Considering M20M Bravo - Need advice

[NickG]

Where better place to come than a Mooney board for advice! I've been in and out of Escrow on a couple of Saratoga Turbos - and a friend suggested I seriously consider a  M20M Bravo.

My mission: Lots of XC from HND (Las Vegas Area) to destinations Conroe, TX, Denver, Portland and LA. My concern is physical space in the aircraft, useful load and CG issues.

I'm a fairly large guy, 6ft, 270lbs. My wife is small 5'3" 135 and we have 2 dogs (1 small, one large, total weight 85lbs). I also have a 15 yo son who is 6'3" 215Lbs who might fly with me/us occasionally

There are some lovely M20M Bravos out there, and from what I can ascertain, useful loads are in the 900-1000lb range, so obviously the 3 of us and dogs plus fuel would be a challenge lol. Are the back seats functional in terms of leg space the long body Mooneys? Does anyone have a WB balance spreadsheet I can take a look at? What is your real world experience in loading these aircraft? The performance is second to none and aesthetically they're beautiful aircraft. I ruled out a Bonanza as the cabin is as narrow as a Piper Cherokee. I believe the Mooney cabin width is 43.5" which is 1.5" wider than a Bonanza but 5" narrower than a Saratoga.

Any advice would be really appreciated. Thanks!

[Crawfish]

My wife and I fit in our M20K fine, I’m 6’1” and 275#, my wife about the size of yours. I’ve also done flights with two buddies and the one in the back had no complaints he was in the 6’ range. CG should be no issue, but W&B can be tricky good news moneys are so efficient it makes life easy. 
270+135+215+85+55 leaves you with 240# for fuel. That’s 40 gallons in my M20K that’s enough for a 2.5 hour flight plus 1 hr reserve. Block to block I average 11.3 GPH, And 175KTS at altitude that’s 400NM  

I think a 252/encore would be probably a better bet vs Bravo I believe there’s some out there with 1100# useful loads that would give you an extra ~1.5 hours of range or 575NM  and they burn less effectively giving you a higher useful load. And will still be quicker than a Saratoga.

Realistically I don’t think adult sized 3 people and dogs would be comfortable, but maybe for a once a year type thing? 

Edited January 14 by Crawfish
Clarification on weight and recommendation.

[1980Mooney]

6 hours ago, NickG said:

Where better place to come than a Mooney board for advice! I've been in and out of Escrow on a couple of Saratoga Turbos - and a friend suggested I seriously consider a  M20M Bravo.

My mission: Lots of XC from HND (Las Vegas Area) to destinations Conroe, TX, Denver, Portland and LA. My concern is physical space in the aircraft, useful load and CG issues.

I'm a fairly large guy, 6ft, 270lbs. My wife is small 5'3" 135 and we have 2 dogs (1 small, one large, total weight 85lbs). I also have a 15 yo son who is 6'3" 215Lbs who might fly with me/us occasionally

There are some lovely M20M Bravos out there, and from what I can ascertain, useful loads are in the 900-1000lb range, so obviously the 3 of us and dogs plus fuel would be a challenge lol. Are the back seats functional in terms of leg space the long body Mooneys? Does anyone have a WB balance spreadsheet I can take a look at? What is your real world experience in loading these aircraft? The performance is second to none and aesthetically they're beautiful aircraft. I ruled out a Bonanza as the cabin is as narrow as a Piper Cherokee. I believe the Mooney cabin width is 43.5" which is 1.5" wider than a Bonanza but 5" narrower than a Saratoga.

Any advice would be really appreciated. Thanks!

 

3 hours ago, Crawfish said:

My wife and I fit in our M20K fine, I’m 6’1” and 275#, my wife about the size of yours. I’ve also done flights with two buddies and the one in the back had no complaints he was in the 6’ range. CG should be no issue, but W&B can be tricky good news moneys are so efficient it makes life easy. 
275+200+200+85 leaves you with 240# for fuel. That’s 40 gallons in my M20K that’s enough for a 2.5 hour flight plus 1 hr reserve. Block to block I average 11.3 GPH, And 175KTS at altitude that’s 400NM  

I think a 252/encore would be probably a better bet vs Bravo I believe there’s some out there with 1100# useful loads that would give you an extra ~1.5 hours of range or 575NM  

Realistically I don’t think adult sized 3 people and dogs would be comfortable, but maybe for a once a year type thing? 

