PROS & CONS to buying a Mooney

[Tmarsha]

Folks, I am close to closing the deal on a 1967 M20F. I am interested in different perspectives on the PROS & CONS for buying a Mooney vs a C-182, Arrow, Beech, etc. I recently sold a 182 I owned for 10 years and really enjoyed the utility, Often hauled four big people down to the Mexican Baja.

 

One obvious benefit is faster speed with less fuel burn. Potential negatives that come to mind are parts availability(now or in the future), ease of maintenance, more difficult to find mechanics that will work on Mooney's, designed for small people, more of a niche market so may be more difficult to sell in the future. You know what they say about vintage sports cars, drive them for an hour and work on them for two. Do Mooney's fall in this category ?  Thanks for taking the time to share your perspectives.   Tom 

[Z W]

Maintenance is similar to any complex airplane.  Probably less, if your F model has manual gear and flaps.  Some like those, some don't.  I prefer electric, having flown both.

 

Parts aren't bad to get.  Most mechanics I've talked to are familiar with them, and like them.  They aren't as common as a Cessna or Piper, but they aren't rare either.  The F makes a decent 4-adult plane, actually.  Maybe not as good as the 182, but since it's more efficient you can take less gas and "use" more of your useful load.  The legroom for your passengers is not any worse than flying coach on an airline.  I've done 4 adult males in my K model for a 2-hour hop and nobody had any complaints.

 

Other pros:

Spending more on your hotel and rental car than AVGas for any given trip

Respect from other pilots ("Isn't that thing hard to land?")

Hearing ATC say, "Reduce speed, there's a 182 on a 5 mile final in front of you"

Sports-car-like handling

40-knot headwinds are an inconvenience, but not a deal breaker

 

Biggest cons:

Not the best load haulers

Rough field capability is limited

Short fields require very precise airspeed control and a practiced pilot

The single door and baggage access make loading somewhat difficult

 

You can find other planes that go as fast, or planes that burn less fuel, but none will do both.  In the budget range of an F, I don't think you'll even find another 4-place single that will go as fast.  

 

If you're flying from one paved strip to another, with 4 or fewer people, the Mooney really can't be beat.  The fuel savings will leave you more room for your maintenance / hangar fund anyways.

[fantom]

What are you comparing the Mooney against, Tom?

 

I suspect you know most of the pros, or you wouldn't be here. Mooney pilots are a very select bunch. You aren't a yankee dentist, I trust.

 

As for the cons, parts are available and there are enough Mooneys in the market that parts shouldn't be a major issue in the future. Like any type plane, good mechanics are difficult to identify, but there are many of them around. I wouldn't tust any A&P who wouldn't/couldn't work on a Mooney. Four big guys might be a challenge....how big? I assure you, the Mooney wasn't designed by, or for, little people. You'll probably find the cost of keeping the Mooney in the sky less than your 182, and the annuals will be no more, assuimg you aren't purchasing a dog. The C-182 is a nice plane; the Mooney M20F is a great plane.

 

Jump on in

[rbridges]

I'm flying a '65, and I haven't had any issues that grounded me except a flat tire on one of the mains.  The biggest surprise I had was addressing a fuel leak (and mooneys with original sealant are notorious for them).

 

The 182 is a very capable plane, and an F model isn't going to carry as much.  If you only carry 4 large adults "occasionally", the mooney makes more sense.  The seating position is different; you are lower to the floor than the 182.  You also lose the pilot side door and will have to climb on the wing and slide across to your seat.

 

Not trying to sell you off the mooney, just pointing out some things you'll notice every time you fly.  I honestly can't think of another plane in the price range of my plane that I'd rather own. 

[rbridges]

 

Hearing ATC say, "Reduce speed, there's a 182 on a 5 mile final in front of you"

 

 

I got changed to a lower altitude b/c I was overtaking a 182 when departing my local airport.  

[BigTex]

Hi Tom,

 

You’ve touched on almost all of the stereotypes that folks not familiar with Mooney’s and virtually everyone one of them are false!

