Looking for some Real world numbers to help me choose right model Mooney to base in Denver

[JoeB]

Mooney owners, 

I am looking to buy a Mooney to go far and fast....  I am currently building an RV10 but I realize that it will be another decade before that ever lifts off for the first time. Previously owned a Cherokee 140 and a Piper Archer.  Loved them both but slooooow. 

I am currently looking hard and trying to decide what is the best fit,  M20F,  M20J,  M20K   Looking to keep budget under 139K

Mission: 

Live in Denver with a 4000 ft runway,  about 5100 on field elevation and much higher on Summer High density days

Will do A LOT of just local flying around since we live on an airpark and I want to get up as often as possible,  but the REAL mission is taking wife and 2 kids (age 8 and 7 months currently) on longer range vacations,  both coasts and anything in between  we are in the "disney" phase of kids and frequent both California and Orlando,  but we also want to hit every National park in America and go to the Bahamas,  go far,  and get there fast without spending the big fuel burns of other similar speed aircraft (Bonanza, Comanche etc).  We want to always cross the Rocky Mtns without worrying about if we are going to have enough engine to get over safely,  and will do it frequently,  but we will be heading east often also.... so I need a jack of all trades. 

I think the I like the F due to the long body,  I like the J cause long body and faster,  I like the K since I feel it has both of the above and More than enough power....... however I don't know if the extra fuel burn and the complexity of the K is "worth it"   

can you share average flight planning criteria you use?   SPEED/ALT/FUEL BURN/ ENDURANCE

Can you all help point me in the right direction?   if anyone is in Denver area I am based at Parkland Estates,  in Erie,  but Happy to drive around Denver to go sit in look and talk airplanes

 

BUT what do you all think fits my mission profile the  best? 

Edited October 14, 2024 by JoeB

[N204TA]

I have a ‘68 F and visit family in COS a few times a year.  I feel the density altitude but I’ve never had trouble getting off the ground and climbing out.   I typically cruise at 11,000/12,000 and plan on 140 Kts TAS and 10 GPH.  I am comfortable saying that the airplane has a 6-hour endurance but I usually limit my legs to four hours or less.  
 

I recently went to Phoenix and back, stopping south of Albuquerque for fuel.  The longest leg was 537 NM which I did at 11,500 in 3+45 and burned about 9 GPH.  By comparison, I heard an M20K pick up a clearance west of OKC and he made it non-stop to Tucson at FL200 in the same amount of time.

[midlifeflyer]

If it helps, my first Mooney experience was when I rented a C at KAPA. 

[philiplane]

Traveling with four aboard, will be difficult with any Mooney. You run out of space pretty quickly. And you need enough power to do it safely in the higher density altitudes that Denver is known for. 

People focus on fuel burn, and compromise the aircraft selection to fit that choice. You really need to focus on the mission, and the fuel burn will be what it is. It's not as big of a number as you might think. 

You're going to need more than 200 HP, or turbocharging, or both, to fly the West safely, fully loaded. A K model might work, but space will be an issue every time. An Ovation would be OK but they are expensive. And the cabin is still not very big for a four person vacation machine.

 25 years ago, my travel requirements with three kids pushed me into a six place airplane, and due to the high costs of six place singles, I ended up in a Piper Apache. And also a Twin Comanche, and now an Aztec. But the lower capital costs more than offset the higher fuel costs. The huge cabin made everyone happy too. A happy family means more airplane trips for the happy pilot too. Don't buy a plane that the family hates to travel in.

The same goes for the speed. 5.7 hours in a comfortable plane is better than 4.7 hours in cramped conditions. And one hour is all the difference there is on an 800 mile trip at 140 knots, versus 170 knots. But it costs a whole lot more to go 170 knots.

You might consider a Turbo Lance. Plenty of room, plenty of power, the speed you want, and there are some in the $130-150K range that have good engines but may need some avionics updates. 

[ArtVandelay]

I think you’ll find a normally aspirated fully F/J (some are turbo charged) that’s fully loaded especially in hot conditions doesn’t give you much margin of error on a 4000’ runway. Any obstacles at the runway ends?

