New Member

[ewilliams93]

Thanks everyone for the great info! It's looking more and more like I'll narrow the search to a nice late model J. I think anything with 950-1050 UL will let me do everything I want. Correct me if I'm wrong but it doesn't look like you really gain a great deal of UL by going to the ovation. I do see the benefit in the climb performance, 20 extra knots, and another 10" of room. Am I missing something in the UL department as most Ovations I've seen advertised have roughly the same UL as the J models.

Regards,

Eric

[KSMooniac]

Most Ovations came very loaded in the panels with heavy pre-Garmin equipment (at least the first few years), and they had taller panels to stuff more into them!  In my observation, it seems a lot of Ovation useful loads are in the low 1000 range, and can be much less with TKS, and/or A/C added on.  Some might get to 1100, but that is offset by the higher fuel burn to get the higher performance.  It is possible, though, to run J-level horsepower in an Ovation and match the fuel burn for ultra-endurance flights, but few of us want to do that.  Many also had extended fuel tanks as well that further reduce payload if you fill them up.

The previously undiscovered gem in that portion of the Mooney fleet is the M20S Eagle.  After J production ended in 1998, Mooney put out the Eagle as a de-rated/lower-cost option compared to the Ovation.  Same engine, de-rated down to 244 hp instead of 280, and a lower-spec panel and interior.  Leaving luxurious leather and extra avionics out means useful loads of 1100 lbs regularly in those planes.  However, like all previous attempts at a lower cost Mooney, these did not sell well in the market b/c in my opinion anyone that could buy a $450k Eagle could also buy a $500k Ovation and enjoy more performance.  Fast forward a few years, and there were STC's to bump that 244 hp up to 280 or even 310 hp to match the Ovation, but these airframes are still lighter weight!  Now 20+ years after their production ended, you're not paying for that vintage loaded panel and old autopilot, so if you want to install the latest Garmin options, these make a great foundation to build on.  I would look hard for these if I wanted a longbody, but unfortunately there were only 44 made, IIRC.  Best part IMO of buying a pre-G1000 Mooney is that you can always update the panel and are not locked into the G1000 universe.  (There are a lot of threads on this topic alone if you want a new rabbit hole.)

[1980Mooney]

On 12/19/2023 at 2:59 PM, ewilliams93 said:

Everyone in my family is small, I'm about 5'7" 140lbs and that's probably a good average pax weight. We all pack light although I am curious how difficult it would be to

Regards,

Eric Williams  

Another tidbit.  I am the same height as you.  

• Based upon your past GA experience, you will probably find the Mooney panel height to be taller than the ones you previously flew.
  • The height adjustable/articulating seats w/ armrest were an option on some planes - they are nice but heavier eating up UL
    • Some people have salvaged and added them - price is ridiculous - Alan Fox has a used pair that need repair for sale now - Price $6,100 plus shipping. Mooney articulating front seats | eBay
  • I simply use a quality travel seat cushion (memory foam) - works perfectly - boosts me up a little and is comfortable.
• Also you will see some comments about extensions on the toe brake pedals. - there are 1.5 inch and 3 inch extension
  • I have never needed extensions - stock seems fine to me

Edited December 21, 2023 by 1980Mooney

[Tim-37419]

5 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

I am the same height as you.  

•  

Also 5'7"

 

I used to pull the seat all the way up, I now go back one notch. Sometimes though if I'm really pushing on the brakes I get a cramp in the back of my calf or thigh, I'm careful about it and don't remember which it was but it hurts.

 

I'm fortunate enough to have the articulating seats and I do have the height cranked up about halfway.

 

My wife is much closer to 5 ft and sits on one of those tailbone cushions you're supposed to put in your chair at work.

 

I haven't once regretted buying my J. The previous owners had all taken good care of it.

 

 

[Kerrville]

On 12/19/2023 at 9:27 PM, KSMooniac said:

There was no 1976 model year M20J. Some (like mine) were produced in late 76 but all were 1977 J's.

Sent from my motorola edge plus 2023 using Tapatalk
 

That may be so, but my FAA registration shows 76…

[EricJ]

4 hours ago, Kerrville said:

That may be so, but my FAA registration shows 76…

Early serial numbers, including mine, were built in 76, but they're all 1977 models.   There were no 1976 model M20Js.

