Real world Ovation2 vs Acclaim vs AcclaimS Performance

[qwerty1]

Hello,

 

Fat guy wanting to bring girlfriend from northeast to FL to South America with reasonable luggage (not favorite bowling ball set, or anything)

 

I'm seeing #s plastered all over web and would like to ask ppl with practical experience here. What matters most to me is hauling me/less fat girlfriend/modest luggage fast with range. Cost up front or operation/maintenance, and in some comfort, are secondary priorities.

 

Guy is funny&concise: claims O2 can haul 250lbs more fat&fuel vs acclaims? Claims O2 half up front price (presumably lower upkeep of course) but with this extra 250lbs just sacrificing 50mph, all three 1200nm. Claims S cruises 10knots/hr faster than plain Acclaim otherwise really similar. Cost estimates/ratios seem pretty off with some relatively cheaper acclaims but may just be random vagaries of market right now

http://www.pilotfriend.com/aircraft performance/Mooney/57.htm craps out around 2001 but O2 looks pretty similar to above

https://www.flyradius.com/mooney-acclaim-type-s/performance umm acclaim range just got a lot better and alludes to an extended fuel tank addon making it a lot lot better but idk where its coming from and assume I'd have to fly alone after a weight loss program and ship luggage ahead if I put extended fuel weight onboard if youtube source was right about everything else but prices.

 

There are other sources galore. Foreflight scattershot preloaded performance profiles. Just offered these to showcase confusion of new market investigator. Basically youtube claims acclaimS if equally priced with acclaim otherwise almost indistinguishable, but ovation makes up for 50mph less with hauling 250lbs more. And last ref claims you can get a hell of a lot more range on acclaim and more than that if you load it down with more fuel without discussing load but presumably I might not even be able to fly in it if fully fueled with extended tank mod if fuel fully loaded.

 

 

The only thing totally clear to me is no sources estimate market offers well bc I can look at those listings directly. Many thanks for helping me with if not hard #s at least salient differentiating factors btwn these 3 variants so I can think about offers in a true/'profitable' way!

[Will.iam]

Ok first off get that extended tank full fuel load out of your mind. Just because you can carry full fuel doesn’t mean you have to. Besides your girlfriend unless she likes peeing in a coffee can , is not going to last much longer than 4 hours before she or you are going to need a restroom break so just get gas at the same time. I have extended tanks and can fly for 10 hours. Yet the longest i have flown at one time is 5 hours. Point being extended tanks would not be the deciding factor. There is a speed chart on mooneyspace that shows the different models all shown together so you can compare. Short summary ovation faster than all but the acclaim S up to 8k then the turbo charged models start beating the ovation. If you are not going above 8k stay with the ovation as you go higher the acclaim will be faster the higher you go. Everything is a compromise so you need to choose whats most important to you. Speed, range, or price. 

[Fly Boomer]

13 hours ago, qwerty1 said:

Many thanks for helping me with if not hard #s at least salient differentiating factors btwn these 3 variants so I can think about offers in a true/'profitable' way!

Not sure if this helps, but gives you an idea.  Take the numbers with a grain of salt.

 

[Red Leader]

Great chart - I've seen that before. Is the airspeed listed in MPH?

[Schllc]

The only time an ovation is “faster” than an acclaim would be on takeoff if the ovation has the 310hp stc. 
The acclaim is as fast or faster than the ovation at all altitudes and all configurations other than takeoff. 
At least that has been my experience with owning two ovations, flying eight or so others, and owning seven acclaims and flying twelve of those. 
I think what may skew some people’s understandings of this is the appointments. 
if you have an acclaim with tks and an ovation with neither AC or tks, the ovation may be faster below 8k.  
But if they are identically appointed the acclaim is still as fast or faster at any time. 
On my average mission the acclaim is about 30-45min faster and uses about 5-10% more fuel. That is the main difference. The difference to maintain an acclaim vs an ovation is a rounding error.  Insurance may be a bit more but once you get good experience, even that isn’t much different. 

[exM20K]

@qwerty1 you may benefit from reading this recent thread.

 

[Fly Boomer]

2 hours ago, Red Leader said:

Great chart - I've seen that before. Is the airspeed listed in MPH?

