696 vs mx200

[randypugh]

Any ideas? I was going to the shop soon for a mx200 install in my 97 Ovation. A freind of mine just had the 696 installed in his panel of his 201. The 696 is a lot of box for the money when compared to the mx200. Example: mx200 $8000.00, gdl 69$3800.00, chartview $2000.00. Compared to $3295.00 for 696. Plus I still have labor for both. Does anyone have a good reason for me to continue with the GMX 200? My purpose of install was for a big moving map, Nextrad weather, plates and charts. I had the mx 20 in my last airplane and liked it, but look at the costs dif. I don't want portable, I want in panel and conected to everything possible.

[RobertoTohme]

Randy,

First, one term: TSO.  It is not legal to conduct IFR flights with portables... As good as the 696 is, it's still non TSO'd and hence, it could not be permanently installed in the panel; it needs to be removable one way or the other, otherwise the installation is illegal.  I understand the part of the cost involved with the GMX200 but trust me, I've flown enough with it that short of a G1000, it's THE best MFD on the market, period.  I'm a part owner of a 135 operation with 6 Learjets, and all of them had it installed over the last 3 years because of the increased situation awareness it provides to the crews.  If you don't fly IFR then it's not worth the investment, but if you do, the GMX200 is the way to go; it'll also make your plane more desirable when the time to sell comes, and command the premium because of it.

Blue skies.

[randypugh]

Thanks Roberto, I talked to my shop today and they said the 696 install I seen the 696 was removable. However I agree the mx200 is a better idea. The 696 just didn't look right (it's about 2" deep) and Jepp-veiw is a better product. I threw this out to see what other's thought and I apreciate your response.  

[Playinmechanic]

Old guy,

Looked into the 696 a little more and I'm still leaning towards the 200.  Not to mention already knowing the system and how good it looks sitting in the pannel.  Besides its only money and you'll only make more.  Time to stop shopping this, and start shopping 310 hp. 

[RobertoTohme]

Quote: Playinmechanic

Old guy,

  Time to stop shopping this, and start shopping 310 hp. 

[RobertoTohme]

Quote: randypugh

Thanks Roberto, I talked to my shop today and they said the 696 install I seen the 696 was removable. However I agree the mx200 is a better idea. The 696 just didn't look right (it's about 2" deep) and Jepp-veiw is a better product. I threw this out to see what other's thought and I apreciate your response.  

[randypugh]

Thanks Roberto, does the 310hp conversion up gross weight/useful load? What sort of performance increase are people seeing? This Moonet Ovation is new to me. I've been flying twin Cessnas for the last 15 years so this is a big change for me to go back to a single. I fly a lot between florida and Michigan and it's the only airplane with simular cruise speed. I sure miss cabin space as my wife is used to taking everything along but we are adjusting. A few adjustments- GMX200, GDL69, and possibly 310hp. I have TKS and like how it works but don't like the mess or limit on fluid but thats all because I've been using boots for the last 25 years. I won't miss buying vacume pumps (big ones). I like this web site, I think it will help me a lot .

[RobertoTohme]

Randy, here are my experiences by type of equipment :

1.- 310 hp conversion :  You'll get a 7 kts increase in TAS on an Ovation; my performance increase on the Eagle (244 hp originally) was 17 kts.  You'll also get shorter takeoff runs and better climb rates; if your plane already has a 3 blade prop you won't notice anything on the glide rate but if it's a 2 blader now, glide will decrease a little bit but you'll also notice a slight reduction on landing distances.   I'm not sure if the Ovation already was certified to the 3,368 lbs. max takeoff weight; my Eagle was 3,200 lbs. with the original hp rating, but with the conversion it was bumped to 3,368 like the Acclaim.   Since the conversion ups the RPM limit to 2,700 the plane will be slightly noisier, but I'll take the noise in trade off for the increased performance; I zip along @ 195 TAS, 10,000 ft turning 2,550 RPM with 16.5 GPH.  These figures are typical of non-TKS airframes.

2.- TKS : Your speed will be 8 to 10 kts slower due TKS, but the plane will be much more useful year round.  It works very well but you do need to plan more on your icing encounters.  The FIKI system I have on my Acclaim has taken care of all sorts of icing I've encountered so far, including prolonged exposure at the flight levels, but you have to have in mind that fluid is in limited supply so I avoid more than 1.5 hours of icing with a full fluid tank to have enough reserve for the unexpected.  I run the system in high pressure (deice mode) mode to build pressure 2 minutes before getting into the clouds, and then back to low pressure (anti ice mode) for the remainder of the ice encounter; this usually keeps me ice free, but sometimes I had to go back to high pressure to stay ice free.  The high pressure mode runs the fluid much quicker, so you must have an out plan already figured out.  Coming from boots, this is the major mindset adjustment you'll need to make coming into TKS.

3.- GMX200 w/ GDL69 & Chartview :  A must for serious IFR, what else can I say...

And last : Welcome to the wonderful world of Mooney!  You won't regret it; regardless of vintage, these are the best single engine planes out there.

[M20BE]

I believe the Mooney is one of the only SE planes that can handle ice so will with TKS installed...

[mooniac227]

Glad to hear all this positive input on TKS.  My Acclaim is in Salina right now getting it installed.  (3 weeks without my bird!  Aaaaggghhh!)

