2024: Thoughts on the sweet spot in the M20 model range?

[DCarlton]

3 hours ago, mooniac15u said:

When comparing the older models to the J everyone focuses on the speed mods and purchase cost but nobody talks about the single greatest design improvement of the J. It doesn't use one of those accordion air-intake boots made of unobtanium.

Hopefully for not too much longer.  LASAR is taking orders to have a batch made.  

[M20F]

4 hours ago, mooniac15u said:

When comparing the older models to the J everyone focuses on the speed mods and purchase cost but nobody talks about the single greatest design improvement of the J. It doesn't use one of those accordion air-intake boots made of unobtanium.

Neither does my F :-)

[Pinecone]

4 hours ago, hubcap said:

For value, ie speed, efficiency, and useful load, I believe the Encore is the best choice. You can fly fast, far, high, using very little fuel. Barrier to entry is greater than older lower performers, but you get a lot for your money with an Encore.

Agreed, but an Encore modded 252 is slightly better useful load.

Add Monroy tanks (104 gallons usable) and you have a serious traveling machine.

175 KTAS at 10.1 GPH in the mid-teens.

[ArtVandelay]

I read this a lot of this…yet oddly, I manage to pull field level manifold pressure on take off and see well over  ambient pressure with the ram air open. As much as 1.5” at low altitudes.
I’m sure it was the inefficient intake that caused Mooney to install the ram air…and to keep it on the original J before deleting it on later models…I mean, we’ve all seen the data….right? It’s out there, right?  Surely someone has recorded the minuscule delta between ram air open and closed in a J?
I am also sure that no manufacturer has ever implemented a cost savings strategy that eliminated a feature and then marketed as something else…you can take their word for it…never happens…ever.

I saw a blip on my analog gauge when pulling it at level cruising altitude, no measurable difference in airspeed. I pulled it the first time it broke.

[Shadrach]

44 minutes ago, ArtVandelay said:

I saw a blip on my analog gauge when pulling it at level cruising altitude, no measurable difference in airspeed. I pulled it the first time it broke.

It does not offer a lot at high DAs in the F model either.  Where it is useful is at lower DAs in a way that Mooney never intended and it suits my unconventional power plant management perfectly.  Opening the Ram Air at DAs below 5000’ is good for a 20° to 35° egt drop on the lean side of peak depending on the DA.  

[Ragsf15e]

I like my F, however I do find myself wishing for a J’s extra knots or (mostly) reduced age.  My F is 56 years old.  A 40 year old J has had many small improvements that slowly add up.

[hammdo]

2 hours ago, M20F said:

Neither does my F :-)

My C has a nice air intake system thanks to @Sabremech…

-Don

[BlueSky247]

Thanks everybody for all the feedback. Really appreciate the variety of options.

 

I agree that finding a cared-for bird is more important than focusing on one specific generation or set of options.

 

But if I'm understanding the specifics right, I should be looking for a J with extra tanks and a piss hose. Is that right? 

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, BlueSky247 said:

But if I'm understanding the specifics right, I should be looking for a J with extra tanks and a piss hose. Is that right? 

There's probably only one J like that. That will depend on whether Jose Monroy  ( @Gagarin , @Piloto ) is ready to sell his J model.  (https://www.monroyaero.com/)

I bought one of the M's I owned from one of Jose's good friends.

[Bolter]

6 hours ago, Shadrach said:

I read this a lot of this…yet oddly, I manage to pull field level manifold pressure on take off and see well over  ambient pressure with the ram air open. As much as 1.5” at low altitudes.
I’m sure it was the inefficient intake that caused Mooney to install the ram air…and to keep it on the original J before deleting it on later models…I mean, we’ve all seen the data….right? It’s out there, right?  Surely someone has recorded the minuscule delta between ram air open and closed in a J?
I am also sure that no manufacturer has ever implemented a cost savings strategy that eliminated a feature and then marketed as something else…you can take their word for it…never happens…ever.

I made a video several years ago in my M20J.  Probably 7500-8000 feet.  Loaded it in my dropbox (may get deleted in future) for your covenience.  The needle jumps enough to let you know something happened, but no meaningful change in MP.  