 

I’m not had any problems finding an A&P to work on my plane… Finding a quality one is an entirely different matter.  I have two A&P’s that work on my plane.  One that’s at my airport that I use him for any non-Mooney specific related work  (which is most of the work).  The other is a Mooney specific  service center.   I use Don Maxwell but there’s several quality MSC’s located around the country.

 

The key is to have someone like Don Maxwell do the pre-buy.  That will save you thousands in post purchase maintenance.

 

I would also do a search on this forum.  This topic has been discussed several times and would provide some good information.

 

[kmyfm20s]

I used to fly a 182 and fly to Mexico but now fly a J. I think Zane hit most of the big items. The big difference for me was that I could go on so many more trips nonstop, what a time savings.

I haven't flow into mexico with this plane yet but would not hesitate to take it to all the strips I did in my 182, 4 of which are dirt. Getting a excellent instructor for transition training and knowing its stall charateristics, approach speeds and prop clearance will greatly enhance your confidence in this plane.

I flew out of Jackson WY to San Diego last fall after Elk hunting with my saddle, riffle, backpacking gear, coolers full of Elk, and full tanks. That trip took 5:05hrs, 42.3 gallon of gas and 739 nm. This used to be a fuel stop trip in the past with my 182 and it's nonstop in my J.

You will rub shoulder more in the cabin and climbing through a single door is different but not bad. Hopefully your passenger has a nice butt:)

[fantom]

....Hopefully your passenger has a nice butt:)

 

Trying VERY hard not to go there

[Tmarsha]

Great feedback. I am looking forward to the change. First 18 yrs primarily in a 182, hopefully next 10 yrs in a Mooney. I will say I was surprised at the differences, controls, landing, takeoff,etc. They definitely don't come off the ground until they are ready !  I will look back at previous posts to get more perspectives.  Thanks again.  Tom

[1964-M20E]

I went for a ride in my buddy's 182 yesterday and the power difference between it and my 67F was noticeable on takeoff.  It is also noticeable at the pump.  When I went to pick up my F in AR back in Oct my buddy and I flew up in his 182. He left before me by 10 to 15 minutes easy and I landed before him and was fueled up by the time he taxied up to the pump it was about a 2.5 hour flight.

 

The 182 is a very capable airplane and if someone gave me one I’d be glad to own it especially if it was a brand new one but I’d keep my F model as well.

[Bennett]

I've taken my J to a few dirt and hard packed sand strips in Baja with two good size males (well above the standard FAA 170 pound male) and a normal sized female, plus lots of baggage and gear, and full fuel. No problems beyond flying with three pilots. (Obviously 4 opinions about everything   ) I don't think I would try four big males and full fuel.  My J has less useful load than most  F models, and I would not want to sit in the rear seat for very long. I've done the same trips to Mexico with a Piper Dakota, and four big males fit fine, and we were always well within gross weight with baggage and full fuel.  The Dakota is slow by Mooney standards, and the fuel burn averaged in excess of 14.8 gallons per hour, while I generally operate my J (LOP) at about 9.5 gallons per hour, and still fly 20 + knots faster.  I believe that the C 182 is much like the Dakota from an engine HP, gross weight, and speed perspective, but two doors are nice. 

[jlunseth]

Hearing ATC say, "Reduce speed, there's a 182 on a 5 mile final in front of you"

Or, "Mooney 381 Sierra Papa, you are number two behind the Citation on final approach, reduce speed for the Citation. "

Or, "Mooney Jet, direct Twolf, join the Twolf Two arrival (a turbine arrival)."

No, I am not making this up, it is too good to make up.

[Tmarsha]

"two doors are nice" 

 

This will be one of the biggest adjustments. Flying elderly in-laws/parents will be more difficult. I'm looking forward to close to max load and see how it performs. My home field is 3500ft elev (19AZ) and going any direction you are somewhere between 7-11k ft. We just built a cabin 10 minutes from D68 which is 7k ft so always aware/concerned about density altitude. I generally try to go early morning or late evening. 

