Question re: Airframe Total Time

[gus007]

Hi All,

In the market for a nice J. What is the consensus from the experts on Total Time Airframe. Is 5900TT excessive for a 1984 model year M20J? Looking at this bird which is really well equipped and looks clean. http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/MOONEY-M20J-201/1984-MOONEY-M20J-201/1233917.htm?

Thoughts?

Also, anyone in the Seattle area looking for a potential 2 person partnership, let me know.

 

THanks

Gus

[carusoam]

Gus,

You came to the right place...

I get the honor of answering first.....

There are Js here with more than 7,000 hours on them.  They get 2,000 hours before rebuilding the engine.  Their brothers are still flying with 50 years on them.

Best of all, they have been written about here in a nearly simple format that can be searched through.

There are some planes here that have been completely refreshed to better than new condition.  

Find the search button at the top of the page and try your hand at creating a personalized search.  Look up TT for total time.  There have been some long discussions on the topic.  Well kept Mooneys last as long as their pilots.... 

Good luck.

I wish I could sell planes for a living...

Best regards,

-a-

[Parker_Woodruff]

My 1990 M20J had 7200 hours on it when I got rid of it.  It was a great plane...about the only difference was that I had to carry around about 15 lbs of airframe and engine logbooks.

[smccray]

My '87 J model just crossed over 5000 hrs total time.  Guess what I think...

Total time doesn't matter as much as how well it's maintained.

[Vref]

Quote: gus007

Hi All,

In the market for a nice J. What is the consensus from the experts on Total Time Airframe. Is 5900TT excessive for a 1984 model year M20J? Looking at this bird which is really well equipped and looks clean. http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/MOONEY-M20J-201/1984-MOONEY-M20J-201/1233917.htm?

Thoughts?

Also, anyone in the Seattle area looking for a potential 2 person partnership, let me know.

 

THanks

Gus

[Cruiser]

Looks good........ except for the color

[N9453V]

5900TT is actually fairly low compared with some Mooneys. I have a 1970 G model with around 8700TT and no major issues since I've owned it (only unscheduled maintenance was to replace a vacuum pump and alternator). Planes that fly generally have fewer maintenance issues than planes that sit on the ground.

Of course you do want to make sure the plane was properly maintained in those 5900TT by a qualified mechanic or Mooney Service Center. Also, a pre-buy inspection by a Mooney Service Center is probably a good idea unless you really have confidence in whomever did the maintenance.

-Andrew

[aviatoreb]

Quote: N9453V

5900TT is actually fairly low compared with some Mooneys. I have a 1970 G model with around 8700TT and no major issues since I've owned it (only unscheduled maintenance was to replace a vacuum pump and alternator). Planes that fly generally have fewer maintenance issues than planes that sit on the ground.

Of course you do want to make sure the plane was properly maintained in those 5900TT by a qualified mechanic or Mooney Service Center. Also, a pre-buy inspection by a Mooney Service Center is probably a good idea unless you really have confidence in whomever did the maintenance.

-Andrew

[jetdriven]

Jim R has almost 10K AFTT and I have about 5K.  The principal difference is the greater amount of grease and stuff in the belly of the fuselage, and the few stripped screws, elongated holes and fretting rivets.  But structurally, put a 20K AFTT wing in a jig and break it, then do a brand new one. There will be no statistical difference.

Last fall I flew a 747-200 that had 140,000 hours on it. It flew like a new one.  I talked to the FE who flew her to the boneyard in Mojave two weeks later. They decided to let to old girl breathe, so about Arizona they went up to FL450, and left climb power in until she hit mach .92, the maximum number.  Just one last time.

 

Regardig the opposite, disuse.  Our plane flew 100 hours a year for ten years. Then it flew ~50 hours, then ~35 hours.  We did a thorough prebuy, then put 241 hours on it.  The cam spalled out and so far its looking like 37K. Maybe more.     Fly your airplane often.  No amount of excessive airframe time is a 37K deduction.

 

[M20F]

Personally I would look at the logbooks and see how the time was generated and the average hours per year.  For that amount of time more than likely the aircraft was either used commercially (I saw a M20J with @10,000 hrs that flew checks and put almost all that time on in eight years) or through a flight school.  As others have noted doesn't neccessarily mean it is a bad airplane but you can learn a lot by reviewing the logs and getting a good pre-buy from an experienced Mooney mechanic.

This doesn't imply this plane is bad, just that you should do your research; good luck!

[jeckford]

This looks like a great plane and has outlived the last 2 guys that had it.

http://www.mooneyland.com/1984_m20j.htm

Previous owner died and then Zeph who recently passed away had it listed for sale.

The owner died a almost a year ago so I would check the logs to see how much it has flown in the last year, otherwise it looks like a well cared for bird.

[jetdriven]

What a beautiful airplane and a sad story.  That page was updated last August.  That is a major bummer as it hasnt likely been flown regualrly.

[gus007]

All,

Thank You for the detailed and very helpful replies. Looks like TT is not a big issue as long as maintenance has been properly done and the aircraft flys regularly.  Will check out this plane and see how it goes

 

Thanks again

Gus