Arrow Training

[livitup]

Trying to keep track of the different models is painful to someone who hasn't been researching the type for 20 years. Is there anywhere a nice little comparison chart that shows most of the stuff a Mooney shopper would be interested in, so they can narrow down their search to a few variants?

 

[DavidWhite]

Trying to keep track of the different models is painful to someone who hasn't been researching the type for 20 years. Is there anywhere a nice little comparison chart that shows most of the stuff a Mooney shopper would be interested in, so they can narrow down their search to a few variants?

What's your budget, do you want a medium body or short body, and 180 or 200hp?

Or if you're looking at the newer planes, I cannot help.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

depends on what you mean. The C and G models are quick but use a 180HP carbureted motor. The E and F models are a little faster since they have a 200HP fuel injected motor. When you get to the J models, you have the 200HP motor, but slicker windshields and cowlings were added. There are other differences, too, but that's the biggest as far as HP. Once you get past the J's, you get into turbocharged and 6 cylinder planes. As someone else mentioned, a lot of the vintage mooneys have had the windshield swaps performed for a little extra speed.

The C and E models are the shorter mooneys. Extra length was added to the F, G and J models, so they are easier on the rear passengers.

That was an excellent answer! Well done.

As far as speed, the newer ones with the bigger engines (Bravo, Eagle, Ovation, Acclaim) and/or turbos (231, 252, Bravo, Acclaim) are going to be fastest. The peak for efficiency in the normally aspirated birds is without a doubt the J model (aka "201"). However, all of them are very efficient.

Whether one of the turbo birds will make sense depends on the kind of flying you do - I figure that in the Ovation, anything at or below about 11,000 feet I wouldn't get any advantage from a turbo. I actually get my best true airspeeds at about 9,000 feet. If I figure an average 1,000 fpm climb at 120 knots (it'll actually do better than that into the low teens), that's 2nm per 1000 feet to climb, and it takes me around 6nm per 1000 feet to descend. By some calculations I've done, it makes the most sense to spend at least half the flight in cruise, so that means a minimum of 16nm of distance traveled per 1000 feet of climb. If the turbo doesn't do me any good until I hit 12,000 feet - And most of the fields I fly in and out of are within 500 feet of 1000 MSL - That means that really, the turbo doesn't start to become an advantage until a flight is at least 200nm long. If you don't have a significant percentage of your flights going at least 200nm, there's really no advantage to the turbo.

 

[wickedsprint]

I took some lessons in our school's Arrow. I thought it was easier to land than a 172. I liked it.

 

[Ghery]

I dont' think that has ever been written before!

Well, compared with a C-150...

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Trying to keep track of the different models is painful to someone who hasn't been researching the type for 20 years. Is there anywhere a nice little comparison chart that shows most of the stuff a Mooney shopper would be interested in, so they can narrow down their search to a few variants?

Let me see... The main differences are the engines and body length. But first, some of the "quirky" models:

* The original M20 (150hp) and M20A (180hp) had a wood wing and tail. There's an AD that eventually required the wood tails to be replaced with metal. Not a whole lot of these birds out there any more.

* The M20D was originally supposed to be a trainer, and had fixed gear. A lot of these have had retracts added.

* The M20L "PFM" had a single-lever-controlled Porsche engine. Most of these have been replaced with a more traditional airplane engine.

Body length: Up to the M20E was the "short body" version. M20F through M20K/252 are the "medium" body, and the M20L and later are the long body.

Engines:
M20B, M20C, M20D, and M20G have a 180hp Lycoming O-360.
M20E, M20F, M20J have a 200hp Lycoming IO-360.
M20K: 210-220hp Continental TSIO-360
M20M "Bravo": 270hp Lycoming TIO-540
M20R "Ovation": 280hp Continental IO-550 (Newer Ovation3 models use an STC'd 310hp version of the same engine.)
M20S "Eagle": 244hp Continental IO-550
M20TN "Acclaim": 280hp Continental TSIO-550

The most popular models: M20C is 180hp short body, M20F is 200hp mid body, M20J is an aerodynamically cleaner M20F, M20K is a turbo'd M20J. M20R Ovation is 280hp long body, M20M Bravo is a 270hp+turbo long body, M20S Eagle is a somewhat-pointless lower-powered version of the Ovation, and the M20TN Acclaim is an Ovation with turbo that's been cleaned up and will do over 235 KTAS at altitude.

Hope this helps.

 

[tmyers]

 

[poadeleted21]

If you want something with swinging bits and an Arrow would do your mission, a mooney would too. At 20 knots faster.

Wow, It took 5 replies to change out OPs plane? What were the first 4 posters thinking?

And to a Mooney? And why are we still on Mooney? We haven't even gotten to Bonanza yet. Then, of course, we'll all agree he needs an RV-10.

