1966 20E

[RobertL]

Have operated a P brand twin for 10 years and am now 'upgrading' to a Mooney. Typical mission will be 200nm in light IFR, with about 8-10 trips of around 550nm a year. Payload of 600lbs OK and typically 1-2 passengers with some luggage. Occasionally a/c landed on firm grass.

Have lived through the experience of caring for a 37 year old aircraft, and other for very lackluster P parts support the experience has been quite good as long as you spend on the preventive maintenance.

Have found (on paper) a nice 20E with ca3500 TT and 800 SOH - reasonable IFR (HSI and 430), but only PC no autopilot, plus 3 blade prop (does this produce better prop clearance?). Multiple owners so am not sure it has been pampered, but appears to have enjoyed reasonable useage in recent years (100hrs pa+). Armstrong ie Johnson bar u/c which I rate as a positive.

Will carry out a pre buy 'annual' inspection, but note a fair amount of corrosion discussion on the brand, despite the quality of construction reputation.

If I might check out some showstopper questions:

1. 
   
2. SB208 - how often is it carried out in practice? Assuming an a/c has received normal maintenance, is this a major showstopper or complying is a reasonable exercise
   
3. Corrosion X fogging treatment - again appears to be something peculiar to mooniacdom - is this due to excessive pampering or does the structure acquire potentially terminal rust spots? For example my existing a/c has the original zinc chrome treatment and gets a high quality re paint every 15-20 years - no 'fogging' etc
   
4. Fuel re-sealing - something reasonably straightforward to remedy? - the a/c in question appears to be clean in this respect
   
5. Johnson bar manual u/c - the engineering seems bullet proof - does age/wear result in major components needing replacement?
   
6. Control rods/bushings/moving tail - again are they showing good longevity, or is this an area where major work is likely to be required as these airframes age?
   

Am skipping the usual perisheables (engine, accessories, rubber donuts) as this will be reflected in the price post pre-buy. Am I missing any showstoppers (other than major DH, etc)?

In terms of mods am only considering the tuned exhaust when the engine is due an OH and an EDM analyser (already has GAMIs) - the a/c is typically going to operate at 10,000 - 12,000', so speed mods seem a bit redundant. Am hoping the PC and the brand's reputation for IFR stability means I can do without an A/P. Am aiming for 140KTAS block speed (65%) and 9gph - 550nm legs may in practice only leave VFR reserves.

Finally in terms of transition training I have a reasonable experience in conventional gear SE and Arrows, plus over 50% of my experience in a twin - am assuming that with good speed control and ensuring landing MLG first, transition should be enjoyable (u/c operation in IFR might be interesting to avoid vertigo) - am 5'9'' and 180lbs so comfort/fit should not be a problem?

Thank you for any feedback - and by the strength of the Forum clearly the brand has a devoted following.

[Guest Anonymous]

Welcome to Mooneys, and you will love it.  Regarding your questions, here is my few bits:

IMHO the PC is someways better than an autopilot.  Less to go wrong electrically, fewer problems and cheaper to repair.  You can upgrade with with either a heading hold, a nav tracker or both.  Although I have not done it yet, it is possible in theory to connect the heading hold upgrade to a roll steering output from a GPS.  (However, I don't know if the PC would be agressive enough to fly approaches.)

You will find the opinions here split on the three bladed prop.  I have one and I like it.  I think my climb performance is improved, the noise level is somewhat lower, and yes, the ground clearance is improved.  On the last part, if you have been flying twins and have good speed control on final you will have no trouble with the Mooney.  If your brand "P" was a Twin Commanche, you will have no trouble whatsoever as they are almost identical in ground clearance and ground effect.

Regarding corrosion, the Mooneys are unique due to their tube and skin fuselage and several other design elements.  Most older Mooneys will have some evidence of light corrosion internally, but the key is good, periodic preventative maintenance with CorrosionX or similar at recommended intervales, especially in humid, coastal areas and colder, wet climates.

Structurally, every Mooney is a tank.  They are incredibly strong and you need have no concerns about the control linkages and tail.  There is very little required in these areas except inspections and normal lubricaton.  There is a single exception to this for an aircraft of the age you are considering.  The control shaft to yoik connection of aircraft of that era can wear to the point that there is play either in roll or pitch between the yoik and the shaft.  This should be checked during the pre-buy.

The 140 knots at 65% seems a little optimistic to me, but I will leave that one for the "E" owners.  The range should be no problem, but you might need to be a little slower to acheive it.

Regards,

RFB

 

[Hank]

Robert--

My 1970C travelled 1320nm westbound at 127 kts, and made the return trip at 151 kts, all around 9 gph. Altitudes were mostly 8500/9500. The wife & I were on vacation, made sightseeing stops, and had a very full airplane. Field elevation varied from 567 msl to 5100 msl with no problem. The E should be a little quicker. I use PC all the time, connected to a Brittain heading bug. Love the plane, love the PC, love the Brittain. Yes, I have a 3-blade with no vibration, but have heard others [with 2-blade props] say bad things about it.