You have neglected to add luggage in these trip scenarios. In the case of pilot,  2 pax and 2 dogs I bet that you will have 45 lbs of luggage/dog food/ supplies - in reality probably more. You are at 705 lbs without luggage. Luggage takes you to about 750 lbs. 

Also Bravo’s burn 16-18 gph. That’s about 100 lbs per hour. Depending on the UL of the ones that you find for sale, you might only have a 2 hour range - less in IMC. 
 

Las Vegas to Conroe would be a lot of stops with a tight/full plane.  But if it’s once a year to a shorter destination it could be workable. 

[Boilermonkey]

Our M20M has plenty of leg room in the back sets.  The seats also fold down nicely for the dogs and cargo.   If you've got dogs and plan to fly high, you'll need to think of O2 or staying below a safe altitude for them...not sure what that is for dogs.

I usually fly with 65 gallons in the tanks giving me at ~3hr range with reserves.  

It's great for that mission, but your son can't join.  Even if you don't carry much fuel, you'll be over the maximum landing weight with all three of you, dogs, and cargo.

Your son, dogs, cargo, and 60 gallons of fuel work too, but then your wife would need to fly commercial.   That might sound weird, but that's the deal I made with my wife.  I'm a big guy and we've got kids.  I take the kids, she gets the day off and flies commercial with our bags.  We both win in that scenario.   The kids won't be around forever, so as they age out, we've got a great plane for the two of us.

 

[Steve Dawson]

I've owned a Bravo and have about 100 hours in a turbo Saratoga, The Bravo flies nicer and has better controls but is definitely weight bound. The Saratoga is the SUV of planes though. Used to have four guys with golf bags and carry on bags in the plane and fly on a three day golf excursion to Atlantic city from CYKF. The Saratoga or Lance has the front baggage area which will hold some of your "stuff" that would normally be behind the back seat. Plus your passengers would have lots of room to move around in the back seat. Plus there's a large rear door to get your passengers and cargo into rather than the only front door. 

Sure they don't look as nice and are slower but you can always paint it something cool and update the avionics to help it not look like a big minivan. 

[Crawfish]

@1980Mooney I did include baggage but I can see why it wasn’t easily seen thank you. Edited my response for clarification.

 

I was trying to point out the M20K would be a little more likely than the Bravo due to lower fuel burns without much lower speeds. 

[LANCECASPER]

11 hours ago, NickG said:

Where better place to come than a Mooney board for advice! I've been in and out of Escrow on a couple of Saratoga Turbos - and a friend suggested I seriously consider a  M20M Bravo.

My mission: Lots of XC from HND (Las Vegas Area) to destinations Conroe, TX, Denver, Portland and LA. My concern is physical space in the aircraft, useful load and CG issues.

I'm a fairly large guy, 6ft, 270lbs. My wife is small 5'3" 135 and we have 2 dogs (1 small, one large, total weight 85lbs). I also have a 15 yo son who is 6'3" 215Lbs who might fly with me/us occasionally

There are some lovely M20M Bravos out there, and from what I can ascertain, useful loads are in the 900-1000lb range, so obviously the 3 of us and dogs plus fuel would be a challenge lol. Are the back seats functional in terms of leg space the long body Mooneys? Does anyone have a WB balance spreadsheet I can take a look at? What is your real world experience in loading these aircraft? The performance is second to none and aesthetically they're beautiful aircraft. I ruled out a Bonanza as the cabin is as narrow as a Piper Cherokee. I believe the Mooney cabin width is 43.5" which is 1.5" wider than a Bonanza but 5" narrower than a Saratoga.

Any advice would be really appreciated. Thanks!

It's good that you're identifying your mission before determining your airplane. I really like the Bravo, I've owned three of them and have the successor the the Bravo, the Acclaim. However with what you described as your mission, the Saratoga TC would be better suited for the trips you take. Putting three people and two dogs plus luggage  in a  Mercedes SL may be possible (but probably not legal unless you have seatbeats for three people) for a trip to the store. However, a three or four hour trip would not be comfortable. That same trip in an SUV would be comfortable. 