Knots.  But it raises a lot of questions.  All the Ks are lumped together, and the chart shows that the K poops out at about 21,000.  My 252 is certificated up to 28, and a couple of the Rocket people have been up to 30 just for fun.  About all you can take away is that the Acclaims are faster than anything else, the Rocket is right behind them, and the Bravo is close.  It also shows that the normally aspirated models take a nose dive starting at around 8 or 9 thousand, while the turbos just keep getting faster as you gain altitude.  For @qwerty1, if you need to get over any significant hills, or you want to get above most of the weather, get a turbocharged airplane.

[Will.iam]

That chart for the 231/252/encore is actually just the 231 with its fixed waste gate. 252 or encore should not be included on the same line. Their line would continue paralleling the bravo like it does in the teens and keep going up to 24k then slightly increasing after 24k as that is critical ceiling on the 252 encore is at 21k but has more speed in the high teens compared to the 252 (guess that 10 extra hp helped) from another chart i saw of just the differences between the 252 and encore. 

[Fritz1]

lots of facets, a turbo with TKS is able to do things that the n/a aircraft without TKS is not able to do, i.e. climb over a lot of weather and in particular icing, the question then becomes how important is it to be able to do these kinds of things, best way to find out might be to talk to one of the dealers and test fly aircraft, Jimmy Garrison at GmaxAmerican, Richard Similie at Thunderbird and Mark Wood at Delta Aviation, as a serious and funded buyer you might just offer to pay for the test flight which they will most likely decline or credit to a purchase. Once you have experience the smooth and solid climb of a turbo going through 14,000 ft the risk is you might want one. Buyer beware!

[dkkim73]

I completely agree with what @Fritz1 said above. All 3 of those gentlemen are very knowledgeable and enjoyable to speak with, and very knowledgeable about market specifics (leads on particular planes, trade-offs, etc). 

 

[qwerty1]

On 11/10/2024 at 3:12 PM, Schllc said:

The only time an ovation is “faster” than an acclaim would be on takeoff if the ovation has the 310hp stc. 
The acclaim is as fast or faster than the ovation at all altitudes and all configurations other than takeoff. 
At least that has been my experience with owning two ovations, flying eight or so others, and owning seven acclaims and flying twelve of those. 
I think what may skew some people’s understandings of this is the appointments. 
if you have an acclaim with tks and an ovation with neither AC or tks, the ovation may be faster below 8k.  
But if they are identically appointed the acclaim is still as fast or faster at any time. 
On my average mission the acclaim is about 30-45min faster and uses about 5-10% more fuel. That is the main difference. The difference to maintain an acclaim vs an ovation is a rounding error.  Insurance may be a bit more but once you get good experience, even that isn’t much different. 

Thank you, several interesting points I'd love to pick your mind on:

1) I'm assuming 'maintain' difference being a 'rounding error' means regular maintenance/fuel 5-10% but NOT overhauls, correct? This even if so is pretty interesting to me would have thought acclaim more expensive at every turn

2) Sorry just trying to improve my terminology too, what does 'appointed' refer to - optional modifications like a/c vs no etc?

3) Not mentioned but I'm confident you know, what is the load/weight differential assuming full tanks? Did you ever do extended tank options, on either per chance? Willing but would rather avoid cost of purchasing individual owner manual PDFs to answer this

Thank you for vindicating reason for this site/community by sharing your experience!

[Bolter]

4 minutes ago, qwerty1 said:

Thank you, several interesting points I'd love to pick your mind on:

1) I'm assuming 'maintain' difference being a 'rounding error' means regular maintenance/fuel 5-10% but NOT overhauls, correct? This even if so is pretty interesting to me would have thought acclaim more expensive at every turn

2) Sorry just trying to improve my terminology too, what does 'appointed' refer to - optional modifications like a/c vs no etc?

3) Not mentioned but I'm confident you know, what is the load/weight differential assuming full tanks? Did you ever do extended tank options, on either per chance? Willing but would rather avoid cost of purchasing individual owner manual PDFs to answer this

Thank you for vindicating reason for this site/community by sharing your experience!

Several POH's are available to download, here on Mooneyspace. 