[HRM]

I have to concur with all of the others, but let me add my two cents.

 

I will never forget the day that I landed at 11R during my "insurance sentence" and it was the second landing I ever made in my E. A Piper had just landed ahead of us and three guys got out. As I taxied towards them, the three just stared--I mean STARED to the point of creepy. I said to my CFI that something must be wrong, why were they staring? He said that they were staring at the plane because of how beautiful it was. My E is painted like an Acclaim and I confess that I fell in love with it based on looks--I did luck out that she is very mechanically sound as well.

 

Once you fly a Mooney, and fly it well, I simply cannot imagine how you could go to anything else. This is what happens when you become a "Mooniac." It is not unlike how Porschephiles feel about 911's. In fact, the Mooney is the 911 of the GA aircraft world in so many ways. I know, I've worked on both of them.

 

Not everyone can be a Mooniac, I am almost thinking you might not be happy being one. There is just way more to a Mooney than the utility of it.

[aviatoreb]

Hearing ATC say, "Reduce speed, there's a 182 on a 5 mile final in front of you"

Or, "Mooney 381 Sierra Papa, you are number two behind the Citation on final approach, reduce speed for the Citation. "

Or, "Mooney Jet, direct Twolf, join the Twolf Two arrival (a turbine arrival)."

No, I am not making this up, it is too good to make up.

 

I will second that.  I too have been asked to slow when second behind a citation jet for landing - what's up with those pokey Cessna jets?  I too often get the arrival procedures usually for turbines at some airports.

[wishboneash]

Once you master the Mooney and its airspeeds, you can land the plane within 1000 ft routinely (no wind). Short fields are not an issue. Then when in the air, you outrun the Cardinals, the 182 and all the Pipers while having similar fuel consumption. Plus, Mooney look like real planes. 

[RocketAviator]

What you all talking about.... THERE ARE NO CONS!!!!  

 

Just kidding, seriously I have both a Mooney Rocket and a Piper Turbo Saratoga both have their place and purpose, right now my main interest with just my wife and myself is get there quickly with speed and speed and speed... which the Mooney Rocket seems to have!   I have over 700 hrs in the Saratoga and only about 13 in the new to me Mooney Rocket.  I just flew its maiden flight today with its new glass avionics panel today and yes it was in IMC... What a joy the SVT is! 

 

I know nothing about any other Mooney model but if they are anything like the Mooney Rocket I am impressed with everything except the useful load!!

 

PS I was told today for the first time in my 27 years of flying to slow down in order not to overtake a King Air landing on the same approach we were using!  Yep felt real nice if I don't say so myself!! 

[jetdriven]

I like the part where approach calls and asks you to slow it down a bit because you have a 50-knot overtake on a 737.

[Bill_Pyles]

_{On my maiden flight from KBDH-KDVT I landed at KLBF for fuel and the Citation and I were on with Denver Center, he on the downwind and I on the 45 for rwy 12, and the Citation asked center "will the Mooney will pass me?"  Denver said "no, you will pass the Mooney," so I followed the jet.  However, I landed much shorter than he and could have beat him to the FBO, but I waited for the Citation to taxi in front of me, in deference to the big boy, but he knew I could have at least beaten him to the ramp.  Fun.}

[PMcClure]

I had a 68F followed by a 1998 B36TC and now a 2002 Ovation. The F model was the most economical and also has some good load carrying ability (about 1000#). It was very cheap to operate at about $60 to $70 per hour and a good 140knots. It was an old plane and have a lot of bumps and bruises but the equipment was simple and I had a very good dispatch rate. I left because it was too difficult to upgrade avionics without spending more than the plane was worth. The Beech was a joy to fly, but expensive. The extra door was nice for passengers and it had a good load carrying ability, but used more fuel so this was about a wash. I took the family from NY to CO to Miami in that plane. Compared to either Mooney, it had more utility because it was easier to load and go. I found it more comfortable too ( 6'2 and 180lb). The Ovation is by far the most beautiful aircraft of the three and the best avionics and the fastest. Somewhat limited load. I briefly considered a Saratoga and a 182 before the Ovation. The Saratoga was slow and flies like a 80's mid size truck. The 182 was very capable. But comparing a Mooney to the C182 on a 3 hour trip, the Mooney was faster and more efficient and comfortable. I think the C182 has more utility though. So it depends on your mission. 

