Andrew – Don’t forget about VAT, generally @ 20% that will be levied on an “import”. When you add in the cost of actually getting over there and the time to survey any potential planes, then ferrying back could easily add another £10K – 15K …
IMHO, there seems to be some very nice “deals” to be had in Europe, thanks to a very depressed GA market …
ps; I’m sure lot’s of others here will speak up about the pros/cons of EASA reg vs FAA.
What Michael says. Once you factor in VAT, ferry costs, registration costs it ends up at European prices anyway.
My suggestion (predictably 
) would be to have a quick read of the list of pros and cons at the start of here
If you wanted a (typically near-useless) Executive Summary 
then ask yourself whether you are a technically minded pilot who wants to get involved in the maintenance, or whether you are the opposite and just want a plane which you jump in and fly to Le Touquet with your girlfriend.
If the 1st type, N-reg is perfect because you have a lot more control and – importantly – can more easily avoid the cowboys which exist all over the place in GA maintenance.
If the 2nd type (and you find the above writeup too long to read) go EASA-reg. It will cost you a lot more, but that’s how life is (less knowledge = pay more €€€ )
There are other factors of course; e.g. with EASA-reg you don’t need to sort out US pilot licenses etc.
A ferry from the USA to Europe is about €10k. Arguably not worth doing on a plane costing less than 100k unless it is a rare type which you really want, and frankly if I was a ferry pilot I would think twice (or charge 2x!) to ferry a piece of wreckage via Newfoundland, Greenland, Iceland with a high chance of death if the engine goes. The odds are anyway stacked against the ferry pilot because so many people sell a plane only after a period of neglect. One experienced ferry pilot I know well won’t do the dodgy jobs unless collecting from well inland USA, so he can gauge the engine condition (oil usage, etc) before he reaches the Atlantic. And he has plenty of “real dog” stories which I wouldn’t dream of posting here.
There are obvious problems with a US buy e.g. a prebuy is a hassle (an airline flight for you and an engineer) but sometimes a type you want is simply not for sale here much (a TB21GT would be one example).
Also if you are upgrading the avionics substantially or overhauling the engine, it makes massive financial sense to do it all over there because
The main reason IMHO why people don’t fly to the USA for this sort of upgrade work is the sheer time is takes to fly there – ~50-70hrs in the air, total.
As a sideline – EASA now allows a lot of pilot maintenance as well. Depending on the tasks, the 50 hour can be signed off by the pilot.
Depending on the tasks, the 50 hour can be signed off by the pilot.
Any more info on that? I have to say that’s news to me.
But the retro bias in me prefers the original Mark 21 with manual gear/flaps and the slightly Coupe second window.
Mine doesn’t have the coupe 2nd window but it has the manual gear and flaps.
Actually, I’d prefer the E over the C for the injected 200 hp engine, given the choice. Same airplane really, but the 20 hp more make one heck of a difference, especcially if it is an upgraded one with 201 windshield and cowling.
Andrew,
a lot of the recent C – F models have either electrical gear or flaps or both if that is important to you.
However, the manual gear and flaps will give you a lot cheaper maintenance and also quite a redundancy in case of electrical failure. Shortly after I got the plane, one of my pilots had a total electrical failure due to an alternator failure and while there is a backup system, the manual gear and flaps helped.
What you might want to look out for is one of the vintage Mooney which have been modified to have the 201 windscreen and cowling.
This is one of them, currently for sale at planecheck. It has the manual gear and flaps. Unfortunately it is not upgraded much in terms of avionics, but there are others which are.
Link
This is another one, which also has the later panel layout as well as electrical gear and flaps.
The advantage of a such modified E over a J is that they are sometimes a lot cheaper, lighter and, as one owner tells me, also faster.
The most “famous” modified “E” Model is probably this one:
Honeymooney
This remarkable plane with its more remarkable owners has flown several long range trips such as around the world and several intercontinental flights. It has the 36 USG Monroy Tank upgrade, 201 windshield and cowling and some other mods. Flaemming Pederson, the owner, can tell you a lot about the E-Mooneys and what to look out for.