[KSMooniac]

If set on a Mooney I would choose a 231, with the knowledge that you'll have to pack lightly for family vacations, and/or ship stuff ahead to a destination.  You'll have several years before your kids get too big to pull that off, but not likely enough to finish the RV-10.    My brother and I grew up riding in the back of an M20C that Dad used for our family trips.  To this day, do not know how we fit everything in but we managed.  I do remember him weighing every bag and making sure all was good, though.  We aged-out at ~13 and 10 years old, though.  Of course everyone is bigger these days and we bring more crap with us too.

Phillip makes an excellent point about family comfort.  Other planes might fit better, but since you're on a Mooney forum most of us will agree that a Mooney is best.   You might see if anyone on your home field travels 4-up and what they use and see if a pattern emerges.  

[kortopates]

Unfortunately nothing under $139K


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bigmo]

One of my kids lives in Albuquerque, so similar DA concerns and you'll be fine unless you're going to frequently need to get up high. I scout out Victor and Tango routes that keep me below 12K if possible. However, on a recent flight up in Washington, I got stepped up to 13K and then 14K and they left me there for a while. The climb from 10K wasn't setting any records, but it'll get there and hold it without concerns. I personally consternated over turbo or not, and decided not. My previous a/c was turbocharged and it was lovely...but came with a lot of extra maintenance. Sort of like dating the captain of the cheerleading squad - obvious benefits but with guaranteed extra drama.

With your kids being so small, you will be fine weight wise. The nice thing about an F (what I own) is the long fuel range. You'll obviously be limited by wife/kid bladder range, but it's nice to not have to gas every 3 hours.

The biggest limiting factor IMO is the price range. I think you'll be hard pressed to find a J in that price range. I found some J's in the $120-130K range, but they needed a LOT of avionics. I needed a good autopilot w/ altitude hold, a WAAS navigator, low or mid time motor, and something that my wife wasn't afraid to get in. The F matched all of my needs.

As for performance, I plan for 145 knots and cruise at 8K-11K depending on winds. For ease, I plan at 10gph and generally beat that. We can reach the kid in Florida or the kid in New Mexico without stopping - but I split it in half to pee and top off. These are stellar a/c for 300-800 nm IMO. Less than that, I drive. More, I generally fly commercial unless it's some obscure location and demands a long car ride after landing. 

As mentioned above, I'd watch for a Turbo Lance. But, as already stated, I think anything that's remotely turn-key will be north of $150K.

 

 

[KSMooniac]

While this market appears to be softening, you might have trouble finding a nice K for <139k, although you might find a top-market F for that price.  For a long while J's have been going for more than similar 231's b/c buyers are apprehensive of the turbo and perceived extra costs and maintenance.  

You should figure out your mission and priorities first, and then work the budget IMO.  It might be better to have a K with ratty paint and interior vs. a shiny and beautiful F for your location.

[hubcap]

For traveling, nothing beats a K for speed & efficiency. As has been mentioned, the useful load will limit your range with 4 people. It can be done, but it will require management. I flew my wife, daughter and her best friend to South Padre Island a few years ago. You have to learn to pack light. 

[Utah20Gflyer]

In the west a turbo is very useful.   4k foot runway in the summer is kind of short but doable if you set good rules and stick to them.   I fly off a 6k runway and that is xtra 2k is nice when it’s hot.   
 

Your budget is a bit light for a K but you might be able to get one in decent condition with older radios.  
 

My next plane will very likely be a turbo’d plane.   So I’d go with a K if you can swing it. 

[NickG]

4 hours ago, philiplane said:

Traveling with four aboard, will be difficult with any Mooney. You run out of space pretty quickly. And you need enough power to do it safely in the higher density altitudes that Denver is known for. 

People focus on fuel burn, and compromise the aircraft selection to fit that choice. You really need to focus on the mission, and the fuel burn will be what it is. It's not as big of a number as you might think. 

You're going to need more than 200 HP, or turbocharging, or both, to fly the West safely, fully loaded. A K model might work, but space will be an issue every time. An Ovation would be OK but they are expensive. And the cabin is still not very big for a four person vacation machine.

 25 years ago, my travel requirements with three kids pushed me into a six place airplane, and due to the high costs of six place singles, I ended up in a Piper Apache. And also a Twin Comanche, and now an Aztec. But the lower capital costs more than offset the higher fuel costs. The huge cabin made everyone happy too. A happy family means more airplane trips for the happy pilot too. Don't buy a plane that the family hates to travel in.

The same goes for the speed. 5.7 hours in a comfortable plane are better than 4.7 hours in cramped conditions. And one hour is all the difference there is on an 800 mile trip at 140 knots, or 170 knots. But it costs a whole lot more to go 170 knots.