 

As an example, I took some samples down to a customer in New Orleans and picked up a small machine. Loading the Ovation was almost comical. I was sure wishing I had the Bonanza (or a C182 or Pilatus!!!) but cruising 300 miles to see my Mom at 255knts ground speed and 16gph in the Ovation, I am sure happy I have the Ovation. 

 

If your goal is to get somewhere fast and cheap, the Mooney is your best friend. If you need to utility and fly to short or unimproved strips, the 182 is a good choice. Need to do both? That is what they make dual hangars for!!

 

Comparing the maintenance of the vintage vs modern birds, I found there was more mechanical maintenance on the F model. Generators, starters, etc... but these are easy to fix. I found with the Beech (and perhaps the Ovation) that all that new stuff breaks too and is more complicated to fix. My Beech spent more time in the shop than I did flying it (Autopilot, AI, Traffic system, cylinders....). 

 

Sorry for the long narrative, but the story continues.......

[Z W]

Hearing ATC say, "Reduce speed, there's a 182 on a 5 mile final in front of you"

Or, "Mooney 381 Sierra Papa, you are number two behind the Citation on final approach, reduce speed for the Citation. "

Or, "Mooney Jet, direct Twolf, join the Twolf Two arrival (a turbine arrival)."

No, I am not making this up, it is too good to make up.

When I'm rocking a tailwind and/or a 175 KIAS descent, I get turbine arrivals. I've not yet been slowed down for a jet though.

[Lood]

I operate my '67 F out of dirt/sand/grass strips about 95% of all flights - no problem. If a strip is a complete no-go for a Mooney, I wouldn't really like to land on it with either a C182, Arrow or Beech in anyway and to be honest, how many of those strips are still in existence? A Mooney is certainly not a bush plane, but you will be amazed at its capability.

Most F's have the best payload of just about all Mooney's and you'll never regret buying one. Pro's and cons were all covered and the conclusion is that nothing can beat the Mooney. You can go fast, from A to B or you can pull the power back and just loiter around the pot. I've used my F to count cattle and find sheep from the air.

[triple8s]

The only reason I could possibly think of owning anything other than some type of Mooney would be to have twin engine redundancy, PERIOD. Thats just me, maybe if you had to carry LOTS of stuff, but you would be very suprised at what will fit in a Mooney. I have only owned a Mooney so the fuel issue has me spoiled. I went to the fuel Island one day and after I fueled I got my receipt and the fellows in front of me had left his, I looked at his bill and was shocked! My bill was about the normal 120-140$ and the Baron driver had a receipt for over 900$ I couldnt believe it.

[aviatoreb]

I like the part where approach calls and asks you to slow it down a bit because you have a 50-knot overtake on a 737.

 

Really?  I like that one.

 

Maybe someday, "Mooney you are cleared for runway 27. American Eagle you are number two behind the Mooney, attention wake turbulence."

[BorealOne]

On Citations...

 

Flying into CYMM (Fort McMurray) from the south the other day, I was sequenced behind a Citation landing from the north. We both entered the gates about the same time, and the tower controllers expectation was that he'd be down and clear well before I hit the threshold. Well, it didn't quite turn out that way. I did do my best to slow things down, but ended up going around because the pokey Citation driver didn't made it to tarmac in time.

 

On loading a Mooney - it's not that there isn't a whole bunch of room (especially in a long body Ovation with the back seats folded down) but compared to brand C, managing larger items through the little baggage door and the single entry door requires a little more thinking before you start tossing stuff in.