I got this one for a 280 HP Ovation:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/eu09nyn73fni43uf3ikin/m20r_ovation_poh.pdf?rlkey=p2m2h87tcl1b5bhk1rujtakat&st=sul51kqh&dl=0

And this is the 310HP STC:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/yqogk7imn7612526ik3k7/Ovation3-STC.pdf?rlkey=dc2tf8lluk2puq2o6yvkevn2x&st=75nnr00e&dl=0

I found these here or other sources online, and are simply passing them on for your REFERENCE ONLY.  The download links will expire in a few days.  

FYI: put me in the happy with a 310 HP M20R with FIKI camp.  I have one with 1100 lbs UL, and that is important.  

[Schllc]

1 hour ago, qwerty1 said:

Thank you, several interesting points I'd love to pick your mind on:

1) I'm assuming 'maintain' difference being a 'rounding error' means regular maintenance/fuel 5-10% but NOT overhauls, correct? This even if so is pretty interesting to me would have thought acclaim more expensive at every turn

2) Sorry just trying to improve my terminology too, what does 'appointed' refer to - optional modifications like a/c vs no etc?

3) Not mentioned but I'm confident you know, what is the load/weight differential assuming full tanks? Did you ever do extended tank options, on either per chance? Willing but would rather avoid cost of purchasing individual owner manual PDFs to answer this

Thank you for vindicating reason for this site/community by sharing your experience!

A factory poh won’t have many of those answers because most are modifications or implications of…

overhauls are definitely more and you have turbos and exhaust maintenance, but if you divide that over a tbo and all other costs of ownership it is probably 5-10%. 
hangar, insurance, basic maintenance, upgrades, fuel etc. 

yes appointments are options, AC, FIKI ect

Mooneys, at least long bodies will always be flying at or near gross, but with an ovation you can keep more fuel and it’s a little more efficient.   
I have had long range tanks in two of my planes. I did not need it enough to pay for the modification myself, but wouldn’t mind the option. It requires more attention to managing fuel because of how the gauges read as the tank empties, but more fuel is always a desirable option. 
 

My point was that everything in aviation is a trade off, and your mission, personality and budget will all play a role in your priorities.  If you can own and maintain an airplane you could justify the extra for a turbo if you wanted to, it isn’t an order of magnitude more to own.  If performance and speed is really important to you, you will probably always long for a turbo.  It may only save 20-30min over a 3+ hour trip and for me that’s big, but in the grand scheme of things isn’t as important to others. I like the climb, the versatility to take advantage of favorable headwinds, getting through bad layers, and love seeing the 200+tas.
There are lots of good arguments for either perspective, but they usually boil down to the trade offs that make sense to you.  

[dkkim73]

48 minutes ago, Schllc said:

I like the climb, the versatility to take advantage of favorable headwinds, getting through bad layers, and love seeing the 200+tas.

Prior to the current plane, I had only a few hours in a 182 turbo (a nice late 80's or 90's model) and I loved the power on demand... everything else was normally aspirated. 

Now, 120 hours later, I wouldn't go back. It is more complex mechanically, but the Acclaim's TSIO-550G turbo design is pretty sound (used also on Cirrus FWIW), and the actual management is much simpler in my opinion (MP is settable arbitrarily up to the critical altitude). The ability to just keep climbing through weather and select arbitrary altitudes is huge. Terrain? Push it up and go... But I also live in the mountains with MEA's routinely above 10k. I came into a cloudy valley with some light ice on Sunday at 17k, had climbed up in a few minutes from 14k to minimize icing (TKS was keeping up but always better to have less), dropped down to 9k in a hold with TKS as needed, and shot the approach. I wouldn't have made the trip without TKS. I think I could get by with an Ovation here, but the diminishing climb rates up high would limit options in some cases. 

East coast does not have the terrain issues, but might have the weather which also benefits from climb in some cases. 

Others here @Schllc? can weigh in on the utiility of a Stormscope too in the southeast (lots of convection at times). The XM weather downlink is great and does most of what you need, but just another thing to consider since this is a bit of a clean-sheet/blue-sky discussion. 

