M20E Chaparral

[Mplante23]

I am looking at a 1970 M20E as a first plane (well technically a second plane but the first one is a rebuild project that I got into just for the learning and it has wings in the wrong place so it doesn't count). Just looking for some feedback.  I have read a bunch of the posts where people talk about the F  being bigger, and the J being faster, I can't justify the extra money for 10" of overall length.  The extra fuel capacity isn't a big concern for me right now as I am not planning more than 2-3 hour trips.  Useful load isn't a ton different (like 46 lbs with full fuel if the data I found on global air is right 700 full fuel on an E vs 746 on the F with full fuel). Looking for someone who has an E that can give me real world advice. The only Mooney owners I've come across at the airport I have my other plane at own C's and they all love them.  Most of them told me a C would be as good as an E but I want the electric gear and flaps.  What else don't I know.  Besides everything if you ask my other half.

[BloodRedSkies]

9 minutes ago, Mplante23 said:

I am looking at a 1970 M20E as a first plane (well technically a second plane but the first one is a rebuild project that I got into just for the learning and it has wings in the wrong place so it doesn't count). Just looking for some feedback.  I have read a bunch of the posts where people talk about the F  being bigger, and the J being faster, I can't justify the extra money for 10" of overall length.  The extra fuel capacity isn't a big concern for me right now as I am not planning more than 2-3 hour trips.  Useful load isn't a ton different (like 46 lbs with full fuel if the data I found on global air is right 700 full fuel on an E vs 746 on the F with full fuel). Looking for someone who has an E that can give me real world advice. The only Mooney owners I've come across at the airport I have my other plane at own C's and they all love them.  Most of them told me a C would be as good as an E but I want the electric gear and flaps.  What else don't I know.  Besides everything if you ask my other half.

I just bought a 1969 E and would be happy to discuss anything with you. I still have the daily epiphany as most of my time in Mooneys (~900-100hrs) is in the K&J.

My reasons like you were the extra room isn't a huge deal to me. I wanted fuel injected and at least 200hp. When I set out in my search I wanted 900+ useful load, 800 statue mile range, 150kts+. In the budget I set out Mooneys and comanche 250/260s were the only things priced there consistently. The ADs on the comanche were the hard part. I had lots of time in the Mooney so it felt like a natural fit. Like you I wanted electric gear and flaps and a later E,F or Earlier J,K would work. My issue with the K was increased maintenance and I'm going to be traveling with dogs frequently so they would limit my altitude. The J's have been way over priced. A pile of garbage that hasn't flown in years with 80s avionics they still want too much(and many are still sitting a year later). A lot of nice Fs have been trying to get J prices and the E kind of falls into a dead zone of similar performance without the bigger back seat. So I found one that worked for me. 

Feel free to message me directly or ask here and the tribe can give us all good to know information. 

[DXB]

59 minutes ago, Mplante23 said:

The only Mooney owners I've come across at the airport I have my other plane at own C's and they all love them.  Most of them told me a C would be as good as an E but I want the electric gear and flaps.  What else don't I know.  Besides everything if you ask my other half.

FWIW there are lots of Cs that have electric gear and flaps - in fact more such Cs than Es - all Mooneys '69 and later came with standard electric gear and flaps.  Before that hydraulic flaps and J bar were standard for all. In the later pre-'69 years, electric gear and flaps became an option for all of them I believe, but you mainly see it on the pre-'69 Fs.

[M20F]

If you don’t need the rear seats the E is the way to go.  

[Bolter]

27 minutes ago, DXB said:

FWIW there are lots of Cs that have electric gear and flaps - in fact more such Cs than Es - all Mooneys '69 and later came with standard electric gear and flaps.  Before that hydraulic flaps and J bar were standard for all. In the later pre-'69 years, electric gear and flaps became an option for all of them I believe, but you mainly see it on the pre-'69 Fs.

Just to be clear on it, there are also many Pre-J Mooney's with manual gear.  If the @Mplante23 requires electric gear, then he cannot assume every E has it.  