I am 5'11" and have enough headroom to wear any hat, even sitting on a 2" cushion for cowl visibility. Lots of legroom, too. My wife [5'3"] slides the seat up and has legroom in front of the pedals. The backseat is tight, but not in an E.

Two things to watch besides normal wear and tear:  make sure the latch on the Johnson bar isn't worn. I've heard horror stories of the handle popping loose after landing. Seems like there might be an SB on this. [My gear's electric.] And check the tail--there should be virtually no side-to-side wiggle when you push the stabilizer back and forth. It it moves much [~1/4" at the tip], check the two small bolts and bushings that hold it to the airframe.

Good luck with your purchase, and happy flying!

                      --Hank

[Gone]

Robert:

I own an '65 E model and your numbers seem pretty reasonable.  Don't know about getting that speed at 12,000 at 65% though.

You will not have any problem transitioning from a twin to the Mooney.  You already know their primary flight characteristics: They don't go down and they don't slow down (easily).  

As others have stated, the tail bolts, SB208 and inspection for corrosion in the wings (with liberal use of Corrosion X) are all items on any annual provided by a reputable MSC.  I have had my Mooney for nearly 5 years now and the pre-purchase resulted in both tanks being re-sealed.  it also resulted in having the rear-spar doubler installed.  My last annual (at the end of a major overhaul) also resulted in the tail bolts and bushings being replaced.  The bolts and bushings just had normal wear and were not very expensive to do.

Great airplane.  You will really enjoy it.  Owning a Mooney gives you braggin' rights.  My airplane was built in 1965 and it is the fifth fastest one on our field of 100.  A Cirrus, a Bo, and two J models are faster than mine - at cruise - at altitude.  And I am burning less than 10 gph.  Gotta love it.

[KSMooniac]

I think the answers above pretty much cover your questions.  Your intended use sounds perfect for a Mooney in my opinion too.

You should easily get 140 KTAS at 9 GPH or less flying LOP and give you enough range for the 550 NM trip without sweating.  If you add a JPI engine analyzer (or similar) I'd highly recommend getting the fuel flow add-on to make much better use of your useful load for long trips like that.  It makes it easier to do partial-fuel trips with lots of people/bags and confidence you won't run out of fuel.

Corrosion generally isn't problematic unless the plane has been near a coast all it's life, or perhaps had leaky windows plus the original insulation while being stored outside for a long time.  The PPI/annual should check the steel cage for rust, and the rest of the airframe for internal corrosion.  Finding signficant rust in the cage is likely to not be economical to repair, so run away.

Fuel tanks are a Mooney weakness in that the wet wing sealant will eventually decay and require some attention.  Search up Willmar Air Service and read about their process for stripping and re-sealing...they are the best in the business.  There may or may not be a shop in Europe that is licensed to do their process.  It is expensive, but worth it.  Your candidate Mooney may or may not need it, so get the tanks inspected, and look/smell for leak evidence inside the cabin, in the wheel wells, belly, etc.  If you're lucky, a previous owner will have had this done recently!  I got to do my tanks in year two of ownership.

As mentioned above, things like the Johnson bar socket, control rod ends, etc. are subject to wear, but easily replaced. 

I'm in the camp that believes metal 3-blade props do not belong on 4-cylinder airplanes.  In the case of the Mooney, they offer the advantages of (a) ramp appeal, ( higher weight, © no additional ground clearance, (d) reduced top speed, (e) marginally better climb, (f) potential vibration problems.  None of those reasons are compelling enough to put one on IMO, but lots of people do.  If/when I upgrade my propeller I will very likely go with an MT because it is lighter and smoother and should give me better climb and perhaps top speed over my older OEM McCauley.  You might consider an MT since it originates in Europe and might be more reasonably priced over there for you.  The weight savings are very significant too, so if you have a payload problem that would be a good place to start.

Good luck!

[HRM]

Quote: RobertL

Have operated a P brand twin for 10 years and am now 'upgrading' to a Mooney.

...

Thank you for any feedback - and by the strength of the Forum clearly the brand has a devoted following.

[KSMooniac]

Congrats a day early!  Take some pics and be prepared for the cheek-sprain from holding an excrement-eating grin all day long.

[RobertL]

Thankyou all for the feedback, have passed it on to the A+P arranging the pre-buy. The a/c in question has lived its entire history in the foggy isles (otherwise Great Britain), and while it may have been hangared and is currently in the midlands I suspect like many GA horses in the UK it has lived a fair amount outside.