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/0tnwmhsjppo96pf5hfg80/M20J-Ram-Air-Demo.3gp?rlkey=prlkdyd9g2f3d80fshqklsqzu&dl=0

[Shadrach]

40 minutes ago, Bolter said:

I made a video several years ago in my M20J.  Probably 7500-8000 feet.  Loaded it in my dropbox (may get deleted in future) for your covenience.  The needle jumps enough to let you know something happened, but no meaningful change in MP.  

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/0tnwmhsjppo96pf5hfg80/M20J-Ram-Air-Demo.3gp?rlkey=prlkdyd9g2f3d80fshqklsqzu&dl=0

I don’t see any movement. In addition to having an efficient intake, the J must have a super efficient air filter. No restriction. Truly impressive.

[M20F]

4 hours ago, hammdo said:

My C has a nice air intake system thanks to @Sabremech…

-Don

Suspicious gear blocks ;-)

[M20F]

2 hours ago, BlueSky247 said:

But if I'm understanding the specifics right, I should be looking for a J with extra tanks and a piss hose. Is that right? 

Jose where r u?

[ArtVandelay]

Overall probably the F.  The J is better but the purchase price these days is almost double for a couple of knots. 

Actually more like 50% higher, but the Js are obviously newer (up to 30 years newer) and tend to have upgraded panels.

[hammdo]

15 minutes ago, M20F said:

Suspicious gear blocks ;-)

‘We’re the government and we’re here to help’…

cringes everyone…

-Don

[Echo]

18 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

Over the years you’ll own the plane, the acquisition costs will be dwarfed by maintenance, hangar, insurance, and fuel costs.

And there’s more to a J than just a cowling and windshield modification.

Is there?  Do tell Art....

[Jetpilot86]

I'd call it Encore, Bravo, J.

My 3 primary legs are 600, 800, & 900 NM solo, so the 118gal Bravo is filling my needs nicely.  I can go non-stop on two of those, both ways, the 900nm is due westbound and in the mountains on the far end.  When looking, I was always looking for K's with the Monroy's, 72gal for a 252 is just not enough for someone who like to run 70-75% cruise all the time.  Had I realized what a rare gem the Encore was at the time, I'd have pounced.  The extra 200# paired with the Monroy's is a very nice combo in a mid-body.

If I didn't need the turbo, I'd probably be in a J and not quite as happy due to the leg length.

[Bolter]

5 hours ago, Shadrach said:

I don’t see any movement. In addition to having an efficient intake, the J must have a super efficient air filter. No restriction. Truly impressive.

There is a slightest flicker that is more perceptible when you are moving the knob at the same time. I took the video because of a similar discussion on teh value of the Ram on the J at the 2019 PPP.  Based on the date of the video, and where I was flying that day in NorCal, it was probably a little cool out.  

[icurnmedic]

Just sold a 67 F. TAS 148kts, 10.5 gph, 640lb payload w/ 64 gallons. As someone said earlier, you have to work very hard to get it out of balance. And compared to equally equipped J’s, probably a $30-50k savings. 

[ArtVandelay]

Is there?  Do tell Art....

https://mooneyspace.com/topic/46274-modded-f-versus-j/

[Pinecone]

8 hours ago, Jetpilot86 said:

I'd call it Encore, Bravo, J.

When looking, I was always looking for K's with the Monroy's, 72gal for a 252 is just not enough for someone who like to run 70-75% cruise all the time.  Had I realized what a rare gem the Encore was at the time, I'd have pounced.  The extra 200# paired with the Monroy's is a very nice combo in a mid-body.

If I didn't need the turbo, I'd probably be in a J and not quite as happy due to the leg length.

I run 63% for 175 KTAS.  No reason to run higher power.

Remember, you can make a 252 into an Encore and get the 230 pound weight increase.  And the 252 converted is slightly lighter than a true Encore.

[Shadrach]

I think people get to love what they become familiar with.  I think the F has a lot going for it. Is it because I own one? Well yes. It is hard to really understand what's great about an airplane until you've lived with it a while.