[McMooney]

I have a 1974 E.

an e is a c with a larger engine.  some other tiny differences.  

it's faster than both the c and f, maybe.  faster than the c but not alot faster than the f

a J is not alot faster than an e.

my E is a 145 to 150kt airplane BUTTT i tend to fly lop so let's just say 140ish.  saving 10 to 15 mins doesn't really mean a lot when flying HOURS

the backseats are very useable, well unless you're like 7 feet tall.  i'm 6'0ish and when in flying position, the space behind me is larger than airline economy.

I wouldn't go acting like an airliner but you can take someone to lunch.  Useful load, not enough diff to talk about. prob more difference between copies of each plane than the models themselves.

I'd really like the extra 12 gallons of fuel from the F, it would save me the expense of adding long range tanks

If i was to upgrade, it would be to a k+, the F and J just aren't that different from the E.  also if you're crazy with boatloads of cash, you can make an E faster than the J.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 9, 2023 by McMooney

[Shadrach]

1 hour ago, Mplante23 said:

I am looking at a 1970 M20E as a first plane (well technically a second plane but the first one is a rebuild project that I got into just for the learning and it has wings in the wrong place so it doesn't count). Just looking for some feedback.  I have read a bunch of the posts where people talk about the F  being bigger, and the J being faster, I can't justify the extra money for 10" of overall length.  The extra fuel capacity isn't a big concern for me right now as I am not planning more than 2-3 hour trips.  Useful load isn't a ton different (like 46 lbs with full fuel if the data I found on global air is right 700 full fuel on an E vs 746 on the F with full fuel). Looking for someone who has an E that can give me real world advice. The only Mooney owners I've come across at the airport I have my other plane at own C's and they all love them.  Most of them told me a C would be as good as an E but I want the electric gear and flaps.  What else don't I know.  Besides everything if you ask my other half.

It’s not just about length. The extra 165lbs of useful and hour of fuel are useful to some. 

[MikeOH]

Well, I have an F and would have killed to have found mine with manual gear! Don’t be too quick to demand electric! There are ADs…

[M20F]

2 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

Well, I have an F and would have killed to have found mine with manual gear! Don’t be too quick to demand electric! There are ADs…

I bought my F specifically for manual gear and hydraulic flaps.  Much cheaper and easier.  Manual gear is 1 million times better and after using it about 3 times it is a non-event.  Because I am dangerous I retract mine rapidly about 2” above the runway, the girls dig it.
 
I would personally though never own a plane named after a scrub plant.  

[JoeM]

Having had an F and a K (231) before my E, (all turbocharged), I have a few observations:

1. Manual gear is easy to get used to and much cheaper to maintain. As long as your shoulder works, it is superior. Not as sexy though. (My E has electric flaps)

2. My E is 10 years older than my F and 15 than my K. There are differences which some people overlook. Lack of sun visors. Older yokes and door handles that break. Steel windscreen tube that messes up the compass. No emergency baggage door unlock. Flying in the yellow arc alot. Fewer autopilot options. Wiring that is ancient and hard to troubleshoot. Vents that don't work the same way. Mooney really did improve the airplane over the years. 

3. The K engines usually need a top overhaul about 900 hours. I loved my 231, until I had to pay the bills. Unless you need to fly high (over mountains, weather, or winds) they are a lot more expensive than an F. For me, it wasn't worth the extra money anymore. 

Which one is best depends on your mission. You are smart asking lots of questions and getting loads of free advice. 

Good luck! 

[Shadrach]

31 minutes ago, JoeM said:

Having had an F and a K (231) before my E, (all turbocharged), I have a few observations:

1. Manual gear is easy to get used to and much cheaper to maintain. As long as your shoulder works, it is superior. Not as sexy though. (My E has electric flaps)

2. My E is 10 years older than my F and 15 than my K. There are differences which some people overlook. Lack of sun visors. Older yokes and door handles that break. Steel windscreen tube that messes up the compass. No emergency baggage door unlock. Flying in the yellow arc alot. Fewer autopilot options. Wiring that is ancient and hard to troubleshoot. Vents that don't work the same way. Mooney really did improve the airplane over the years. 

3. The K engines usually need a top overhaul about 900 hours. I loved my 231, until I had to pay the bills. Unless you need to fly high (over mountains, weather, or winds) they are a lot more expensive than an F. For me, it wasn't worth the extra money anymore. 

