of  Military posts with Southern General names were renamed, surely they will this too?

Honestly I’ve never noticed, I don’t think average person does.

No, the woke crowd is busy erasing Southerness. That's why the Commanding General of the Union Army has a navigation point named after him outside the largest city in the South.

Renaming all bases, schools, etc., is a huge waste of time and money, both of which could be used productively instead . . . .

[RobertGary1]

On 8/7/2023 at 11:18 AM, A64Pilot said:

You know I just think ultra light. May sound silly but lately I’ve been thinking about one as a toy.

I thought something like a Stinson 108, but couldn’t come up with 103

But didn’t that market die in the 80’s? They were popular then but seemed to just go away.

‘If I still had the physical ability I’d want one of the parachutes with a back pack motor, the trikes just don’t interest me.

Backpacks are for kids. I fly all types of airplanes from ww2 tail wheels to jets and helicopters and gliders but nothing comes close to giving the real sensation of flight anywhere close to my ppc trike.