 

[tmyers]

Hari Hari, Krishna Krishna

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

Whaaaaa??? Like I said, I'm 6'4" and 300#. The Mooney is one of the most comfortable planes I've ever flown. The only way I can see someone thinking it's "cramped" is if they're on the short side and have to move the seat way forward, as they'll be closer to the panel than they would be in other airplanes. (There are rudder pedal extensions available for those of shorter stature, though.)

So Mooneys' are not for height challenged nor girth challenged pilots. Still a good bird.

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

Hari Hari, Krishna Krishna

Have I told you that I love that paint job on your Arrow. Wow! I wish I had it on my plane.

 

[tmyers]

But I keep hearing how slow it is .

My god someone even compared it to a 150???

I am looking for my new Mooney now.

OK enough jocularity.

Do you recognize the paint job? let me give you a hint. Think 1998 AOPA Ultimate Arrow. No this is not the AOPA bird but the owner at the time liked the paint job and had his done in the same colors. Actually the real Ultimate Arrow has been repainted and no longer looks like this.

 

[tmyers]

Actually Kent said he is very comfortable in the Mooney and I met him, he is a big guy.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

So Mooneys' are not for height challenged nor girth challenged pilots. Still a good bird.

The "height challenged", IE short* pilot who likes everything else about a Mooney should just get one, and get the pedal extenders. Our dearly departed friend Moxie was about 5-foot-nothin' and she flew a Mooney with the extenders.

* I disagree that only short people are "height challenged". It's a challenge for me to get in and out of smaller airplanes/vehicles/spaces, and I bump my head on an awful lot of stuff. So, I've kind of always hated that term. I think the world is built for people between about 5'4" and 6'2".

 

[tmyers]

I like the Mooney. I obviously prefer the J model due to leg room and having rode in a J model can attest that there is adequate leg room, and maybe a tad more than in the Arrow. Riding in the Mooney however hurts my back, just like the Corvette hurts my back. My legs are pretty much straight out in front of me and it takes very little time before my back is aching. I have similar experiences with the Arrow but it takes about two hours before it starts to really hurt. I can also pull my feet out of the tunnel and stretch around in the Arrow. the tunnel in the Mooney is deeper and this makes it harder to get my legs clear and move around.

The J's typically run about 10 to 15K more than I paid for my Arrow and most of my flights are in the two hour range which accounts for about a 15 minute penalty on my overall flight time vs the Mooney. Insurance also came into play as I already had 85 hours in an Arrow II and none in the Mooney. My insurance is only running $1100 a year.

 

[poadeleted21]

I like the Mooney. I obviously prefer the J model due to leg room and having rode in a J model can attest that there is adequate leg room, and maybe a tad more than in the Arrow. Riding in the Mooney however hurts my back, just like the Corvette hurts my back. My legs are pretty much straight out in front of me and it takes very little time before my back is aching. I have similar experiences with the Arrow but it takes about two hours before it starts to really hurt. I can also pull my feet out of the tunnel and stretch around in the Arrow. the tunnel in the Mooney is deeper and this makes it harder to get my legs clear and move around.

The J's typically run about 10 to 15K more than I paid for my Arrow and most of my flights are in the two hour range which accounts for about a 15 minute penalty on my overall flight time vs the Mooney. Insurance also came into play as I already had 85 hours in an Arrow II and none in the Mooney. My insurance is only running $1100 a year.

I doubt insurance would me much of a factor. A similar hull value Mooney would run about the same.

 

[tmyers]

A couple years ago I was told I would have to get about 50 hours in a Mooney to even think of Insurance. I know insurance companies are hard up like everyone so maybe that has all changed.

All that being said I would really like to have a Deb. Having flown Barrons there is just something about the feel of a Beech. Maybe if things work out over the next few years that would make a great upgrade. Maybe Fuller should just give the AOPA Bo to me and make this simple.

 

[poadeleted21]

A couple years ago I was told I would have to get about 50 hours in a Mooney to even think of Insurance. I know insurance companies are hard up like everyone so maybe that has all changed.

All that being said I would really like to have a Deb. Having flown Barrons there is just something about the feel of a Beech. Maybe if things work out over the next few years that would make a great upgrade. Maybe Fuller should just give the AOPA Bo to me and make this simple.

Someone didn't want your business.

PLEASE DONT LET AOPA cut a hole for an iPad in that Deb's panel.

 

[Ghery]

But I keep hearing how slow it is .

My god someone even compared it to a 150???

I am looking for my new Mooney now.

OK enough jocularity.

Do you recognize the paint job? let me give you a hint. Think 1998 AOPA Ultimate Arrow. No this is not the AOPA bird but the owner at the time liked the paint job and had his done in the same colors. Actually the real Ultimate Arrow has been repainted and no longer looks like this.