[MikeOH]

Sigh, @Kerrville bought a plane that was built, first flown, and is FAA registered in 1976.  He said it was a 1976 Mooney; IT IS!  He NEVER claimed it was a 1976 Model Year.

Honestly, the desire of some here to 'prove him WRONG' is mind boggling and a bit mean spirited, IHMO.

JUST. LET. IT. GO.

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, MikeOH said:

Sigh, @Kerrville bought a plane that was built, first flown, and is FAA registered in 1976.  He said it was a 1976 Mooney; IT IS!  He NEVER claimed it was a 1976 Model Year.

Honestly, the desire of some here to 'prove him WRONG' is mind boggling and a bit mean spirited, IHMO.

JUST. LET. IT. GO.

I don't think anybody's trying to prove anyone else right or wrong, but it does help to reduce confusion when looking things up that reference model years, or even bringing things up here.   If somebody says they have a 76 J model, I wonder whether they really mean an early J or an actual 76F that has essentially been converted.     MY J was built in 76, but I say it's a 77J, because there are no 76 J models in various literature, spreadsheets, etc., that reference early J models.

His, like mine, were made in 76, his was initially registered in 76, as were others, and calling it a 76 or a 77 or a 201 or a J or whatever doesn't change or challenge that.

But to perhaps help somebody to not get lost traversing the various relevant spreadsheets or part catalogs or references or conversations here, somebody might point out that many people make the distinction that there wasn't actually a model year 1976 M20J.   Sometimes people point out such things to be helpful, not to be contrary.    But if you want to be contrary about that, it's okay.   People do that, too. 

 

[ewilliams93]

12 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Another tidbit.  I am the same height as you.  

• Based upon your past GA experience, you will probably find the Mooney panel height to be taller than the ones you previously flew.
  • The height adjustable/articulating seats w/ armrest were an option on some planes - they are nice but heavier eating up UL
    • Some people have salvaged and added them - price is ridiculous - Alan Fox has a used pair that need repair for sale now - Price $6,100 plus shipping. Mooney articulating front seats | eBay
  • I simply use a quality travel seat cushion (memory foam) - works perfectly - boosts me up a little and is comfortable.
• Also you will see some comments about extensions on the toe brake pedals. - there are 1.5 inch and 3 inch extension
  • I have never needed extensions - stock seems fine to me

I noticed several listings made mention of or bragged about the articulating seat and didn't really thing anything of it. I guess over the years in aviation I've flown enough different makes/models/types that I've just learned to adapt to a new sight picture from airplane to airplane. Your point is extremely valid now that I think about it. Not having to settle or compensate for limited positions would be nice to have onboard from the get go!

[1980Mooney]

Come on guys - this discussion is getting goofy.  The Serial Number says it all. 

As posted on page one N201JK is Serial Number 24-0040.  You can look it up on Aircraft Inquiry (faa.gov)

It is a M20J.  Period.  Go look at the parts manual and the service manual (both are posted on MS).  Parts and service is identified by Serial Number - not "year of Mooney" or date of Certification.

 

[ZuluZulu]

15 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

Come on guys - this discussion is getting goofy.  The Serial Number says it all. 

As posted on page one N201JK is Serial Number 24-0040.  You can look it up on Aircraft Inquiry (faa.gov)

It is a M20J.  Period.  Go look at the parts manual and the service manual (both are posted on MS).  Parts and service is identified by Serial Number - not "year of Mooney" or date of Certification.

 

I don’t think anyone is saying it’s not a J, they’re just saying a J built in 1976 should be referred to as a 1977, as @EricJ says he does. It’s about the model year nomenclature (1976, 1977, 1978…), not the model type (M20F, M20J…). You wouldn’t call a brand-new 2024 Mercedes a 2023 just because it was manufactured this month, or so the argument goes.

I will admit I have not followed this debate closely so if anyone is actually saying his plane is not a J, I think that’s pretty clearly incorrect. It’s about what model year J.