Flaemming writes about his airplane (which is not for sale)
After all these modifications I had a Mooney which empty was almost 200 lbs lighter than the M20J and significantly faster. The simple manual Johnson bar for gear retraction and hydraulic flap system saves a lot of weight compared with the electrical gear and flap motors. In a formation flight with a similar loaded 1988 M20J belonging to a Mooney friend and with identical power settings and fuel flow, it was about 5 knots faster than the M20J. Alternatively, we tried my M20E with best economy mixture at 8 GPH and the M20J at best power mixture at 11 GPH which resulted in identical cruise speeds.
There is also currently an “F” on Planecheck which has the 201 windshield and better avionics.
Link
This one is very decently equipped with HSI, Autopilot, Monroy tanks (10 hrs endurance) e.t.c.
Michael – page 242, second paragraph up from the bottom. 50 hour e.g oil change plus whatever inspection the manufacturer mandates if it fits in the activities described in pages 243-245.
EASA now allows a lot of pilot maintenance as well.
I am not up to date on the details but JAA/EASA has always allowed pilot maintenance, to the extent of the 50hr check. No AD checks or AD rectification allowed; just routine maintenance.
Very similar to N-reg.
Pilot maintenance is banned (in the UK) in specific scenarios e.g. having training on the aircraft, using it for any initial test (e.g. the IR), and obviously carrying paying passengers (but that needs an AOC anyway). And some other scenarios.
It would surprise me if there was any European country which totally banned pilot maintenance, but there may be some.
There is some issue with pilot maintenance in that your CAMO can refuse to co-operate / recognise it, I think. I am not up to date on this; it’s worth checking out.
Also, for the reason given above, pilot maintenance may not be viable on aircraft which have recurring-action ADs where the action is every 50hrs.
Has there been a major relaxation on EASA-regs recently? If so, it would be very interesting what it is, because the tasks beyond a 50hr check are often not all that trivial.
I’ve operated my N reg Mooney M20E (N7423V) in the UK and all over Europe for the last 6 years without any problem. I had a UK PPL with a Night Rating when I started, I then obtained an IMC as a stepping stone to a full Instrument Rating.
Maintenance is far cheaper than the EASA system, on average I spend between £1100 & £1500 a year working together with my IA (the guy who signs it off) and normally it is done within 4 days. The N reg system allows the owner to do any of the maintenance under the watchful eye of and A&P or IA (same person in my case) and so I do all the donkey work and he does all the ‘clever stuff’.
If it is being used for private and personal business use then there is no legal requirement to do a 100 hr service which under the EASA system in theory you could do 105 Hrs in a year and have to effectively pay for 2 annuals. There are some AD’s that are required every 100 hrs but everything else is at the owner’s discretion. The engine and propeller are maintained and overhauled ‘on condition’ and there is no mandatory period for overhaul if the components are good. Same applies to Mags, pipes, vacuum pumps.
To fly internationally in an N reg aircraft with an EASA licence then you need to obtain from the FAA a piggyback licence which allows you to exercise the privileges of your EASA licence in a N reg aircraft worldwide. It is a form filling exercise which at one time required you going to a FAA office in the States but I believe that there is a way around that now.
By the way, my Mooney M20E has electric gear and flaps. Unlike the M20C which some have converted from the Johnson Bar to electric.
The M20C has a 180hp carburettor Lycoming -O360 engine, the M20E has the 200hp Lycoming IO360 which is fuel injected and IMHO is much better. I run lean of peak at 120Kts on 21-23 Ltr’s an hour below 5000 ft and slightly more higher up. You can’t run lean of peak with a carburettor engine so you are looking at 30+ Ltr’s minimum and of course I can’t get Carb Icing because I don’t have one.
The M20E later versions (such as mine) have the more standard and up to date instrument panel