You might consider a Turbo Lance. Plenty of room, plenty of power, the speed you want, and there are some in the $130-150K range that have good engines but may need some avionics updates. 

You beat me to it. Turbo Lance. Get one with the intercooler and merlin wastegate. The upcoming Piper AD's are going to depress that market even more. Now is a good time. Few examples with very modern panels but decent. Another one to look at is a Commanche 260 C - would have the space, uselful load and speed although like the turbo lance (even thought normally aspirated) its not exactly fuel efficient here's one in your price range: https://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=PIPER&model=COMANCHE+260C&listing_id=2434340&s-type=aircraft#

[McMooney]

think if i were based in denver and already at 5k with lots of plans for travelling locally and west, i'd be looking at the K.

yes, the e/f/j would work but i'd  be happier with the turbo.  as for the kids, they really arent going to be travelling with you once they get older, so long as you pack efficiently you should be good

[N201MKTurbo]

I did my first 3000 hours flying out of Denver with an NA M20F. There was nowhere I couldn’t go. Including a few IFR hops across the rocks at 16000. 
 

But now I have a turbo and it defiantly makes things easier.

[MikeOH]

5 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I did my first 3000 hours flying out of Denver with an NA M20F. There was nowhere I couldn’t go. Including a few IFR hops across the rocks at 16000. 
 

But now I have a turbo and it defiantly makes things easier.

But did you typically do that fully loaded, or just you on board?

[N201MKTurbo]

17 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

But did you typically do that fully loaded, or just you on board?

Mostly just me. One of my IFR crossings was with my girlfriend. Her son was in daycare. The weather turned IFR and I said we would have to spend the night, she went ballistic. And said we had to get back so she could get her son. So I filed and off We went. I only had  bottle with one mask, so I said we would share it. She refused and said I should use it. The flight was uneventful.

BTW, My personal minimums were to not fly over the rocks at night or IFR…. 

[dkkim73]

Initial thought is work to find a turbo plane...

Some flying locally around a moderately high altitude location is one thing, but "exploring the West" is a blank check. 

Remember climb rate, and ice/IFR, and hot days. 

[IvanP]

Short body Mooneys are not really 4 people airplanes. Although I did have 4 people in E model couple of times, it was only for short hops and not very comfy for the folks in the back. Even the long bodied ones tend to run into useful load issues when loaded with 4 people and luggage. 

For your stated mission, a long body turbocharged Mooney could be OK, but you may not be able to pack much with you. I love my Bravo for the ability to climb out of high DA places if needed, but in reality it is only 2-people and some luggage plane if I need to load enough fuel to make 3-4 hour flight with reserve. Your budget may be a bit low for any long bodied Mooney in decent shape, though. 

Edited October 15, 2024 by IvanP

[Pinecone]

First, all of those are MID body Mooneys.  Long bodies start with the M20L.

What you really want is a M20K 252 (turbo) converted to Encore specs.  But NOT in your budget.  Auto wastegate, intercooler, over 1000 pound useful load.

Next best would be an M20K 231.  Also turbo, but no auto wastegate or intercooler from the factory, although a lot of them have had them added.

[midlifeflyer]

Sorry to say, but I think you have a significant budget vs desired performance issue. That 7 month old isn't getting any smaller, so those vacation missions  mean 4 people and a bunch of baggage. I'd really be looking at carrying capacity more than Mooney efficiency.  I flew a lot in the Rockies in my 20 years in Colorado and, on a nice day with only my wife and I, there were a bunch of options. But add kids and baggage, and I'd be looking at things like a 182 (RG or Turbo if you want some speed) or even a Comanche or Bonanza F-series with a big engine STC (I used to fly a Debonair with an IO 550 - about 5 kts slower than an Ovation with similar fuel burn).

Whatever you do look at, be sure to look at the actual weight and balance form for the specific airplane, and run some realistic numbers.

[Z W]

I've been in and out of Denver and the Rockies in both a turbo and a naturally aspirated Mooney.  Given the choice, you'll want the turbo every time, especially with 3 or more people and a 4,000 foot runway.  So of the Mooneys, I believe you'd be happiest with a K.

My kids are now 14 and 9 and my family of four has pretty well outgrown long trips in the Mooney.  It worked when they were young, as well as traveling anywhere with young kids works.  One would work pretty well for you for a few years.