[1980Mooney]

14 minutes ago, ewilliams93 said:

I noticed several listings made mention of or bragged about the articulating seat and didn't really thing anything of it. I guess over the years in aviation I've flown enough different makes/models/types that I've just learned to adapt to a new sight picture from airplane to airplane. Your point is extremely valid now that I think about it. Not having to settle or compensate for limited positions would be nice to have onboard from the get go!

Since you have narrowed your interest to a M20J

POH

Service Manual

Wiring Diagrams  (safe to open)

mooney.free.fr/Manuels M20J/M20J/Mooney Service Manuel M20J Vol. 2 of 2.pdf

Parts

 

[1980Mooney]

3 minutes ago, ZuluZulu said:

I don’t think anyone is saying it’s not a J,.....

Uh - Eric above raised doubt "If somebody says they have a 76 J model, I wonder whether they really mean an early J or an actual 76F that has essentially been converted." 

THERE IS NO DOUBT.

 

[ZuluZulu]

8 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

Uh - Eric above raised doubt "If somebody says they have a 76 J model, I wonder whether they really mean an early J or an actual 76F that has essentially been converted." 

THERE IS NO DOUBT.

 

That’s not how I read it. I read that as @EricJ describing his own confusion upon hearing the words “1976 M20J.” It’s widely known that the first model year of the J was 1977, even though manufacturing began in 1976. The resulting ambiguity is, IMHO, all Eric is describing, since he personally owns a “1976” J himself and thus knows this better than anyone, yet he still chooses to describe it as a 1977 to avoid confusing people. And he calls his own plane a J.  I don’t understand him to be arguing that his own plane or any other manufactured in 1976 isn’t a J at all. But he can speak for himself…

[1980Mooney]

34 minutes ago, ewilliams93 said:

I noticed several listings made mention of or bragged about the articulating seat and didn't really thing anything of it. I guess over the years in aviation I've flown enough different makes/models/types that I've just learned to adapt to a new sight picture from airplane to airplane. Your point is extremely valid now that I think about it. Not having to settle or compensate for limited positions would be nice to have onboard from the get go!

Also you may have already seen some of theses

From one of our MS'ers @201er

Also

Emergency Gear Swing by @201er

 

[1980Mooney]

3 minutes ago, ZuluZulu said:

That’s not how I read it. I read that as @EricJ describing his own confusion upon hearing the words “1976 M20J.” It’s widely known that the first model year of the J was 1977, even though manufacturing began in 1976. The resulting ambiguity is, IMHO, all Eric is describing, since he personally owns a “1976” J himself and thus knows this better than anyone, yet he still chooses to describe it as a 1977 to avoid confusing people. And he calls his own plane a J.  I don’t understand him to be arguing that his own plane or any other manufactured in 1976 isn’t a J at all. But he can speak for himself…

 Look - I agree with your point.  Anyone buying a plane should look at the Serial Number to avoid confusion.  Advertisements and owner statements can be misleading.  Also if you search a plane by Serial Number you may find that the N-Number changed along the way.

[1980Mooney]

56 minutes ago, ewilliams93 said:

I noticed several listings made mention of or bragged about the articulating seat and didn't really thing anything of it. I guess over the years in aviation I've flown enough different makes/models/types that I've just learned to adapt to a new sight picture from airplane to airplane. Your point is extremely valid now that I think about it. Not having to settle or compensate for limited positions would be nice to have onboard from the get go!

Also I have always found KNR- Inc., a Mooney specific shop out of Evanston, WY, to be a great online resource.   They have a "Shop Talk" section that is very knowledgeable and pragmatic.  Everyone has their favorite - my 2 cents.

ShopTalk Index (knr-inc.com)

Regarding Mooney specific pre-buy

200404 Caveat Emptor, Caveat Vendor (pre-buy) (knr-inc.com)

201712 Pre-buy Part 1 (knr-inc.com)

201801 Pre-buy Part 2 (knr-inc.com)

 

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, 1980Mooney said:

Uh - Eric above raised doubt "If somebody says they have a 76 J model, I wonder whether they really mean an early J or an actual 76F that has essentially been converted." 

THERE IS NO DOUBT.