Hey, the crack about a C-150 was a joke. Heck, the Arrow is faster than a 172, too. Now, our club's 182 will outrun the Arrow by a few knots.

A couple years ago I was told I would have to get about 50 hours in a Mooney to even think of Insurance. I know insurance companies are hard up like everyone so maybe that has all changed.

10 hours dual before solo for our club's Arrow, assuming no previous time in make/model. That is an insurance requirement. Has been for over 10 years. I don't know where your 50 hour number came from.

 

[hindsight2020]

I don't think the cost of retractable maintenance is a myth. Having just sold my warrior II, I've been considering options for my replacement airplane. I did the math when comparing a FG 182 to Mooneys, Arrows, Cardinal RGs and considering my intended use and even my 15% mission range requirement ,the cost differential in gas is about 1.5-1.8 AMUs per 100hrs per year. That's with a GPH delta between 2-2.5 GPH. Big Meh. And Im not even normalizing for the 182 having better climb rate at the retracts' MGW and better ingress/egress (somewhat subjective in terms of personal tolerance).

2 AMUs is not enough to cover the gear swing, insurance delta (albeit Im willing to concede this item is inconsequential when compared to hull value impact assuming a pilot with more than 100hrs of retract time) and the ongoing year to year cost on aged hydraulic lines, old PMA re-badged marine powerpacks, wonky microswitches, gear uplocks, springs, gear donuts, gear forks, and whatever belated AD compliance endemic to RGs over decades of existence. I can always fly less in the 182 and further close the gap. Ironically the one thing that's fixed about a retract is the gear maintenance costs! LOL. So no, I don't think it's a myth.

Of course there are niche mission circumstances for which the gas savings of the gear might come out ahead of using a FG 182 to accomplish the mission. You gotta fly very far for very long to realize those savings. I just don't think they are the preponderance of mission sets. Which is why these things (sub 200 retracts) have always been relegated to a complex trainer requirement in a commercial ticket PTS. I also don't put a bonanza in the same category as a vintage mooney or arrow just by reference to being retractable. I speak strictly of sub 201HP retracts.

 

[tmyers]

Someone didn't want your business.

PLEASE DONT LET AOPA cut a hole for an iPad in that Deb's panel.

I saw the mock up panel, it is already there. I hate it too.

 

[dell30rb]

Hey, the crack about a C-150 was a joke. Heck, the Arrow is faster than a 172, too. Now, our club's 182 will outrun the Arrow by a few knots.




10 hours dual before solo for our club's Arrow, assuming no previous time in make/model. That is an insurance requirement. Has been for over 10 years. I don't know where your 50 hour number came from.

I only had to get 5hrs dual in the club M20J's and that was with zero retractable time.

 

[Ghery]

I only had to get 5hrs dual in the club M20J's and that was with zero retractable time.

Better deal that we have. Oh well, I've yet to find dual instruction to be a waste of time or money. Just because we were burning off 10 hours in the Arrow didn't mean that the time was strictly devoted to Arrow issues.

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

But I keep hearing how slow it is .

My god someone even compared it to a 150???

I am looking for my new Mooney now.

OK enough jocularity.

Do you recognize the paint job? let me give you a hint. Think 1998 AOPA Ultimate Arrow. No this is not the AOPA bird but the owner at the time liked the paint job and had his done in the same colors. Actually the real Ultimate Arrow has been repainted and no longer looks like this.

Speed:

Once you go 110 knots all other speed gains are minor incremental.

Paint:

That is it. I loved it then too.

Awesome times two.

 

[tmyers]

Right after finding this one a 1977 Arrow III, I found a 1976 Arrow II with the same or close paint scheme.

As far as I know they are the only two.

 

[livitup]

The most popular models: M20C is 180hp short body, M20F is 200hp mid body, M20J is an aerodynamically cleaner M20F, M20K is a turbo'd M20J. M20R Ovation is 280hp long body, M20M Bravo is a 270hp+turbo long body, M20S Eagle is a somewhat-pointless lower-powered version of the Ovation, and the M20TN Acclaim is an Ovation with turbo that's been cleaned up and will do over 235 KTAS at altitude.

Hope this helps.

It does. Help a Mooney experience challenged brotha out... On a scale of most cramped to least cramped, rate short, mid, and long Mooneys compared to a Warrior II and a 172.

Also, were some models produced concurrently, or are they chronological? For example, were C and E models produced in the same year, or did E follow C?

I have no idea what my budget is lets say less than 100k, but I'd like 200HP, Electric gear, and something with a usable back seat. I think there's a market for a partnership at my local airport, so however much it costs, I'd just take on partners to make the per-person share reasonable (within limits).