I've only flown in a Saratoga TC once (early 2000's model) but I was surprised by the room and utility. Will it fly as nicely or as fast as the Bravo? Probably not. But in reality you'll never be able to carry the fuel you need for the non-stop trips you mention in the Bravo, which will mean a stop. The useful load of the Saratoga TC will likely mean you'll get there in the same time without a stop.

One of the things that hold back the value on Mooneys is that they don't fit everyone's mission, therefore the demand is less.

[Hank]

8 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

One of the things that hold back the value on Mooneys is that they don't fit everyone's mission, therefore the demand is less.

No airplane fits everyone's mission. That's why there are so many different kinds available. 

[Fritz1]

I bought the Bravo 6 years ago, carefully considered a 252 due to better airframe and control balance, decided for the Bravo mostly because I am particular to Lycoming engines. The weak spot of the Bravo is UL, mine is 925 lb, rear seats out, TKS tank empty. I fly with my wife only. Even then we typically take off at MTOW with full fuel. The Bravo is nose heavy, luggage goes as far back as possible. The Bravo is a two person airplane at best, turns into a magic carpet in the high teens. When UL and seat filling becomes important the Toga suits better.

[KLRDMD]

The cabin width between a Mooney and a Bonanza depends on exactly where you measure from and may not realistically be any different so don't rule out Bonanzas based on that. Having owned four Mooneys, two Bonanzas, and two Barons (same interior dimensions as the Bonanza), I can tell you the Bonanza cabin feels much larger than a Mooney. The ceiling is higher and the huge windows bring in so much more light that it feels much larger. Nowadays when I fly a Mooney I feel like I'm in a tank.

For your mission, you need a TAT A36 Bonanza with tip tanks. It will have a +/- 1,500 lb useful load, no CG issues, huge back doors, six seats, plenty of fuel, and +/- 200 KTAS at altitude on 16-17 GPH.

Something like this:  https://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=225796

Edited January 14 by KLRDMD

[NickG]

8 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

 

You have neglected to add luggage in these trip scenarios. In the case of pilot,  2 pax and 2 dogs I bet that you will have 45 lbs of luggage/dog food/ supplies - in reality probably more. You are at 705 lbs without luggage. Luggage takes you to about 750 lbs. 

Also Bravo’s burn 16-18 gph. That’s about 100 lbs per hour. Depending on the UL of the ones that you find for sale, you might only have a 2 hour range - less in IMC. 
 

Las Vegas to Conroe would be a lot of stops with a tight/full plane.  But if it’s once a year to a shorter destination it could be workable. 

Realistically, I'll almost never be flying with myself , my son, wife and the dogs. Maybe the 3 humans for a $100 hamburger an hour away e few times a year - and then my son will go off to college and it's basically just me, wife and dogs.  

[NickG]

3 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

It's good that you're identifying your mission before determining your airplane. I really like the Bravo, I've owned three of them and have the successor the the Bravo, the Acclaim. However with what you described as your mission, the Saratoga TC would be better suited for the trips you take. Putting three people and two dogs plus luggage  in a  Mercedes SL may be possible (but probably not legal unless you have seatbeats for three people) for a trip to the store. However, a three or four hour trip would not be comfortable. That same trip in an SUV would be comfortable. 

I've only flown in a Saratoga TC once (early 2000's model) but I was surprised by the room and utility. Will it fly as nicely or as fast as the Bravo? Probably not. But in reality you'll never be able to carry the fuel you need for the non-stop trips you mention in the Bravo, which will mean a stop. The useful load of the Saratoga TC will likely mean you'll get there in the same time without a stop.

One of the things that hold back the value on Mooneys is that they don't fit everyone's mission, therefore the demand is less.

My bladder and circulation make it impossible for me to do a non stop from HND to CXO anyhow. Would make one stop on the way. Yes, Togas are spacious and large but in  a year or two when my son goes off to school or whatever his next move is, It'll be me and the wife flying around in very large 6 seat Toga burning 21 GPH. Not sure that makes sense.