Which one is best depends on your mission. You are smart asking lots of questions and getting loads of free advice. 

Good luck! 

Most of that stuff is easily and inexpensively mitigated. My 67F came from the factory with perfectly serviceable sun visors. The interior pieces have proven to be quite robust. I added an emergency pull to the baggage compartment. All Mooneys have a steel tube running down the windshield.  The early split windshield birds simply have the steel tube boxed in with aluminum.  If there is an issue with the compass the airframe must be degaussed no matter hai year it was made.

[Zippy_Bird]

Hello Mplante23,

Welcome to MooneySpace!

I own a "new to me" 1966 M20E Super21 with Manual gear that I purchased earlier this year from Jimmy Garrison at GMAX Aircraft down in Texas.  Can't say enough good things about Jimmy and my experience.  When I sell or buy again, It will be with Jimmy.  Definitely recommend reaching out to him and explaining your Mooney requirements.

As to requirements, it is my opinion you should list and prioritize "what you need" for your aviation mission before searching for your Mooney and then stick to that list!  I say this humbly, because I wasted SOOO much time chasing desire and conjecture versus actually getting into something real and practical... Well, as practical as GA can be!  Buying and owning an airplane is journey in itself with a learning curve.  You can learn a ton from the forums, but everyone has different needs and this is as it should be.  Your Mooney journey will be different, so lay out your guiding principles, and go get one!  Now for me, I conducted a mission assessment and my journey unfolded like this:

1) Where will I primary fly?... I am in the Central US in the Ohio River valley at 500 MSL.  No mountains, mild winters, density altitude no factor, HUMIDITY a huge factor.  Which Mooney model would work... all of them!  BUT it did go into a hanger!

2) How will I use it... Local VFR/IFR Training/Cross Country?  For me a little of everything, but IFR training was the top of that list.  Which Mooney model would work... all of them!  BUT Avionics was a MUST and I got some!

3) Who is flying with me 80% of the time... I have a family with Spouse + three kids AND parents and siblings all nearby.  Could have easily got tripped up here, but despite this I fly ALONE 80% of the time, one passenger the remaining 19.99%, and in my eight years of flying I have carried two passengers simultaneously in any plane only twice!  Which Mooney model would work here... all of them!  I could split hairs and obsess about the extra leg room in the F/G versus C/E, but for me this was irrelevant.  If a family member complains I won't hear it again for another 4yrs!

4)  Lastly and most importantly (for my mission) was where will it "Be Based?"  How far of a drive is it to that airport?  Are hangers available?  Is Fuel on the field?  Are there "skilled & willing mechanics" nearby?  Are CFIs around?  For me these answers were more important than "which airplane" in supporting my mission goals.  Luckily, the market permitted an airport 15mins from me with all the above.  If I had been forced to other airports in the area I could have been 45mins OR 1hr driving each way.  Think about 90mins-2hrs total drive time for a few laps in the pattern.  I am not judging anyone who does this, but for me that would have killed the joy.  And as a parent with three children and spouse, had I stared pulling 4hr disappearing acts my spouse would have killed the plane.  Also worth mentioning, last week my battery died and it was a non-event.  I went home, shop took the plane, three days later I am back in the air.  Location, location, location for me, but again everyone is different.

In the end a C, D, E, F, or G would have accomplished my mission IF the avionics were up to snuff.  A 1966 M20E Super 21 was on the market when I was looking that fit my checklist items.  I went for it.  Am I happy with this bird?  F@#$ YES!  Could I have been happy with another bird?  Sure!

I feel like I've provided a lot of what you didn't ask for, so I'll try to end with what I think you wanted to know... Could I go back to a C now that I've flown the E?   NO.  I love the 200hp with fuel injection.  Not messing with carb heat/carb icing is great.  Love the Johnson-Bar manual gear.  Love the manual flaps.  I intentionally looked for these to reduce maintenance cost and increase reliability.  Now, had I been given the choice between an E or F "all things beginning equal" I guess I would have bought the F.  Would that scenario ever exist?  NO.  Would I pay more for an F over an E similarly equipped?  NO.  Does the extra leg room matter for my mission?  NO.  Plus, when I was shopping C's & E's were everywhere but F's & G's were rare as hen's teeth.  Would I wait for an F?  NO.