HTH
D

[Z W]

I left Durango this month with an adult passenger, a cargo area full of bags, and 6 hours of fuel on board.  Headed east, pointed straight at the Rocky mountains.  Climbed 500-700 FPM up to 17,500 feet, straight over those mountains with 4,000 feet of terrain clearance, no circling required, no mountain wave concerns.  Caught a tailwind of up to 70 knots, and made it to the Kansas City area in a little over 3 hours.  Smooth air, no clouds, no traffic, within glide distance of multiple airports almost the whole time.  Didn't even make a radio call between leaving the pattern in Colorado and entering it in Missouri.  175 KTAS at 13 GPH (TIT limited, I like to keep it under 1600).  Landed with 2 hours of reserve fuel.

Some days the turbo really shines.

[Schllc]

9 hours ago, dkkim73 said:

Others here @Schllc? can weigh in on the utiility of a Stormscope too in the southeast (lots of convection at times). The XM weather downlink is great and does most of what you need, but just another thing to consider since this is a bit of a clean-sheet/blue-sky discussion. 

I have had the storm scope, but never really used it to be honest. XM shows you where the activity is, and I do not poke around violent convective activity so I cannot speak to its efficacy. XM weather is great, you just have to be mindful of the delays or lags in information.  
I have gone back and forth over the years with turbo/NA, and I like the trade offs the turbo affords.
The beauty of most turbos, is that you can fly them exactly like their NA analogs if you choose and get about the same efficiency, but the power is available if you want or need. 

[Jeff_S]

This was a fun topic to go through.  I'd never seen that Mooney compilation video before, and he was mostly correct, except that the 310hp modification didn't hit the official Ovation until the Ovation 3 model, not the 2.  (It was available as an STC to the O2 before Mooney incorporated it into the O3.)  As to real-world performance, although I haven't flown anywhere near as many planes as @Schllc, I concur with his general assessments.

Except for one.  In an all-out low altitude balls-on-fire racing config, an Ovation 3 will beat an Acclaim.  This I know from racing against them at 1000' AGL during Sport Air Race League events.  The reason is that Acclaims almost always have just the 280hp engines, which limits their RPM to 2500, where an O3 can go to 2700 RPM. I know there's a 310hp STC for the Acclaims as well but I don't believe they are widely deployed. And Acclaims use cowl flaps to keep cool at low altitude/high power settings, whereas the Ovation requires no cowl-flaps...thus much less drag.  So, higher RPM and less drag will give the Ovation 3 an advantage over an Acclaim right up until the altitude where the turbo advantage kicks in.  This assumes similar "appointments" as has been indicated already.

To the OP, good luck with your decision.  I have flown my Ovation 3 for 10 years now and I love it.  But I would say that if I were looking for a different plane that would allow me to travel longer distances more comfortably, I'd move to an Acclaim, which would give me the ability to fly up and over a lot of weather that kicks up here in NE Florida.  But of course, this would require having built-in O², and maybe TKS (although I know at least one Acclaim driver that routinely goes to 25K without it) so it would reduce useful load.  So many trade-offs!

Good luck!

[dkkim73]

41 minutes ago, Jeff_S said:

And Acclaims use cowl flaps to keep cool at low altitude/high power settings, whereas the Ovation requires no cowl-flaps...thus much less drag.

At least the Type S has no cowl flaps. I am told that the airflow changes at different angles of attack so as to provide a good airflow solution over the cylinders. In my experience it works really well without any need to adjust anything. Cylinders run very cool LOP, #5 might need a bit of attention on a hot day ROP climbing hard, but very manageable and that's keeping Mike Busch's 380F working limit in mind. Also don't really cool down too much on the descent, much less of a problem than I'd anticipated. 

I wonder how the Acclaim with the 310hp STC would do against an O3 at low altitudes. I would imagine there is some effective volumetric restriction and exhaust back pressure with the turbos, but I don't know. Max MAP is 33.5", which is slight boosting relative to SLP so that might offset it. 

You mention useful load. That is the Achilles heel of a well-equipped Acclaim (O2, TKS). I would not have AC, though on the East Coast that might be a much bigger deal. 

HTH

D

 

[dkkim73]

4 hours ago, Schllc said:

The beauty of most turbos, is that you can fly them exactly like their NA analogs if you choose and get about the same efficiency, but the power is available if you want or need. 