What  I think is superior about it compared to other 4 place singles:

• Light weight (<1700lbs)
• Manual gear and flaps.
• Retractable step (continues to function flawlessly after 57 years with no mx, just lube)
• Good speed (reliable yields 150kt cruise over a broad range of altitudes)
• Solid climber into the teens (easily avg 1000fpm to 10,000' when solo)
• Fun to yank and bank at light weights
• Good short field performance.
• Stable cross country platform 
• Enough UL to put 800lbs in the cabin and go 500NM with reserves
• Bendix S20/200 mags
• Excellent heating and ventilation system.
• Comfortable for four adults.
• Folding, split rear seats.
• I like the smooth flight controls on the vintage birds
• Good access to back side of instrument panel

What I think is suboptimal:

• Cowl shape
• Cowl aesthetics
• Steeper windshield angle. ( though I actually like the look of the two piece) 
• Twist wing (only because wing tips are not available)
• No gross weight increase available (if there were, I'd have a UL of 1,219lbs making it one of the best load hauling piston singles in existence)

What I would do to make it better if money were no object

• Perhaps a TN system
• slope windshield mod 
• 201 or Lopresti cowl mod

There are panel and interior upgrades galore.  These are more a reflection of the owner's tastes and budget than a model specific attribute.

 

[KSMooniac]

Any airworthy Mooney is better than no Mooney!  Beyond that, there is a Mooney for nearly every budget and 85% mission if you're rational and honest with yourself.  Buy the absolute best one you can find in your budget range, but be wary that a higher purchase price might not mean it is a truly better airplane than another.

I originally started shopping for a modified/updated E or F due to my acquisition budget preferences, but ended up in an early J ('77) and couldn't be happier.  I got a bigger loan, and that might be my only regret in that I didn't make an action plan long before and save up cash, but that is water under the bridge now and I have many more years of great life experiences with a Mooney vs. being more responsible and saving cash for longer.

At the time, I got a modernized panel and new interior, but high-time engine and original paint (2007 purchase).  Over the last 17 years, I've done a lot to modernize the airframe and make it like a newer J because it is also my hobby.  I truly believe the J is the sweet spot for an owner pilot that wants to travel... it is fast enough for real travel, and simple enough that dispatch reliability is outstanding and the operating costs are lower than just about anything else.  A real milestone airplane, and the market reflects it.  My list of superior features is just about exactly what Ross listed above, too, except for instrument panel access!  That is terrible on a J. 

I sometimes ponder what I would be flying today if I had purchased a C, E, or F 17 years ago and it is hard for me to say... C or E, I would have likely replaced to get more fuel capacity and more backseat/cargo room.  If I got an F, I suspect I would have transformed it into a near-J much like John Breda has (search the site).  Maybe I would have jumped up to a K after a few years, or maybe an R/S by now.  Hard to say.  All I know is I still love my J, and am still improving her, and don't think twice about any of the costs to own or fly a particular trip, anywhere in the country, like I might if I had something more complex/capable/expensive.  To get a noticeable improvement over a J in terms of meaningful trip time reduction or increased load-carrying would cost a LOT more to purchase and run, so I continue to be happy.  I still have a TN system to add one of these years, and then I'll be ecstatic, and have my own K-killer. 

[wombat]

I think that the right model for any person depends on the person and so many other factors.

My primary flights are:

• 100NM over mountains through ice, about weekly. (2S0<->KBFI)
• 266 NM over mountains through ice, about quarterly (2S0<->KCVO)
• 1271 NM over all the mountains, but usually not a lot of ice, about semiannually (2S0<->KFFL)

 

I'm really happy with my K.  The turbo makes getting to the altitudes where I have a lot more options so much easier/faster.   And the longer flights go by much faster.   

But this is only really useful for me because my budget can absorb this cost. 

And because my bladder can deal with this flight length.   

And my risk tolerance can deal with the altitude.   

And my budget does not cover anything better/faster/pressurized/turbine.   

[BlueSky247]

Thanks again, everyone. I was originally hoping to save up and go cash on a C or E, but after thinking about how long I hope to be flying, and being a "cry once" kind of guy, I've decided to look into getting a loan for a J. Won't be able to justify the fancy panel'ed ones, but there's still a lot of reasonably updated ones out there. Maybe by the time I'm ready to upgrade the panel, they'll have that emergency autoland option available.