To close, I love my E.  This bird does easily does 135kn @ 7.5gph at 4500ft if I make a perfunctory attempt to lean.  Honestly, my current training focus is "when to start TOD" for slowing the plane for landing.  I find myself in the yellow a lot... but that is topic for another thread!

Make your mission list, prioritize, and stick to it.  Don't let analysis paralysis ground you.

Good luck on Mooney journey!

Z

[gmonnig]

My 65' E does 150kts+ on 9-10gph. The E is a cool spot to be if you don't need the rear legroom. It's the lightest (2575lbs) 200hp Mooney out there which means it's the best climbing 4 cylinder Mooney. The F would be nice but the extra weight is a climb/cruise penalty. I will say, the extra fuel of the F would be the biggest benefit to me. That will very specifically per person. If I'm flying with my wife, she hates sitting more than 3hrs so we always stop somewhere around there. If I'm by myself, I'd love to go 5.5hrs. But yeah, I love the E and the electric gear. Haven't had any issues with it. It's also nice to know that in an incapacitated pilot situation, my 110lb wife won't have to try and manually get the gear down with her left hand while trying to fly. 

[zaitcev]

I have a 1969 "Chapparal" M20E and it's nowhere near a 150 kt airplane. I can only do that much at sea level and 2700 rpm. Mostly I cruise at about 132 kts, give or take, and somewhere between 4.5 and 12.5. The higher I go, the slower it gets. The horsepower falls off quicker than true knots overtake indicated.

I used to blame my upright windshield, but I talked to a guy at OSH23, who has almost the same model and he touches 150 kts. My gears retract normally (I took a video in flight). At this point I'm blaming rigging.

[Hank]

1 hour ago, zaitcev said:

I have a 1969 "Chapparal" M20E and it's nowhere near a 150 kt airplane. I can only do that much at sea level and 2700 rpm. Mostly I cruise at about 132 kts, give or take, and somewhere between 4.5 and 12.5. The higher I go, the slower it gets. The horsepower falls off quicker than true knots overtake indicated.

I used to blame my upright windshield, but I talked to a guy at OSH23, who has almost the same model and he touches 150 kts. My gears retract normally (I took a video in flight). At this point I'm blaming rigging.

Get thee to Maxwell or SWTA or Dugosh and get rigged! My 1970 C trues out at 145-148 KTAS above 7500 msl (WOT- and 2500), and you've got 20 more HP. Yes, I have the 201 windshield, but I also have a 3-blade Hartzell prop.

[BloodRedSkies]

7 hours ago, zaitcev said:

I have a 1969 "Chapparal" M20E and it's nowhere near a 150 kt airplane. I can only do that much at sea level and 2700 rpm. Mostly I cruise at about 132 kts, give or take, and somewhere between 4.5 and 12.5. The higher I go, the slower it gets. The horsepower falls off quicker than true knots overtake indicated.

I used to blame my upright windshield, but I talked to a guy at OSH23, who has almost the same model and he touches 150 kts. My gears retract normally (I took a video in flight). At this point I'm blaming rigging.

That seems really odd. I know mine is way out of rig and it's got a 3 blade and a 201 windshield so imo they cancel out. I true out 148-152. I probably wouldn't know this if I didn't have G5s because my mechanical Airspeed Indicator basically sticks about 118kts IAS and won't go past that (even in a dive). It's close to correct below 118 in the pattern. I wouldn't have really questioned it to much if I didn't have the G5s. Mine is also a 1969. 

What power settings are you using? Are you sure your ASI is working properly? Have you done a GS test? Go up to 7.5k and run it 4 directions and average it compare that to the book. Even my roles left, control surfaces sticking up beast can do 145-150. 

