Can't decide between 1986 M20J and 1980 M20K

[larryb]

I had a J for 5 years and a K for 6 years. The K is only slightly more expensive to operate. On my standard 150nm 1.2 hour flight I went from about 14 to 15 gallons per trip. Average cross country speed as shown in Garmin Pilot logbook function is 15 to 20 kt faster for the K. The K could be faster still but I don't fly it aggressively. 

 

Maintenance has been similar. Both engines have required 1 cylinder during my ownership, so that's a wash. The K did require a scavenger pump repair. The scavenger pump is only found on a turbo engine, so that was an extra cost related to the turbo.

 

But the maintenance expenses have been overshadowed by the other aviation costs such as hangar, insurance, fuel, etc. So it's a little more but doesn't really move the needle. For me the turbo is well worth the minor extra cost. 

[kortopates]

Turbo's are the best bang for the buck; significantly enhancing my dispatch ability since I have far more weather options with the altitude abilities to climb quickly and above weather and then cruise significantly faster at altitude. Many thousand hours in Mooney's in virtually all models and no doubt in my mind that the 252/Encore is the sweet spot in Mooney effeciency and capabilities to do it all.  

[Jetpilot86]

No Euro expert, but in the US, I’ve already found a nice perk of the turbo in my M. I go everywhere at 11 or 12000 feet. Haven’t had a single traffic call in 6 hours at those altitudes. Why?  The J’s, or anything else NA won’t normally wander up there because they lose power the further above 8000’ they go. Additionally, I’ve been able to get any route I wanted there, as I’m out or nearly everyone’s way and above most B airspace at either altitude. I’m presuming it will be even easier at 16-17k once I start using the O2. Just got the new tank installed Monday. 
 

My $.02, go with the K and an Encore, or K upgrade to it,if you can find one. 

Edited November 16, 2023 by Jetpilot86

[Ethan]

 Go with a K, you'll love the turbo. It gives you oodles of options; it gets you out of ice, lets you climb to smoother air, lets you get off the ground and climb out of high density altitude airports. I'm sure the M20J is awesome, efficient, cheaper to own and operate and is probably even nicer to fly because the nose is lighter, but I just love the options the turbo offers.

[EricJ]

17 hours ago, Jetpilot86 said:

No Euro expert, but in the US, I’ve already found a nice perk of the turbo in my M. I go everywhere at 11 or 12000 feet. Haven’t had a single traffic call in 6 hours at those altitudes. Why?  The J’s, or anything else NA won’t normally wander up there because they lose power the further above 8000’ they go.

I regularly fly my J around 10k, usually between 8k and 12k, but sometimes on trips up to 15-16k when it makes sense to take the O2 bottle along.   I've been up to 18k with mine.   A buddy that had an E model long ago would routinely fly 12k-15k because of the sparsity of traffic.    A turbo will certainly be faster at those altitudes, but it isn't necessary.   If you want to routinely go higher than 14-15k, a turbo will definitely be a benefit.

[Sue Bon]

On 11/16/2023 at 12:51 PM, Pinecone said:

The question is, how many people go from turbo to NA and are happier?   How many go from NA to turbo and will NOT go back?

I was going to make this argument, but as I'm on Team J, I thought it might fall flat...

[Pinecone]

23 hours ago, Jetpilot86 said:

No Euro expert, but in the US, I’ve already found a nice perk of the turbo in my M. I go everywhere at 11 or 12000 feet. Haven’t had a single traffic call in 6 hours at those altitudes. Why?  The J’s, or anything else NA won’t normally wander up there because they lose power the further above 8000’ they go. Additionally, I’ve been able to get any route I wanted there, as I’m out or nearly everyone’s way and above most B airspace at either altitude. I’m presuming it will be even easier at 16-17k once I start using the O2. Just got the new tank installed Monday.

I mentioned both of those in my Mooney Flyer article.

Last summer I did a 1333 nm, 7 hour flight from Denver to Maryland.

My clearance was Plains One departure, Akron transition, DIRECT.  So some 1300 miles direct.  And not a single traffic call.

[Sue Bon]

On 11/15/2023 at 9:38 AM, Ibra said:

AFAIK, one rarely takeoff IFR with 6kft DA in Europe?

Only Samedan/St. Moritz, LSZS. It's the highest airport in Europe at 5600 feet. DA in the summer can be tricky, which is why you need to do an online pilot briefing before you're allowed to land there.

[Ibra]

15 hours ago, Sue Bon said:

Only Samedan/St. Moritz, LSZS. It's the highest airport in Europe at 5600 feet. DA in the summer can be tricky, which is why you need to do an online pilot briefing before you're allowed to land there.

