Hi All
Ive finally decided to buy my own Mooney. Ive been wanting to own my own aircraft since completing PPL training. Im currently IR(R) but am doing ATPL theory, and intend to get my CB IR in due course.
Ive listened to owners, flown in a Mooney, and basically love it.
Ive got circa £60K free cash.
I’m looking at Mooneys for sale increasingly.
OK- questions:
201 or 231 – i.e. normally aspirated or turbocharged? I’m intending to fly through Europe, but am not sure what kinds of altitudes I need to get to
what age? The amount of money I have can buy me quite a variety of planes, from old to 1990s
where are all the good ones? Does anyone know of a Mooney which might be for sale? Ive already learnt a fair bit about how creative people who own a plane can be with the truth, and assume personal knowledge of a particular aircraft would be very comforting
should I steer well clear of Rocket conversions?
The company no longer fit new conversions, and I’ve heard dark mutterings about how stressed the engine is, and even that the CAA don’t allow them on the G reg, even though one Ive looked at is currently on the PH (Dutch) reg
Sanity check- for this amount of money, is there any other plane which gives me this speed/range/running cost combination?
Please, any advice is welcome, from anyone, especially those who already fly Mooneys and are aware of the “gotchas”
thanks- Andrew
I have posted this one before (and can’t believe it’s not sold!
http://www.planecheck.com?ent=da&id=24603
I love the 201. It’s beautiful, very efficient fast, not too expensive to maintain … And this example is well equipped too.
hi there flyer59.
Thanks for the link. Ive asked for more details via planecheck, and am awaiting the owners reply.
Im not sure why it hasn’t already sold- maybe a lot of competition from similarly equipped aircraft?
Why do you think that particular one stands out, compared to the other aircraft available on Planecheck?
thanks in advance
Andrew
What is your mission profile ?
What’s your operating budget ?
That’s what should be driving your model choice.
A 201 is going to be cheaper to operate but the 231 is a more capable in terms of topping weather and spanning longer distances faster.
hi Michael:
mostly UK and near europe with 2 up
occasional further into europe, again 2 up
can manage £12k /year without squeeling too loudly (fuel on top)
Agreed re 201/231 comparison, wisdom of the flock seems to be a 201 is enough, unless a lot of high flying needed, and for most of my missions, Im not sure I’d get high enough often enough to justify the fuel burn/shorter engine life/extra operating costs.
So, anyone now of any good 201s?
Planecheck is the best source for Europe, unless anyone knows better?
Andrew
Hi Andrew
for me it stands out because it seems to be in very nice origial condition, has alow time engine, is well equipped – and I really like the colors. There’s a couple of similar 201’s on the market — some other nice ones too!
One thing that is often overlooked when pondering Mooney N/A vs. Mooney Turbo (or
Piper Arrow vs. Turbo Arrow, etc.) is the fact that one is four cylinder and the other is six cylinder.
Now whilst the six-cylinder is heavier, slightly thirstier, more expensive to maintain etc. (even irrespective of the turbocharger), there is simply no comparison in the smoothness of the ride bezween a nice six-cylinder engine and a crude, rumbling four-banger. Believe me, it makes a big difference on those long cross-countries.
Also, if you intend to fly IFR, go with the Turbo.
if you intend to fly IFR, go with the Turbo
If the NA version can reach say FL180, I would recommend doing some due diligence on this, by speaking to a number of owners of the turbo model, privately (off any forum – aircraft owners rarely advertise issues because they want to sell the plane one day), and check what if any issues they have had.
I did that before I bought the TB20 (which I bought new in 2002, and I could have had the turbo TB21, albeit with a 2-3 month wait and another £50k) and I did not like what I heard. And I like even less what I have heard in the 12 years since. A lot of downtime, cylinders cracked (discovered on the Annual… you hope!), exhaust systems which last till engine TBO on the NA model having to be repaired several times on the turbo model, etc. This goes right across the turbo versions of the IO360/540/550 engines i.e. across many aircraft models. In fact I have not yet seen a single authenticated case of a TB21 (TIO540) making 2k hrs without cylinders having to be changed. The TB20/21 GT has an inconel exhaust which should last the TBO anyway; not sure if Mooney used that because it is very expensive.
Maybe some engine models don’t have issues, and I don’t know Mooneys, but this is worth checking out.
Personally I value uptime and lack of hassle very highly. And, flying once a week on average, I have to. The performance gain with a turbo is very substantial (generally, +1000fpm climb all the way to FL150+) but there is a price to be paid for it, and my TB20 gets to FL150-160 in ~30mins anyway which is good enough.
Different aircraft.
The typical 200 hp aircraft, when close to MTOW (which is often the case when “touring”, i.e. lots of fuel and also some gear and baggage) are not really good for climbing much above FL100.
Sure, if it’s blue skies and one has endless time, one can climb these aircraft to FL130, at minimal climb rates. But the point is one might be IMC (at least partially) in the last third of the climb (and that’s where one will also encounter a bit of ice during most of the year), so you want a “healthy” climb rate, even above say FL80.
I routinely fly my M20J to 15,000ft….rate of climb is down to around 150-200fpm at MTOW….