At any rate, they told me that the TAS loss varies with the aircraft.  8-10 kts is on the high side.  I was told some have reported as low as 4 kts.  They believe most of that has to do with the prop.  At least that's what I was told.

I have a Type-S prop and this is only the second aircraft they have done with this particular prop.  They didn't have any feedback from the owner of the first one.

[RobertoTohme]

Quote: mooniac227

Glad to hear all this positive input on TKS.  My Acclaim is in Salina right now getting it installed.  (3 weeks without my bird!  Aaaaggghhh!)

At any rate, they told me that the TAS loss varies with the aircraft.  8-10 kts is on the high side.  I was told some have reported as low as 4 kts.  They believe most of that has to do with the prop.  At least that's what I was told.

I have a Type-S prop and this is only the second aircraft they have done with this particular prop.  They didn't have any feedback from the owner of the first one.

[mooniac227]

Robert -  Living in the midwest, temps in the summer here get ridiculous too.  Like you though, I was counseled to choose between AC and TKS.  I chose both - SORT OF.  I went with the TKS but I did not opt for the factory AC.  Rather, I bought one of the large "Arctic Air" AC coolers that you put ice in.  I hard wired the control switches up to the panel (there is a switch for the fan and one for the pump.)  The weight (full of ice) is just slightly less than an installed AC unit, but I only have the weight when I want it.  Cooler days and all winter I don't have it in the plane.

I put a small freezer in my hangar and some tupperware type containers to freeze water in.  In the summertime I just grab a couple large blocks of ice out of the freezer and put in the ARCTIC AIR.  The thing does a GREAT job of cooling the plane without adding any humidity.  I taxi and climb out in comfort and then turn the thing off at altitude where it is cool anyway.  The cooler maintains the leftover ice during cruise and I flip it back on during descent.  When I get to the hanger, I put the discharge hose on the unit and pump the water back into the tupperware and put it back in the freezer for next time.

The beauty of this is that the whole setup cost less than a grand, so I saved well over $20k.  I'm sure it works just as well as it cools the cabin down in minutes.  I can turn it on while I'm preflighting the plane and it's fairly cool before I even get in.  And also, as I said earlier, I'm only carrying the extra weight when I want it, so the flexibility is really nice.  I just have a small "pig-tail" in the baggage compartment.  I put the cooler in, plug it in the pigtail, throw the ice in and go. 

[M20BE]

Mooniac227, that is one hell of a technique you figured out there !! Here in Europe we don't need AC ... we just open the door a little and that big fan in front provides us with plenty of cooling, nothing compared to the temps in texas and kansas you guys are having in the summer time i guess. 

The sad thing is the payload with long range tanks, TKS etc.. on the Acclaim S 

[mooniac227]

M20BE -  Well, thanks.  All I can say is that it works.   There is a bit of a "hassle" factor (but it is largely mitigated by having the wiring permanently installed and having the freezer in the hangar) but the payback of having a higher useful load when AC is not needed is worth the relatively small amount of bother.  (not to mention the extra $20 grand!)

I don't have long range tanks (don't have the bladder to match!) so the only weight gain I have is the TKS.  I worried a bit about the limited useful load prior to purchasing the aircraft, but actually I have not had a mission yet that I could not complete due to weight / balance concerns so it hasn't really been a factor.   Can I put four grown men in the plane with full tanks and fly for 5 hours?  No.  But then again, I don't need or even want to either...

[randypugh]

Well I did it. I had the mx 200 installed and got it back today. I did gdl 69 also. Havn't had a chance to subscribe to Jepp-veiw yet but maybe monday. I purchased the 200 to include traffic but not sure what to do. I've had tis in my last airplane and wasn't impressed. Anyone have ideas on an affordable active traffic?

[RobertoTohme]

Quote: randypugh

Well I did it. I had the mx 200 installed and got it back today. I did gdl 69 also. Havn't had a chance to subscribe to Jepp-veiw yet but maybe monday. I purchased the 200 to include traffic but not sure what to do. I've had tis in my last airplane and wasn't impressed. Anyone have ideas on an affordable active traffic?

[mph5790]

I was the friend Randy referred to earlier who put in the 696.  I finally got some pics of what this looks like in my panel (in gallery).  I know it isn't as good as the MX200 for hard IFR flying (I had mx20 with xm, jeppview and TIS in my last plane) but I am trying to keep my aviation costs way down so I can keep flying without guilt.  I had room in my panel next to my 430 and this was the answer for me to get weather.  It is cheaper than the GDL 69 and has a bigger screen than the MX200 that gives me a second moving map option.   I can get traffic to display on this as well and the avionics shop is going to hardwire for power and to the 430 to save duplicate entry.  I also don't have to yoke mount with wires everywhere and the charts and Safe Taxi are there for backup if needed.

[mph5790]

Hillview Avionics in Muskegon built the bracket for me.  I think he charged about $400 for fabrication and installation - the second is probably cheaper.  I was very happy with how it turned out.  He put it on an angle for better pilot viewing without blocking my view of the other gauges.

[Jack Burson]

Considering a Q1 Ultra from aviationsafety.com.  Anyone with any experience?  My biggest concern is the size of the unit on the yoke.  (Don't really have room anywhere else.)

[FlyDave]

Guys,

AirGizmos (396/496 panel mount) is working on a standard mount for the 696:

http://www.airgizmos.com/

Not sure when it will be out.

Dave