Regular corrosion prevention does seem the mark of good maintenance but with few vintage Mooneys in the UK (most live in Germany, presumably because they are not suitable for farm strip flying once the damp sets in), I think most A+Ps will have to develop their skills. My A+P used to annual a M20F so has some experience, but would suggest not that of a MSC.

Will keep you posted and hopefully can get the PC to speak to the heading bug - I noticed this was also quite an economical upgrade.

[rgaines]

I have a 1962C which is substantially the same as the 1965E.

1.  I suggest doing a full annual instead of a pre buy. Try to find a mooney experienced mechanic.

2.  I have recently done a number of mods and a new paint job + interior replacement and found absolutely no rust.  When doing this work we also did a SB208.  I suggest in conjunction with the pre buy at least doing a modified SB208 and look for rust under the insulation - especially if you have the old pink factory insulation. Removed the bottom panels and look at the tubing on the underside of the airplane.

3.  My mechanic likes using corrosion x .  A mooney has a lot of inspection plates and I suggest a corrosion x treatment. If is not very expensive and is good insurance against rust.

4.  Fuel re-seal is not complicated but is time consuming. If properly done it will last many years. But it is an issue in Mooneys so look for this problem in your pre buy.

5.  No problems with the Johnson bar at all. Never had any issues with control rods.  I believe there is an AD issued some time ago on control rods though I am sure your plane has satisfied the AD.  

6. I really like the speed mods available for Mooneys and suggest them to you if you can afford it.  If you can only do one modification then do the cowl closure.

7. I am not sure about 9 gal per hour. But you should get between 9 and 10.

8.  You should have no transition problems to a Mooney.  The only thing to look for is excess speed on landings.  If you come in too hot you will float.

9.  At 5'9' 180 lbs you will fit perfectly.  I am 6'3" and have pleanty of leg room, though it is a little tight side to side. But still it is comfortable.

10.  Suggestions if not already done:  replace the generator with an alternator, make sure the AD hartzell propeller hub is in compliance, install three point seat belts, modify with the cowl closure.

[Gone]

I would also emphasise the need for getting three-point belts for the front seats.  Very important.  And they are relatively inexpensive - about .6AMU all up.

The engine monitor is also a must-have if you are planning on running the engine as it was desiged to run and going to 2000 hours.  If you can manage the temperatures, your engine will go the distance for you.

[RobertL]

It does have shoulder safety belts (three point) for the front seat occupants. It has a three blade prop as mentioned, which may have some harmonic issues (am presuming none at the ideal 2500 RPM), but which hopefully means the recurring AD is taken care of.

Alternator, engine analyser, PC link to heading bug all on the upgrade list if acquired.

By my count there is possibly only half a dozen to a dozen 20E in Europe - all seem much cheaper than the F which seems to trade at not much of a discount/close to an early J. Pre-69 models manual u/c do not have the following of the US, or over time have made their way back stateside - or Texas itself (I assume all Mooneys have a homing instinct for the Lone Star state).

[HRM]

Quote: RobertL

By my count there is possibly only half a dozen to a dozen 20E in Europe - all seem much cheaper than the F which seems to trade at not much of a discount/close to an early J. Pre-69 models manual u/c do not have the following of the US, or over time have made their way back stateside - or Texas itself (I assume all Mooneys have a homing instinct for the Lone Star state).

[KSMooniac]

HRM, I'm glad someone finally bought that plane!  It was for sale for a long time and it sure looked like a good one to me.  Enjoy!

[georgeb]

You're going to love the Mooney. For my 2 cents, I have a 70 E and typically fly 9500 to 10500 at 22" and 2400-2500 rpm. This gets me a 7.8 to 8.5 GPH fuel burn and that's running a bit ROP. I have Gami's and I know I can run LOP w/o any problem, but I just prefer to run it this way. Plugs are consistenly good and engine runs smooth. I do, however, have a 2-bladed scimitar blended airfoil prop and that is the one item that has been the greatest 'nocicable' difference in speed. As far as speeds are concerened,  I usually see on average 120-129 with slight to strong headwinds; 130-149 with light/quartering  headwinds; and if I happen to be lucky enough to have a tailwind of anykind I've gotten anywhere from 150 to almost 180 in cruise. Mind you, that is groundspeed in knots coming from my GPS, NOT TAS: Real speed! You're gonna love it. While it's true that the Cirrus; Bonanza's are just a tad faster, they're burning almost twice the fuel to get just a few knots faster. I've seen them throttle back to say 12gph rOP to conserve fuel, and they're pretty close to the speeds I'm seeing at 8-10 GPH.

If you want to conserve even more fuel (I played around with this for a bit and have settled in at the 22") you can throttle back to 21" at 2400 RPM ROP and you're groundspeed will only reduce by about 3-4 knotts: thing is, you'll see a fuel burn in the mid 6's to low 7's ....it's beautiful .

