Jump to content

M20J turbo

dc0341

By dc0341
in General Mooney Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

dc0341 Newbie

dc0341

Posted
Posted

I'm looking at the M20Js and came across one that has turbo.  For those who have owned one or flown one, what are the pros and cons for a turbo M20J?  

Schllc Veteran

Schllc

Posted
Posted

It’s called a turbo bullet. There is a pretty good article about it. If I can find I will post it, but a google search should find it. 
they claim 200tas at 20k. That would be pretty good. 
the one listed now has 64 gallon tanks which may be limiting. The article said 25gph in the climb. But it seems like a worthy upgrade. 

  • Like 1
toto Grand Master

toto

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, dc0341 said:

I'm looking at the M20Js and came across one that has turbo.  For those who have owned one or flown one, what are the pros and cons for a turbo M20J?  

There’s a lot of MooneySpace threads on turbo Js. Just search for “Rajay” and you should find most of them. 

  • Like 1
1980Mooney Grand Master

1980Mooney

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, dc0341 said:

I'm looking at the M20Js and came across one that has turbo.  For those who have owned one or flown one, what are the pros and cons for a turbo M20J?  

 

19 minutes ago, Schllc said:

It’s called a turbo bullet. There is a pretty good article about it. If I can find I will post it, but a google sea h should find it. 
they claim 200tas at 20k. That would be pretty good. 
the one listed now has 64 gallon tanks which may be limiting. The article said 25gph in the climb. But it seems like a worthy upgrade. 

There were three (3) STC turbo conversions of the J. Some turbo-normalized, some true turbocharged. Turbo Bullet, M20 and original RayJay (might be a ModWorks conversion). 
 

Which are you looking at? 
 

https://mooneyspace.com/topic/9340-original-rayjay-turbo-normalizer-v-m-20-turbo-v-turbo-bullet/

 

  • Like 1
1980Mooney Grand Master

1980Mooney

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, toto said:

Don’t all three of these use the Rajay turbo?

I think so. Aviation Consumer Mag referred to the M20 Turbos brand as Rayjay/Consolidated. But each system differs. The original Rayjay and M20 are turbo normalized. The Turbo Bullet (an early rare Darwin Conrad creation before he set up Rocket Engineering) lowered the piston compression ratios and then overboosted to 38.5 inches. It broke crankshafts and the was an AD that restricted boost. Avoid it. 

Edited by 1980Mooney
  • Like 3
Fly Boomer Grand Master

Fly Boomer

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

I think so. Aviation Consumer Mag referred to the M20 Turbos brand as Rayjay/Consolidated. But each system differs. The original Rayjay and M20 are turbo normalized. The Turbo Bullet (an early rare Darwin Conrad creation before he set up Rocket Engineering) lowered the piston compression ratios and then overboosted to 38.5 inches. It broke crankshafts and the was an AD that restricted boost. Avoid it. 

I wonder if that experience helped Darwin with his decision to use the bulletproof TSIO-520 on the Rocket?

KSMooniac Grand Master

KSMooniac

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Schllc said:

https://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=MOONEY&model=M20J+201&listing_id=2436439&s-type=aircraft

If this is the plane under consideration, it is indeed Darwin Conrad's first Mooney mod (Turbo Bullet), but it was pulled from the market after a fatal crash and AD in 1993 that reduced max MP from 38" down to 33".  I think the mod was making way over 200 HP and reducing MP down to 33" put it back to 200 HP.  It has low compression pistons, and no intercooler, so it is similar to an early 231 but with the Lycoming instead of Continental.  The ad copy says Turbo Normalized, and it is NOT that, unless they somehow got a field approval to morph it into a TN setup with high compression pistons and 30" MP max.  

I don't think it is officially supported by Rocket Engineering since it pre-dates that company, but I believe there is nothing exotic that would make ownership risky.  Exhaust is exhaust and can be repaired by competent shops.  Turbo and check valves are off the shelf, etc.  With some engine operational savvy and a modern engine monitor, it might be a great plane to own if the owner does their part.  The down side is that the low compression pistons make it less fuel efficient than a stock 201, so for it to "pay off" the mission should be longer XC where it makes sense to get into the teens routinely and use oxygen.  My Mooney mentors in college owned the plane that crashed in 1993 (flown by a friend, fortunately/unfortunately) and their mission had routine trips from TX to NE and all over the country so they loved it.  It was replaced by a 262 Mod K and they loved it too.

1980Mooney Grand Master

1980Mooney

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, KSMooniac said:

If this is the plane under consideration, it is indeed Darwin Conrad's first Mooney mod (Turbo Bullet), but it was pulled from the market after a fatal crash and AD in 1993 that reduced max MP from 38" down to 33".  I think the mod was making way over 200 HP and reducing MP down to 33" put it back to 200 HP.  It has low compression pistons, and no intercooler, so it is similar to an early 231 but with the Lycoming instead of Continental.  