You can gain some cabin space and useful load in a Lance or Saratoga, at the cost of speed, fuel burn, and range.  A 36 Bonanza, especially turbocharged, may be as fast or a little faster, at the cost of some fuel burn and range.  You will pay a lot more for one though. Then there are the Piper pressurized piston singles, again at a steep price increase, and if you run the numbers, you're mostly just gaining some cabin volume, and I personally find the pilot's seat in those to be a significant downgrade in comfort.

Getting more true performance to haul a family of four long distances in comfort just about requires a twin or a turboprop, and greatly increasing your fuel and maintenance costs, as far as I can tell.  If you figure it out otherwise, let me know 

[N201MKTurbo]

49 minutes ago, Z W said:

I've been in and out of Denver and the Rockies in both a turbo and a naturally aspirated Mooney.  Given the choice, you'll want the turbo every time, especially with 3 or more people and a 4,000 foot runway.  So of the Mooneys, I believe you'd be happiest with a K.

My kids are now 14 and 9 and my family of four has pretty well outgrown long trips in the Mooney.  It worked when they were young, as well as traveling anywhere with young kids works.  One would work pretty well for you for a few years.

You can gain some cabin space and useful load in a Lance or Saratoga, at the cost of speed, fuel burn, and range.  A 36 Bonanza, especially turbocharged, may be as fast or a little faster, at the cost of some fuel burn and range.  You will pay a lot more for one though. Then there are the Piper pressurized piston singles, again at a steep price increase, and if you run the numbers, you're mostly just gaining some cabin volume, and I personally find the pilot's seat in those to be a significant downgrade in comfort.

Getting more true performance to haul a family of four long distances in comfort just about requires a twin or a turboprop, and greatly increasing your fuel and maintenance costs, as far as I can tell.  If you figure it out otherwise, let me know 

I flew a turbo Saratoga to New Orleans last year. It was faster than my turbo Mooney. I was surprised. At 10000 feet, it was doing 170 KTS at 14 GPH

[NickG]

52 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I flew a turbo Saratoga to New Orleans last year. It was faster than my turbo Mooney. I was surprised. At 10000 feet, it was doing 170 KTS at 14 GPH

The suggestions are all terrific except his budget is around 139K,

SO no turbo saratogas (or any saratogas), 182’s Bonanzas, modern mid bodied Mooneys and up etc etc. The OG has Champagne taste on a beer budget.

There may a turbo lance or turbo Arrow at that price range that would fit his mission.

[BlueSky247]

Since budget > everything else, I'd look for a nice J with a three blade up front and get used to packing light.

[NewMoon]

19 hours ago, JoeB said:

Mooney owners, 

I am looking to buy a Mooney to go far and fast....  I am currently building an RV10 but I realize that it will be another decade before that ever lifts off for the first time. Previously owned a Cherokee 140 and a Piper Archer.  Loved them both but slooooow. 

I am currently looking hard and trying to decide what is the best fit,  M20F,  M20J,  M20K   Looking to keep budget under 139K

Mission: 

Live in Denver with a 4000 ft runway,  about 5100 on field elevation and much higher on Summer High density days

Will do A LOT of just local flying around since we live on an airpark and I want to get up as often as possible,  but the REAL mission is taking wife and 2 kids (age 8 and 7 months currently) on longer range vacations,  both coasts and anything in between  we are in the "disney" phase of kids and frequent both California and Orlando,  but we also want to hit every National park in America and go to the Bahamas,  go far,  and get there fast without spending the big fuel burns of other similar speed aircraft (Bonanza, Comanche etc).  We want to always cross the Rocky Mtns without worrying about if we are going to have enough engine to get over safely,  and will do it frequently,  but we will be heading east often also.... so I need a jack of all trades. 

I think the I like the F due to the long body,  I like the J cause long body and faster,  I like the K since I feel it has both of the above and More than enough power....... however I don't know if the extra fuel burn and the complexity of the K is "worth it"   

can you share average flight planning criteria you use?   SPEED/ALT/FUEL BURN/ ENDURANCE

Can you all help point me in the right direction?   if anyone is in Denver area I am based at Parkland Estates,  in Erie,  but Happy to drive around Denver to go sit in look and talk airplanes

 

BUT what do you all think fits my mission profile the  best? 

Acclaim