[NickG]

5 hours ago, Boilermonkey said:

Our M20M has plenty of leg room in the back sets.  The seats also fold down nicely for the dogs and cargo.   If you've got dogs and plan to fly high, you'll need to think of O2 or staying below a safe altitude for them...not sure what that is for dogs.

I usually fly with 65 gallons in the tanks giving me at ~3hr range with reserves.  

It's great for that mission, but your son can't join.  Even if you don't carry much fuel, you'll be over the maximum landing weight with all three of you, dogs, and cargo.

Your son, dogs, cargo, and 60 gallons of fuel work too, but then your wife would need to fly commercial.   That might sound weird, but that's the deal I made with my wife.  I'm a big guy and we've got kids.  I take the kids, she gets the day off and flies commercial with our bags.  We both win in that scenario.   The kids won't be around forever, so as they age out, we've got a great plane for the two of us.

 

This is very helpful. Any chance you could share your WB profile with me?

[Fly Boomer]

2 minutes ago, NickG said:

This is very helpful. Any chance you could share your WB profile with me?

I don't fly a Bravo, but the weight-and-balance function in Foreflight appears to be pretty good.  Probably Garmin Pilot has something similar.  These apps are good for "what-if" calculations.

[hubcap]

My plane is an M20K 231 because 99% of the time it is just my wife and I with 2 backpacks and full fuel. 
 

However, I am in a club that gives me access to a Saratoga and a couple of 172s and 182s. My dues are only $35/month and flying rates are very reasonable. No need to purchase a plane for that one or two times a year mission.

[A64Pilot]

Ref a Bo and a Mooney, we can argue book measurements all day but a Bo feels roomier, maybe it’s because the cabin is taller or you sit higher, who knows. But both are cramped for big guys.

Have you considered a Turbo Centurion ?Way more room that a Bonanza and still a nearly 200 kt airplane at altitude and with an over 1500 lb useful load everyone can go and they will fit too.

The Information Manual (IM) for a 1979 T210N cites a service ceiling of 27,000 feet, an as-delivered useful load of between 1,729 and 1,785 pounds, and the ability to leap the proverbial 50-foot obstacle in 2,160 feet.

The Cruise Performance tables in the IM lists a cruise speed of 180 knot cruise speeds (80 percent power/17.8 gph) at 10,000 feet and 196 knots for the same power setting/fuel burn at 20,000 feet. The performance tables show that a more reasonable 71 percent power setting (15.5 gph) at 16,000 feet will yield a true airspeed of 179 knots.

(P) 210’s are more complex (expensive to own) and I believe have less useful load, but pressurization would be nice 

[NickG]

25 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

Ref a Bo and a Mooney, we can argue book measurements all day but a Bo feels roomier, maybe it’s because the cabin is taller or you sit higher, who knows. But both are cramped for big guys.

Have you considered a Turbo Centurion ?Way more room that a Bonanza and still a nearly 200 kt airplane at altitude and with an over 1500 lb useful load everyone can go and they will fit too.

The Information Manual (IM) for a 1979 T210N cites a service ceiling of 27,000 feet, an as-delivered useful load of between 1,729 and 1,785 pounds, and the ability to leap the proverbial 50-foot obstacle in 2,160 feet.

The Cruise Performance tables in the IM lists a cruise speed of 180 knot cruise speeds (80 percent power/17.8 gph) at 10,000 feet and 196 knots for the same power setting/fuel burn at 20,000 feet. The performance tables show that a more reasonable 71 percent power setting (15.5 gph) at 16,000 feet will yield a true airspeed of 179 knots.

(P) 210’s are more complex (expensive to own) and I believe have less useful load, but pressurization would be nice 

Yes, I’ve ruled out a 210 as too cramped up front. Also they are notorious for high maintenance. 
 

[donkaye]

1 hour ago, NickG said:

This is very helpful. Any chance you could share your WB profile with me?

An elegant spreadsheet was developed a number of years ago by one of my students who was an engineer, and I have adapted it to every airplane in which I teach including the C310 Twin.  You can easily play "what if" scenarios with it.  It does require you have access to Excel.  For the Bravo all you have to do is enter the empty weight and CG from the Weight and Balance section of the POH.  Here's a screenshot.