 

There's an F model hangared near me that is nearly indistinguishable from a J.  Windows, cowl, gear doors, hinge covers, everything.  I've heard people with such beasts refer to them a J models.    So, yes, there can be doubt.

[ArtVandelay]

Jeez, I just pointed it out because what model year, especially certain key years, like 77, 78, 87… it’s important to be able to help answer questions. When I say 77, that means throttle quadrant, etc, even though there may have been 77s built in 78 or vice versa.

I thought maybe he had serial number 24-0001 or something?

[ArtVandelay]

 Look - I agree with your point.  Anyone buying a plane should look at the Serial Number to avoid confusion.  Advertisements and owner statements can be misleading.  Also if you search a plane by Serial Number you may find that the N-Number changed along the way.

I’ve seen F and E models advertised as a J because of speed mods.

There’s more to a J than just some speed mods, I agree, getting the serial number, subsequently checking registration and NTSB database for accident reports should be something a buyer does when looking to buy.

[N201MKTurbo]

I would say if it has a dual mag it is a J. If it has an IO360-A1A it is an F.

[toto]

On 12/20/2023 at 2:41 AM, 1980Mooney said:

The later J models had a small modification that allowed the GW to increase to 2,900 lbs from 2,740 lbs. 

• All Serial Numbers 24-1686 and above had 2 tubes in the side of the steel cage with a slightly greater wall thickness (.049 vs .035)
• M20J Serial Number 24-3057 and above are certified at 2,900 lbs. GW
• M20J Serial Number 24-1686 through 24-3056 can be certified via STC (basically 1988 and newer)
  • https://mooneyspace.com/applications/core/interface/file/attachment.php?id=95270
  • It basically involves relabeling the ASI, checking the balance of your rudder and POH additions.

For your mission look for 1988 or newer.  Many will already have the GW increase STC.

Apologies for being super pedantic, but the GW increase doesn’t require an STC. It’s the original type certificate, just a service bulletin to comply with. 

I’m not 100% sure how this even works today, since the Mooney letter requires the installation of a kit that includes a new ASI - which requires purchasing a specific part number from Mooney that would be hard to find today. Most shops seem fine with the ASI remarking approach, but I don’t think that’s contemplated by the Mooney letter.

 

 

SL92-1_SN24_1686-2999.pdf

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, toto said:

Apologies for being super pedantic, but the GW increase doesn’t require an STC. It’s the original type certificate, just a service bulletin to comply with. 

I’m not 100% sure how this even works today, since the Mooney letter requires the installation of a kit that includes a new ASI - which requires purchasing a specific part number from Mooney that would be hard to find today. Most shops seem fine with the ASI remarking approach, but I don’t think that’s contemplated by the Mooney letter.

 

 

SL92-1_SN24_1686-2999.pdf 2.62 MB · 0 downloads

Your ASI just needs to be marked consistent with the limitations section of the AFM/POH.    So updating the AFM/POH with the new airspeed values is what requires the remarked ASI.    As long as the ASI agrees with the POH, you should be good.   It's not any different than having to replace or repair a faulty ASI.

[ewilliams93]

2 hours ago, toto said:

Apologies for being super pedantic, but the GW increase doesn’t require an STC. It’s the original type certificate, just a service bulletin to comply with. 

I’m not 100% sure how this even works today, since the Mooney letter requires the installation of a kit that includes a new ASI - which requires purchasing a specific part number from Mooney that would be hard to find today. Most shops seem fine with the ASI remarking approach, but I don’t think that’s contemplated by the Mooney letter.

 

 

SL92-1_SN24_1686-2999.pdf 2.62 MB · 0 downloads

Thanks for the reference, so much good info here from all! @1980Mooney I had seen some of that but all the docs are great. Prior to this point I hadn't gone cover to cover on any of it. I'm getting excited about the search and it seems there are a couple airplanes on the market that fit the bill, now I just have to survive the holidays and find the time to get out and take a look at one. 

[T. Peterson]

On 12/19/2023 at 9:30 PM, KSMooniac said:

All of that, plus two humans and a dog went in there!

Sent from my motorola edge plus 2023 using Tapatalk
 

Holy Smokes, Batman!!