 

[bbchien]

Mooney "J"s are about spatially the same as the post 1975 Arrow- long body. The M, R, S and TN (same body) model is is longer but BEHIND the pilot's seat. This allows the rearmost gatch on the seat rails to be used, however, effectively allowing even taller pilots (legs & down) to use the ship.

 

[Marauder]

It does. Help a Mooney experience challenged brotha out... On a scale of most cramped to least cramped, rate short, mid, and long Mooneys compared to a Warrior II and a 172.

Also, were some models produced concurrently, or are they chronological? For example, were C and E models produced in the same year, or did E follow C?

I have no idea what my budget is lets say less than 100k, but I'd like 200HP, Electric gear, and something with a usable back seat. I think there's a market for a partnership at my local airport, so however much it costs, I'd just take on partners to make the per-person share reasonable (within limits).

I find my F model (mid Mooney) comfortable for my size 6'4" and 210. It is hard to compare Mooneys to a Piper or Cessna. The Mooney front seating is like sitting in a sports car. You sit lower in the plane than a Piper or Cessna. If you want a usable backseat for adults, you will want to be in a mid body length or longer.

The different models overlapped during production. The C/E/F/G models were the most popular versions and were produced from the mid 60s until the mid 70s (there were a few years in the early 70s when they weren't produced). The later model F model was given an aerodynamic overhaul by Roy LoPresti and became the J or 201 as it is also called.

Based on what you are looking for, you can find pretty decent late model F or early J for the price range.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

Mooney "J"s are about spatially the same as the post 1975 Arrow- long body. The M, R, S and TN (same body) model is is longer but BEHIND the pilot's seat. This allows the rearmost gatch on the seat rails to be used, however, effectively allowing even taller pilots (legs & down) to use the ship.

F/J models are longer and have more leg room than a Arrow.

I have 900 hrs in a Cherokee (the small length Arrow fuseloge). However girthwise, this statement is wildly optimistic. I sat in J Mooney and it is much smaller in two ways.....first the tight concave or roundness of the way the top of the fuselage crowds in you to your face space. Secondly the console tightly compresses your legs so where a Cherokee does not have a console (for landing gear) you have 3-4" extra inches if needed. 200# pilot probably ok.

I can easily sit in a Cherokee and have flown 11+ hour cross countries while having two pax with me. I could not fit in the front pilot seat of a J model mooney.

Granted I am 6' 350 lbs but these two models are not about the same where it counts to me---IMO. But for a more normal sized person I guess I agree with Doc's basic statement.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

It does. Help a Mooney experience challenged brotha out... On a scale of most cramped to least cramped, rate short, mid, and long Mooneys compared to a Warrior II and a 172.

Cabin width is pretty similar on all of the above. Height is a bit harder to compare, but you should have plenty of room in all of the above, albeit with worse visibility if you're a tall guy in a 172 because you have to duck below the wing roots to see out the side.

Where the Mooneys shine (in the front seats, anyway) is legroom. It's somewhat similar to taking a PA28 and shoving the rudder pedals about a foot farther forward.

If you want to use the back seat, avoid the short body.

Also, were some models produced concurrently, or are they chronological? For example, were C and E models produced in the same year, or did E follow C?[/quote]

I think the E came out after the C, but they were produced concurrently for a while. The letter pretty much just indicates the order in which the birds were introduced. Don't read too much into it.

I have no idea what my budget is lets say less than 100k, but I'd like 200HP, Electric gear, and something with a usable back seat. I think there's a market for a partnership at my local airport, so however much it costs, I'd just take on partners to make the per-person share reasonable (within limits).

Go for at least an F then, J is better.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I have 900 hrs in a Cherokee (the small length Arrow fuseloge). However girthwise, this statement is wildly optimistic. I sat in J Mooney and it is much smaller in two ways.....first the tight concave or roundness of the way the top of the fuselage crowds in you to your face space. Secondly the console tightly compresses your legs so where a Cherokee does not have a console (for landing gear) you have 3-4" extra inches if needed. 200# pilot probably ok.

I can easily sit in a Cherokee and have flown 11+ hour cross countries while having two pax with me. I could not fit in the front pilot seat of a J model mooney.

?????

The Mooney I fly doesn't really have a console, and I don't remember one in the J model either. The floor in front of the front seats is flat. Trim wheel is positioned pretty much the same as a Cherokee.

Looking at the for-sale sites for J-models, I see a few J's that have a piper-syle throttle quadrant rather than the push-pull vernier controls in the panel that most Mooneys have. That does look like it might cause what you describe for legs....

As for the "face space" - Do you mean the way the side curves into the top of the fuselage, or the positioning of the windscreen? Some people dislike the windscreen at first because it is closer to your face, but as I don't stick my head above the glareshield on a regular basis, I don't really notice it.