Jump to content

What would you fly  

63 members have voted

  1. 1. If Al Mooney never deisgned the Mooney, what would you fly?

    • Cessna Single Fixed Gear
      4
    • Cessna Single Retract
      4
    • Piper Single Fixed Gear
      3
    • Piper Single Retract
      13
    • Beechcraft Single Retract
      30
    • Light Twin
      2
    • Experimental
      5
    • LSA
      0
    • Other
      2


Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm curious and did make a poll, if Al Mooney never made the M20, what would you own/fly? 

 

I'd probably still be in the single market, and probabaly own/fly a Cessna 182, maybe a Bonanza, maybe a Saratoga.

 

Just curious - I would fly rather than not fly if there were no Mooney aircraft, and the Mooney is by far my choice. 

 

Even if you want to pick multiple choices, think hard at what you'd proably own.  For me, it may actually have been a 182 Fixed gear.  Though I may quickly have ended up with a Bo or a retract 182, or 210.  I picked Cessna fixed gear (even though I like the wings down low, I admit the 182 is a great airplane).

 

If you have specific model in mind, please note it:

 

182 (fixed and retract)

Bonanza

Saratoga

 

-Seth

Posted

Given the X-C mission, I'd go back to a Beech 35/33. Used to own an old '56 V-tail. The Bonanza is great airplane with solid owner support through their type-club. Nothing against the venerable high-wing Cessna, but they just don't appeal to me. Besides, a 30 yr old Bo is about all alternative plane this pilot can afford and still get from pt A to pt B with smile! Thanks Al for your Mooney, I'll take good care of it!

Posted

Whatever the fasted, affordable, American factory built, four seat, N/A, single would be... Sorry, Al, it's the mission more than anything else. Fortunately my mission hasn't changed much over the last 13 years... Best regards, -a-

Posted
Tough to say. Maybe a Cardinal RG, or perhaps a Tiger or a Cheetah with long range tanks. Or a Commanche 180. An old low horsepower V tail perhaps.

Jim

 

The old E-185 / E-225 Bonanzas return almost the same fuel economy as a 201 like yours, Jim.  They are really cool old machines.

Posted
I know. Just more expensive to maintain, I think. A little less efficient than the 201 and I'd have to insure that the CG envelope would allow full use of the available useful load. I love those old polished aluminum unmolested Bonanzas, though. True works of Art Deco beauty, at least to my eye.

Jim

100% agree. A rich man buys a new Bonanza.  A truly wealthy man buys an old Bonanza.

  • Like 2
Posted

Probably a 180 Commanche or if not that, them an older Sierra (the faster one).  For me, it is bang for the buck, and although I admire the Debbie, the six can engine is just to costly to operate.  Lower cost of operation == more flying for me.

 

RFB

Posted

I'd probably just fly whatever other efficient, low-maintenance aircraft he made. There were many predecessors to ours, including some that had "normal" tails. Had Al never gone into aircraft design, surely someone would have thought about fuel efficiency; just because Cessna, Piper and Beechcraft ignored it doesn't mean that Al was the only one who cared about it. Lots of low-volume aircraft were made in the 20's and 30's; lots of one-offs may have succeeded without Al's competition.

 

But Bo's are too pricey to operate and maintain; 182's suck too much fuel. I was looking at aircraft that I could afford and was not happy with what I was hearing about fuel burn. Then I stumbled across my Mooney completely by accident, never having heard of the line before. I'm good now. 

Posted

I'd probably be in the best Beechcraft F33 that I could afford. If not that, then likely I'd search around for a really nice RV-x two-seat touring, or maybe even someone's tricked out RV-10 if they were selling.

  • 1 year later...
Posted

I'm bumping this topic in light of the recent topic.

 

I'd still go Bonanza or Saratoga.

 

Maybe a FIKI twin

 

I'd also own an experimental 2 seat tail dragger or a Citabria/C-140/Champ

 

-Seth

Posted

Experimental all the way if there wasn't a Mooney to own!

 

Me, too.  In fact, sometimes I contemplate selling my Mooney and replacing it with something that doesn't need an IA sign off.  I'm presently flying my second experimental airplane; both have been very easy on the wallet to own.

 

I'm pretty much done with certified.  The experimentals out there are pretty impressive and buying parts for them is much more reasonable.  The guys in the neighborhood flying the glasairs blow the doors off my Mooney.

 

The Mooney is a great airplane, but, let's just say the part 23 re-write can't come soon enough.

  • Like 2
Posted

100% agree. A rich man buys a new Bonanza.  A truly wealthy man buys an old Bonanza.

 

That is really funny. This one is a keeper. I think I will be repeating it...

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted

Im surprised more of you arent picking the one plane that is most Mooney-ish...

The piper Comanche, in three flavors,,  180, 250, 400...  

 

Guess who designed it for Piper....     Al Mooney! 

Posted

Im surprised more of you arent picking the one plane that is most Mooney-ish...

The piper Comanche, in three flavors,,  180, 250, 400...  

 

Guess who designed it for Piper....     Al Mooney!

The Comanche is a Mooney designed for our typical body size, and payload requirements.

Clarence

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.

×
×
  • 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.