Yes flying IFR or VFR from altiports is tricky, that is why we have “VFR mountain rating” (to land on 500m/1500ft with 15deg slope) and “special crew/aircraft IFR certification” (to operate Iunder instruments on short non-instrument runways like Samedan, Sion, LaMole) 

One detail that is worth mentioning is that all instrument procedures (RNP, ILS, SID RNAV or CONV) flown by GA under IFR in Switzerland are actually “cloud break” or “cloud punch” rather than full IFR procedures, if you look at all Switzerland IFR airports (except two big ones: Geneva and Zurich) they have physical runways that don’t qualify for instrument runway under ICAO Annex 14 due to obvious topography, as such they can’t support full IFR procedure design as per PANS-OPS or TERPS for an instrument touchdown (on runway TDZ) or an instrument liftoff (from runway DER), as such the decision hight (OCH) is always high than 500ft, the takeoff segment is always visual and may have ceiling restriction and the required visibility is always high than 5000m or 1500m…this basically means while it’s IFR, you are supposed to behave similar to visual flying while near the ground 

The majority of those IFR procedures in Austria, France, Italy or Swiss Alps seems to require PC12 operated under NCO (sort of Part91), while other aircraft struggle: private pistons, don’t have the required performance and private jets are out of their league as they apply NCC/CAT (sort of part121)

In US, you have mountain IFR airports above 6kft with long runway (6000ft and 0% slope) where someone under Part91 can operate VFR with no specific pilot rating or aircraft permission, even IFR up to zero/zero departure and land up to 200ft DH and 1600ft RVR (550m), given this one can get lot of IFR utility in say turbo/fiki K vs clean/na J  

I don’t think similar logic apply to operate turbo and de-iced Mooney under IFR in Switzerland? you will have to learn how to enter or exit via the valleys under VFR (unless you have PC12 and you get pilot & aircraft signed off for all airports), away from Alps the only concern is cruising: FL80-FL120 will do in J (K will get there quicker) and there is rarely any need to go above except weather and winds 

 

Edited November 19, 2023 by Ibra

[Tx_Aggie]

On 11/17/2023 at 10:56 AM, EricJ said:

I regularly fly my J around 10k, usually between 8k and 12k, but sometimes on trips up to 15-16k when it makes sense to take the O2 bottle along.   I've been up to 18k with mine.   A buddy that had an E model long ago would routinely fly 12k-15k because of the sparsity of traffic.    A turbo will certainly be faster at those altitudes, but it isn't necessary.   If you want to routinely go higher than 14-15k, a turbo will definitely be a benefit.

What TAS are you seeing in the 13-15k range in the J? 2700 rpm’s?

[EricJ]

13 minutes ago, Tx_Aggie said:

What TAS are you seeing in the 13-15k range in the J? 2700 rpm’s?

I generally cruise at 2500 rpm, and TAS will depend on fuel flow.   Seems to be typically around 145-150 kts, though, iirc.   Even when it's slower the wind can more than make up the difference.

[amillet]

25 minutes ago, Tx_Aggie said:

What TAS are you seeing in the 13-15k range in the J? 2700 rpm’s?

POH shows 150 knots at 14,000. I only fly that high to take advantage of tailwinds so typically see 200 knots  going east

[Sue Bon]

12 hours ago, EricJ said:

I generally cruise at 2500 rpm, and TAS will depend on fuel flow.   Seems to be typically around 145-150 kts, though, iirc.   Even when it's slower the wind can more than make up the difference.

I cruise at 2400 rpm at 8-10k and have a TAS of 148 (ROP).

[ttflyer]

Personally, I'm on team J.  If you want to fly at altitudes where humans can't breath, you should be pressurized.  Breathing is serious business.  And O2 in concentrated form is dangerous.  I know of a Westwind that burned to the ground because the O2 system caught on fire.  I consider O2 to be the most dangerous thing onboard the jet I fly.  This whole thread is about picking up knots to fly high but that's not all there is to it...

[kortopates]

2 hours ago, ttflyer said:

Personally, I'm on team J.  If you want to fly at altitudes where humans can't breath, you should be pressurized.  Breathing is serious business.  And O2 in concentrated form is dangerous.  I know of a Westwind that burned to the ground because the O2 system caught on fire.  I consider O2 to be the most dangerous thing onboard the jet I fly.  This whole thread is about picking up knots to fly high but that's not all there is to it...

This one? https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19991226-1

Luckily this sort of thing is extremely rare.