My next aircraft - 150 Knot 4 seater with good range???

Jason, forget Arrow I’s or II’s. They have very little range due to their small tanks.

A 1982 TB20 is a very very early model, prob99 very thoroughly shagged. Cheap to buy, yes…

One could always say so, also about most of the other aircraft proposed here. But if 65k£ is the budget, then that’s the budget.

Jason, on first look, that TB20 looks quite adequate to me. But yes, one would obviously need to verify it is technically sound. And consider the poor autopilot, lack of HSI, lack of engine monitor, etc.

And if it’s EASA reg, factor a few thousand for putting it on the N-reg.

I’d also have a closer look at that English C210 mentioned above.

I am afraid that the OPs requirements are impossible for that money. Maybe a Saratoga would make sense or a Bonanza but both are very tight on that strip length and too expensive.

Phillip,

The Arrow III is definitly the better airplane (non Turbo) due to higher fuel load (72 USG useable) and increased MTOW.

They have very little range due to their small tanks.

I never looked at the Arrow I (180hp) but the Arrow II with the 50 USG tanks has a realistic range of 600-650 NM. While this is significantly less than say an Arrow III with 72 USG useable, according to the POH’s I have available, the Arrow III has a realistic range of about 760 NM in economical cruise. However, the Arrow III also has less payload, due to the increased fuel load, which is not entirely compensated by the increased MTOW. The Arrow II’s payload is 470 kgs, vs 460 with the Arrow III. Full fuel traffic load is consequently even less, 334 kgs for the Arrow II vs 311 kgs for the Arrow III. According to the POH, the Arrow III is also slower, possibly because it is heavier with the same engine (or Piper got more realistic when writing the Arrow III manual?).

If you load the Arrow II with the 370 kgs Jason wants to transport, he can carry 37 USG. At 65% power (only one setting available) the range would be approximately 435 NM.

If you load an Arrow III with the 370 kgs Jason wants to transport, he can carry 55 USG. At 65% economic power, this will given him a range of about 581 NM. That is 146 NM more than the Arrow II.

The trip Jason looks at is one from the UK to the South of France, so Shoreham to Montpellier is roughly 470 NM. The Arrow II and III can do these trips with range to spare, yet the Arrow III can do it non stop even with the 370 kg load.

In short, as a 4 seater with bags the Arrow II is a 430 NM airplane, the Arrow III a 580 NM airplane. Loaded for maximum range, the Arrow II can carry 335 kgs over 600 NM while the Arrow III can carry 310 kgs over 760 NM. The difference in both cases is about 150 NM.

(Range figures take into account the 1 hr reserve fuel Jason specified).

I am keeping out of arguments suggesting that a C182 R goes faster than a TB20, for the same thrust (i.e. IAS, altitude, temperature, etc), loading (MTOW), and the same fuel flow and the same ‘540 engine Somebody who thinks that needs to check his fuel totaliser and his ASI. But the difference won’t be great.

Hey Peter, just fly the TB out to L.A. and we’ll do a fly-off ;-)

Or just come and measure for yourself. Have to say the airframe I’m flying here appears exceptionally fast. In any case, the difference isn’t gonna be huge either way.

" I’d also have a closer look at that English C210 mentioned above."

The question is: what’s wrong with her? Mark advertises her for months/years, maybe due to missing logs/SID (although N-Reg)?

Jason,

This may help a bit in the chapter ‘range’:

You mention your wish to make it to the Balearics non-stop. I apologize if I state the obvious to you, but in case if your destination is Mallorca, then your option is limited to the main airport LEPA if direct from the UK. At the same time as your wheels touch the ground you will hear a loud sound of a cash register, and before you know it someone from the handling company is waving a bill of 350 euros at you, including landing fee and one day of parking. Plus slot issues in summer. If your destination is Menorca, LEMH: less costly, but still around 150 euros for the main airport, and free of charge for LESL, but no fuel there. Ibiza: Around 60 euros I think, no obligatory handling like in LEPA and LEMH. Add parking fees..

So, the point is that cost wise, if Mallorca is your destination, go to Son Bonet, LESB. But then you need to make a stop in Schengenland first. Note that in July/August, parking fees are silly at Son Bonet, about 45 euros per day for the type of aircraft you are looking at. But there is a little trick that helps limit the cost if you stay longer than 10 days. PM me if you (or anyone else) likes to know how to do that.

In this case, the M20E/F suddenly get attractive again. I would also point you towards the Commander 112 TC/TCA, the normally aspirated 112 is unfortunately underpowered.

The Arrow fits in between – neither Commander comfort nor Mooney performance …

But still, if you can live with a fixed gear, it seems to me that a C182 would be the best machine for your mission profile.

It all depends on your ‘grass strip’.
If you have a perfect maintained, flat, dry and golf green quality runway it will be ok to have a retractable. I sometimes fly to grass fields, but have rejected a take off in shoreham as it got too bouncy. A grass strip can up your maintenance bill in a retractable.

I love my turbo commander and its a touring machine with 900lbs load and long range tanks.
The longest flight was 5:10 mins from Mannheim to Biarritz into a headwind. boy that tested my bladder as I crushed my bottle with the seat.

My profile is very similar. 1 Person and a bit cargo (golf set, wine ….), mostly medium long legs (550NM) and sometimes short legs (120NM). FL160

Not surprising to some here, I’ll second Blueline. If the 370kg limit falls, then Mooneys become very viable indeed.