George

[HRM]

Quote: KSMooniac

HRM, I'm glad someone finally bought that plane!  It was for sale for a long time and it sure looked like a good one to me.  Enjoy!

[HRM]

Quote: georgeb

While it's true that the Cirrus; Bonanza's are just a tad faster, they're burning almost twice the fuel to get just a few knots faster. 

George

[KSMooniac]

I fly a '66E. A few thoughts:

- 140 KTAS on 8gph (or even less) is possible if you're at altitude and lean to peak EGT at somewhere between 2400-2500rpm. At altitude would mean > 10,000 density altitude and thus you're below 65% power or so making it safe to further lean the mixture. I recently conducted some GPS based speed tests that confirmed this.

- You can go faster -- closer to 150KTAS in an E but that will be at a lower density altitude and will require flying ROP by at least 100dF; its nice to go fast but now you're over 10gph; with even higher fuel flow down low. That last 10 knots eats a lot of economy but can be useful when fighting a headwind.

My numbers above are based on a 66E with the usual collection of antennae, the one piece belly, and lasar cowl closure. No other speed mods.

Fuel tanks: My logs indicate a couple of spot repairs/patches over the years. No full strip/reseal. Knock on wood, I have not had *significant* fuel leaks. There are different sorts of leaks that can occur. I think whether to do anything, do a 'spot' fix, or do a complete reseal depends on the number, location, and severity of the leak(s). As an example in my left tank I have a *seep* where if I top it off I will lose approx 1/2 gallon over several days out the top of the tank (blue stains visible). There is never any dampness -- the fuel simply evaporates away. Solution: Leave the tank 1/2 gallon below full when parked, or do a complete fill only before a flight. Keep in mind these are 42-year-old fuel tanks.

Gear: There are several wear spots... and I suggest getting someone knowledgeable with Mooneys to go over the gear before you buy. The rubber shock discs have a finite life and are not terribly difficult to replace but require special tooling, and each disc is something like $80USD -- quite a bit for what they are, really. So having a way to estimate the service life left of the discs is useful. The johnson bar 'socket' is another wear item. I had it replaced when I bought the airplane. Another is the nose gear pivot and steering mechanism. Both of these can develop play. The 'pivot truss' can wear and an inexpensive ream/large bushing job can add to service life. After this is done and it wears further, an overhauled truss is called for. The steering horn is another area. Finally, there are neumorous bushings that can develop wear. Most of these areas should be readily identifiable by a good mooney mechanic with the airplane up on jacks by simply moving the gear legs around looking for play and determining where the play us coming from. In the two years I've owned my airplane I've replaced the pivot truss, two bushings/bolts in the nose gear, and one of the end-links used to steer it. This reduced the amount of play to almost nil.

In the above notes I made several references to replacement parts -- nearly all of the gear parts I've purchasd came from Lake Aero (www.lasar.com) which offers rebuilt, overhauled, and new replacement gear parts as well as many other things to suppor the fleet. Items such as the bushings I've mentioned are available from Mooney, through the Mooney service centers, and aren't terribly expensive.

[Immelman]

This is strange -- but I want to clarify. I (user name "Immelman") posted the above message. After I posed it I saw that it says it was posted by KSMooniac. I have no idea how the website got me logged in as that user. Anyway, I posted a bug report on this over in another forum. If yo have any questions about the above post, please contact me (Immelman).

[ray]

I have a (?1965 Mooney M20-E) N5987Q I reg it withe the state of Arizona as 1965 but when I go on some

of the FAA sites it is reg as a 1966 mod. It was cert. in the month of Dec. I only bring this up because I noticed

HRM aircraft has a N number very close and his is a 1966 mod so how do I find out for sure, also my flight

man is a 1966. Does anyone have a exp for this?

 

[fantom]

Quote: JimR

[KSMooniac]

testing...KSMooniac here.

[fantom]

Quote: KSMooniac

testing...KSMooniac here.

[HRM]

Quote: ray

I have a (?1965 Mooney M20-E) N5987Q I reg it withe the state of Arizona as 1965 but when I go on some

of the FAA sites it is reg as a 1966 mod. It was cert. in the month of Dec. I only bring this up because I noticed

HRM aircraft has a N number very close and his is a 1966 mod so how do I find out for sure, also my flight

man is a 1966. Does anyone have a exp for this?

 

[ray]

Well that does not suprise me  my ser#853 so I must have a 1966 mod

Thanks for the quick response I don't think I will change anything with the state it will only

confuse them.

[jkb458]

My M20E is a 1966 model with its serial number being 912.  It was built in late 1965, but it is a 1966 model.  When I checked the FAA registration, it shows as a 1965.  Go figure...

 

Jeff