 

[Shadrach]

On 8/11/2023 at 11:21 PM, gmonnig said:

My 65' E does 150kts+ on 9-10gph. The E is a cool spot to be if you don't need the rear legroom. It's the lightest (2575lbs) 200hp Mooney out there which means it's the best climbing 4 cylinder Mooney. The F would be nice but the extra weight is a climb/cruise penalty. I will say, the extra fuel of the F would be the biggest benefit to me. That will very specifically per person. If I'm flying with my wife, she hates sitting more than 3hrs so we always stop somewhere around there. If I'm by myself, I'd love to go 5.5hrs. But yeah, I love the E and the electric gear. Haven't had any issues with it. It's also nice to know that in an incapacitated pilot situation, my 110lb wife won't have to try and manually get the gear down with her left hand while trying to fly. 

Certified max gross weight is not a very useful comparison with regards to climb performance. I believe the difference in air frame wait between a short body and a mid body is ~20lbs. The empty weight of my F is currently 1680lbs (1060ul). What is your E weigh?

[Entropy]

Here’s a question for ya’ll; is there any significant difference a buyer should care about between pre-68 Mooney vs post-68? I had read somewhere that cost cutting occurred around ‘69, and was wondering if negative changes were significant enough to avoid later model’s of C, E, F? Thanks!

 

(edit) Actually, I think I will make this a new post

Edited August 23, 2023 by Entropy

[gmonnig]

5 hours ago, Shadrach said:

Certified max gross weight is not a very useful comparison with regards to climb performance. I believe the difference in air frame wait between a short body and a mid body is ~20lbs. The empty weight of my F is currently 1680lbs (1060ul). What is your E weigh?

It is when we have the same wing and same engine. My plane weighs nearly what yours does, 1675lbs after new interior and avionics. I only have a 900lb useful load, which makes the F better for family traveling. I’m sure our planes loaded with the same weight and same fuel, it would be basically the same climb rate. But at a higher Max Gross it wouldn’t be the same. My POH shows a 300fpm increase in climb rate at 2200lbs vs 2575lbs gross. Assuming those numbers 375lbs less weight equals 300fpm. Your plane is 165lbs more at gross, which equals 132fpm less climb rate than an E. Sea level, gross, std temp is a 1120fpm climb rate. What’s the F show out of curiosity?  

[Shadrach]

1 hour ago, gmonnig said:

It is when we have the same wing and same engine. My plane weighs nearly what yours does, 1675lbs after new interior and avionics. I only have a 900lb useful load, which makes the F better for family traveling. I’m sure our planes loaded with the same weight and same fuel, it would be basically the same climb rate. But at a higher Max Gross it wouldn’t be the same. My POH shows a 300fpm increase in climb rate at 2200lbs vs 2575lbs gross. Assuming those numbers 375lbs less weight equals 300fpm. Your plane is 165lbs more at gross, which equals 132fpm less climb rate than an E. Sea level, gross, std temp is a 1120fpm climb rate. What’s the F show out of curiosity?  

I see what you’re saying. However, it sort of comes off like your saying that a 165lb increase in MGW is a performance disadvantage. It’s not. It would be if it came with a 165lb increase in empty weight. In reality all 200hp Mooneys will have very similar climb rates at the same weight. If I could get the 160lb increase to 2900lb that the te J models have, I would do it. It would not change climb performance of my plane, it would merely expand loading envelope and give me a UL of 1220lbs.

[Pinecone]

Just because you have a higher UL to a higher GW, doesn't mean you have to load to it. 

I seldom fill my tanks (252 with Monroy) but I was VERY happy to have them, and the GW capability (Encore upgraded so 1119 UL), when I stopped at KEYF and fuel was $4.85 a gallon.  

[gmonnig]

15 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

Just because you have a higher UL to a higher GW, doesn't mean you have to load to it. 

I seldom fill my tanks (252 with Monroy) but I was VERY happy to have them, and the GW capability ()SENcore upgraded so 1119 UL), when I stopped at KEYF and fuel was $4.85 a gallon.  

Yep I get that. But if you ARE loading it up more, then the performance will take a hit. The POH says 100lbs will change true airspeed 1.1mph and obviously we already talked about weight vs climb rate. I wish I had an Encore, that useful load is crazy and the extended range tanks are nice! 

[Pinecone]

Yes, but sometimes the hit in speed and climb is worth it.

It is nice to have the flexibility.