I've had my Bravo for 31 years.  It's a 4 person airplane with 50 gallons of fuel and 50 lb total of baggage.  It's a 3 person airplane with 60 gallons of fuel.  It's a 2 person airplane with full fuel and full baggage.  You can increase the useful load by close to 30 lb by removing the back seats (takes about 10 minutes).  The above assumes no TKS.

You'll have to email me for the file because Excel files can't be attached here.  Email: donkaye@earthlink.net

[NickG]

7 minutes ago, donkaye said:

An elegant spreadsheet was developed a number of years ago by one of my students who was an engineer and I have adapted it to every airplane in which I teach including the C310 Twin.  You can easily play "what if" scenarios with it.  It does require you have access to Excel.  For the Bravo all you have to do is enter the empty weight and CG from the Weight and Balance section of the POH.

I've had my Bravo for 31 years.  It's a 4 person airplane  with 50 gallons of fuel and 50 lb total of baggage.  It's a 3 person airplane with 60 gallons of fuel.  It's a 2 person airplane with full fuel and full baggage.  You can increase the useful load by close to 30 lb byremoving the back seats.  The above assumes no TKS.

You'll have to email me for the file because Excel files can't be attached here.  donkaye@earthlink.net

Thanks for your kind offer. I have sent you an email.

[A64Pilot]

32 minutes ago, NickG said:

Yes, I’ve ruled out a 210 as too cramped up front. Also they are notorious for high maintenance. 
 

Have you flown a 210? You do have to respect the gear and take care of it, but it’s not hard or expensive. Only money we put into it was when my Brother detonated the engine to death, but you can do that in anything. It was a NA 210, non turbo.

Orders of magnitude more room in the front seats, two big guys sit in front and shoulders don’t touch. I own a Mooney and have owned a 210, room and hauling cargo wise there is no comparison. I don’t understand the way these things are measured but a Bo has a little more room than a Mooney and a 210 more than a Bo.

Currently the Mooney fits my mission better, Retired and just the Wife but when the kids got bigger the 210 was nice. I would remove the middle row of seats and put the kids in back and put large ice boxes full of ice and food etc in the middle. A 210 is like a Station wagon, same fuselage as the 206, just the wheel wells take up room in the 210 where they don’t in a 206. 

[Fritz1]

The proof of the pudding will be flying the airplanes, I flew gliders as a kid so the tight Mooney cockpit feels comfy, I am 6'2", 210lb, typically seat full down, one hole showing in the rail, passenger seat in most rearward position staggers the shoulders. Fly and you will know the answer, depending on the outcome you may just adapt the load to the airplane, kinda like an air-cooled 911, you love them or you hate them, not a whole lot in between

[Boilermonkey]

I'll send you a PM with the W&B.  

 

[Boilermonkey]

Of course the txt from Foreflight just has a URL...I guess I can post that here:    https://plan.foreflight.com/wb/share/accept/9b50ceXnrEGr

 

[donkaye]

1 hour ago, Fritz1 said:

The proof of the pudding will be flying the airplanes, I flew gliders as a kid so the tight Mooney cockpit feels comfy, I am 6'2", 210lb, typically seat full down, one hole showing in the rail, passenger seat in most rearward position staggers the shoulders. Fly and you will know the answer, depending on the outcome you may just adapt the load to the airplane, kinda like an air-cooled 911, you love them or you hate them, not a whole lot in between

I can and have flown a 10 hour day in the Bravo.  Mooney somehow got the seat angle perfect for long term sitting.  I did a 2.5 hour engine break-in in a C182 a couple of years ago and couldn't wait to get out of the airplane.  The seat angle was just not good for long term sitting for me.

[Pinecone]

IMO, the sweet spot is a 252 upgraded to Encore.  Over 1100 pound useful load and 175 KTA at 10.1 GPH for cruise in the teens.

 

I have done over 7 hours my Mooney, and several over 5 hour flights and find it comfortable.  I have done 2.5 in a C-182, and was also fine.