However, I’ll have to second the question about the grass strip. My M20C has lived on a pretty rough grass strip for decades and I occasionally fly into one too. If the runway is acceptable and the surrounding area as well (taxiways, ramps) then a Mooney will handle these, however, care must be taken as their prop clearance is definitly not the largest. 750m nice grass will do more than enough for most of the airplanes within your budget, which are the “Vintage” C/E/G/F or “Modern” J/K models. Newer models like those will probably be outside your budget and are different animals altogether.

Within that line up, there are two quite different models to consider: The short body C and E vs the long body G, F, J and K.

If you fly with 2 adults and baggage, the short body Mooney will do you well, equally if you fly with 2 kids or slender and not too long legged people in the back. If you often fly with more than 2 people, a long body is the better choice.

The cheapest models on the market are the C and E models. These are the so called short body Mooneys, yet they are amongst the most efficient of the lot. C’s are priced from 20k € and E’s slightly more expensive. The difference between the two is the engine. The C features the same basic engine you know from your Archer, the E has the 200 hp engine found in the Arrow. Botch can have manual gear and flaps, but there are quite a few which are electric. I personally prefer the manual versions for cost of maintenance. Both the C and E share a relatively small 52 USG fuel capacity (as well as the “G”).

The C and E are quite similar in load, but different in performance. I fly a C model.

The C is the 2nd most produced Mooney and will fly a solid 140 kts @ 9 gph at usual travel altitudes between 8-10k ft. You can get the C up to FL170 if you need to, done it in high summer at Max Gross and it works. In terms of efficiency (NM/fuel) the C together with the 201 are the most efficient airplanes around. The C will carry around 270 kgs with maximum fuel, which is ample for 2-3 people and bags. With reserve, the C will travel about 650 NM non stop.

The E runs about 10 kts faster than the C, that is a solid 150 kts. Range is about the same as the “C”, as the larger engine will use more fuel, compensating for the speed advantage. Payload of the E is slightly less than the C, as it’s empty weight is higher at the same MTOW.

There are models of both the C and E which have mods like the 201 style windscreen and some with Monroy long range tanks. Both are an advantage. The 201 style windscreen will add about 5 to 7 kts to the speed, but it will also make the cabin space larger due to the dashboard it opens. The Monroy tanks will allow flights of up to 1200 NM, however at the cost of payload.

The G and F models are “long body” versions of the C and E respectively. The G is today rare, I would not even mention it if there wasn’t one on planecheck now. It is a long body with 180 hp and 52 USG fuel capacity. It is considered the slowest of all vintage models (apart from the fixed gear “D” but you won’t find nor want one of those), with about 135 kts cruise speed.

The F features the same 200 hp fuel injected engine the E has. It is very slightly slower than the E but has 10 inches more legroom for the back seat passengers. That makes it, at least in terms of space, a true 4 seater. It also has longer legs: 12 additional USG of fuel bring the grand total up to 64 USG. Payload with full fuel tanks is the same 270 kg as the C, but with 12 USG ( 33 kgs) more fuel. With the same fuel on board than the C, it can therefore carry 305 kgs. The F has more or less the same speed as the E, it is a 145 to 150 kt airplane. Rangewise, the F however has a huge advantage, as it will fly up to 800 NM non stop.

The F model became the base for the best selling Mooney of all times, which is the M20J or 201. Mooney got engineer Roy LoPresti from Grumman, (where he had transformed the AA5 line) in order to do an aerodynamic improvement of the vintage line. The result was a modified F model with new cowling, windscreen and an array of other mods. The model name (201) came from it’s top speed of 201 mph, which was achieved during flight testing.

In reality, the M20J will deliver an average of 160 kts at 9 GPH, with a top speed of around 167 kts at 10 GPH. In terms of range, it will fly up to 900 NM without refuelling. Traffic load with 64 USG on board is around 240 kgs, 270 with 52 USG. It became a massive success for Mooney and is today the most sold of all models, followed by the C model. Personally, I believe it is the best and certainly most efficient Mooney ever built, producing 1 mph for each hp available. If you do not fly in alpine terrain often and regularly, I think it is the one to look for. They do start at around 50k Euros these days.

If you need to go turbo, the Mooney M20K (231) is the turbo variant of the 201. It will fly at a top speed of around 180 kts in the high flight levels (it is certified up to FL280…) and 170 in more normal altitudes with 12.5 GPH in high speed and 10.5 in economy cruise. It’s payload is slightly worse than the J and so is the range, despite 14 more gallons available.

Both the J and K can also be found with Monroy tanks, which makes them true long range airplanes. The J will travel up to 1500 NM with the Monroys, the K around 1400 NM. However, it comes at the price of payload.

My personal favorite is the J, followed by the C. This seems to be in line with sales as well. The whole line however will deliver the best speed vs consumption and also maintenance cost you can get with retracable airplanes. If you want to go budget, go for a C or E, if you can afford a bit more, by all means go for a 201, the relatively low price difference is worth it. 201’s were quite regularly equipped with HSI and King KAP/KFC 150 autopilots, many today are IFR equipped and, where applicable, certified.

Hope to have given you something to think about. If you have questions, let me know or have a look at “mooneyspace.com”, which is a Mooney community with a lot of know how around.

And moreover: Whatever you do buy eventually, have a ball evaluating. Check out as many planes as you can, fly as many as you can, Pipers, Mooneys, Cessnas, Grummans (did I mention that the AA5B Tiger flies at 140 kts with fixed gear and prop?) and only then choose what fits you best.

Best regards
Urs