I don't think it is officially supported by Rocket Engineering since it pre-dates that company, but I believe there is nothing exotic that would make ownership risky.  

Actually it did have an intercooler. The Bullet STC was never supported by Rocket because it was in a different company with another partner - “Aircraft Specialties Inc.”
 

1 hour ago, Fly Boomer said:

I wonder if that experience helped Darwin with his decision to use the bulletproof TSIO-520 on the Rocket?

Yes. Because he didn’t try to modify the engine on his next projects. He used the complete engine and prop set-up  from the well established Cessna 340 and 414. The only change was the engine mount and cowl. 

  • Like 1
KSMooniac Grand Master

KSMooniac

Posted
Posted

Ah, thanks.  I forgot it did have an intercooler.  I should have remembered that as the M20 Turbos TN kit was essentially a carbon copy except for the retention of 8.7:1 pistons and the 30" MP limit, and I knew it had an intercooler.

Fly Boomer Grand Master

Fly Boomer

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

The only change was the engine mount and cowl. 

And, at least for the 252, the cowling was just a modified factory part to accommodate a different induction air path, and a small bump to provide a little clearance for cylinder #6.

M20F-1968 Veteran

M20F-1968

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, carusoam said:

Invite Rich and Doc Jon to the conversation…

both have a turbo connected to their IO360…

@M20F-1968

@tomgo2 interesting contact for this conversation…

@N201MKTurbo

:)

 

Best regards,

-a-

I will throw in my two cents.  There were three aftermarket turbo systems applied to the IO-360 Mooneys.  (Models E, F and J).  The original RaJay Turbo system had a manual wastegate and no intercooler. Next in line was the Rocket Engineering turbo-boosted system for the J which is the one that was involved in breaking crankshafts and was taken out of production.  M20 Turbos took the Rocket Engineering system exactly as it was designed except configured it on an IO-360 engine as a turbo normalized system with a pop-off valve set at 31 inches of manifold pressure, an intercooler, and keeps the original high compression pistons.  It has a fixed wastegate.  In that configuration with operating manifold pressure limited to 30 inches, it is a very good system.  The STC's for both the original RaJay system and the M20 Turbo system are orphaned STC's.  A turbonormalized E, F or J increases the capability of these planes considerably.  The original E or F can only use the original RaJay system if it has the original cowling.  The M20 Turbo system has STC's for the F or J only.  The F cowling must be converted to a 201 cowling to be covered under the STC.  

John Breda

  • Like 3
1980Mooney Grand Master

1980Mooney

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, M20F-1968 said:

I will throw in my two cents.  There were three aftermarket turbo systems applied to the IO-360 Mooneys.  (Models E, F and J).  The original RaJay Turbo system had a manual wastegate and no intercooler. Next in line was the Rocket Engineering turbo-boosted system for the J which is the one that was involved in breaking crankshafts and was taken out of production.  M20 Turbos took the Rocket Engineering system exactly as it was designed except configured it on an IO-360 engine as a turbo normalized system with a pop-off valve set at 31 inches of manifold pressure, an intercooler, and keeps the original high compression pistons.  It has a fixed wastegate.  In that configuration with operating manifold pressure limited to 30 inches, it is a very good system.  The STC's for both the original RaJay system and the M20 Turbo system are orphaned STC's.  A turbonormalized E, F or J increases the capability of these planes considerably.  The original E or F can only use the original RaJay system if it has the original cowling.  The M20 Turbo system has STC's for the F or J only.  The F cowling must be converted to a 201 cowling to be covered under the STC.  

John Breda

Small point.  The Turbo Bullet was not developed/marketed by Rocket Engineering.  Indeed, Darwin Conrad, who went on to form Rocket Engineering, marketed the Turbo Bullet in a company named Aircraft Design, Incorporated (ADI) in Spokane.   Prior to forming ADI, Darwin Conrad was an employee of Machen as head of R&D, American Aviation, Inc was the parent of Machen.

  • In 1988, Darwin Conrad and his partner Gary Dilley (a former client of American Aviation) .formed Aircraft Design, Incorporated (ADI)
  • In 1989 ADI was awarded two (2) STC's for the Turbo Bullet conversion ( STC SE4757NM and STC SA4758NM)
  • In 1990, Machen and American Aviation sued Darwin Conrad and his partner in ADI ,Gary Dilley, for theft of Turbo Bullet design.  They allege that Conrad developed it while working for Machen.
  • The lawsuits drug on for two (2) years.
  • In August 1993 the Airworthiness Directive limiting boost due to crankshaft failures was issued.  (AD NUMBER:   93-14-15)
  • In the meantime, Conrad formed Rocket Engineering in 1990 with a different partner. The Turbo Bullet was not part of Rocket.

Machen, Inc. v. Aircraft Design, Inc., 65 Wn. App. 319 | Casetext Search + Citator

Machen, Inc. v. Aircraft Design, Inc. - Washington - Case Law - VLEX 894951679

Edited by 1980Mooney
  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.