As Teddy Roosevelt said, "Maneuver softly and carry a big boost." 

Or wait a minute...

[NickG]

15 hours ago, Bolter said:

Several POH's are available to download, here on Mooneyspace. 

I got this one for a 280 HP Ovation:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/eu09nyn73fni43uf3ikin/m20r_ovation_poh.pdf?rlkey=p2m2h87tcl1b5bhk1rujtakat&st=sul51kqh&dl=0

And this is the 310HP STC:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/yqogk7imn7612526ik3k7/Ovation3-STC.pdf?rlkey=dc2tf8lluk2puq2o6yvkevn2x&st=75nnr00e&dl=0

I found these here or other sources online, and are simply passing them on for your REFERENCE ONLY.  The download links will expire in a few days.  

FYI: put me in the happy with a 310 HP M20R with FIKI camp.  I have one with 1100 lbs UL, and that is important.  

Me too. M20R TKS with 310HP STC and 1100 lbs UL. Very happy.

[Schllc]

3 hours ago, Jeff_S said:

 

Except for one.  In an all-out low altitude balls-on-fire racing config, an Ovation 3 will beat an Acclaim.  This I know from racing against them at 1000' AGL during Sport Air Race League events.  The reason is that Acclaims almost always have just the 280hp engines, which limits their RPM to 2500, where an O3 can go to 2700 RPM. I know there's a 310hp STC for the Acclaims as well but I don't believe they are widely deployed. And Acclaims use cowl flaps to keep cool at low altitude/high power settings, whereas the Ovation requires no cowl-flaps...thus much less drag.  So, higher RPM and less drag will give the Ovation 3 an advantage over an Acclaim right up until the altitude where the turbo advantage kicks in.  This assumes similar "appointments" as has been indicated already.

 

That may well be true.  I have never tried it, but it stands to reason both making sea level MP, one is lighter with 30 more hp.  I think even with the 310 the acclaim may still lose there because it is heavier.  But it would not be by much at all.  

I was thinking of a typical flight profile where the turbo starts beating the MP on a naturally aspirated engine pretty quickly. 

No cowl flaps on any acclaim.  The type S had some modifications to the interior of the cowling, but I would have to look at two side by side to see what those are.   

The main differences on the S model was a different prop, flap gap seals, and the inner cowling.  There may be a few other items I forgot about but those three are the big speed mods.

FIKI in my experience is a pretty large speed penalty.  One of the ultras i owned was a real dog.  I even flew it to the factory because I was certain there was a rigging issue.  It was a good 5 knots slower than my other ones with FIKI.  I never did figure out what it was but it bothered the heck out of me.

AC is less of a penalty that FIKI, but given the nature of parasitic drag, having both doesn't add the two penalties, but one with both still has to be kind of a dog comparatively.

[LANCECASPER]

48 minutes ago, Schllc said:

FIKI in my experience is a pretty large speed penalty.  One of the ultras i owned was a real dog.  I even flew it to the factory because I was certain there was a rigging issue.  It was a good 5 knots slower than my other ones with FIKI.  I never did figure out what it was but it bothered the heck out of me.

I've often wondered with the extra step for the pilot's door and the wing walk material on both sides if that causes a few knots drag on the Ultra. 

[exM20K]

1 hour ago, Schllc said:

FIKI in my experience is a pretty large speed penalty.  One of the ultras i owned was a real dog.  I even flew it to the factory because I was certain there was a rigging issue.  It was a good 5 knots slower than my other ones with FIKI.  I never did figure out what it was but it bothered the heck out of me.

what has been the delta vs book in your experience with multiple examples.  Mine is 8-10 KTAS in the mid teens.

-dan

[Schllc]

1 hour ago, exM20K said:

what has been the delta vs book in your experience with multiple examples.  Mine is 8-10 KTAS in the mid teens.

-dan

That is about what I saw. The offending example was 15+

[NickG]

1 hour ago, exM20K said:

what has been the delta vs book in your experience with multiple examples.  Mine is 8-10 KTAS in the mid teens.

-dan

I get about a 5 KTAS penalty in my O