Best bang for your buck

Use the $100k as a down payment. Plan to spend another $100k. If you can't spend that, then rent. You've been out of flying for a number of years. Unfortunately, it's changed a lot since you've been flying. In the past 3 years prices have exploded.

Turbo 182
 
Now where is that really really embarrassed emoji.

(Thanks)
 
Andrew Cobb said:
@Huckster79 well crud…..found a decently equipped (avionics) F turbo at the right price…..that’s a good sign that they can be had for that….turbo would be nice too for that high altitude take-off roll…..
Click to expand...
F Models have one annoying AD, every 100 hours prop hub NDT inspection. This can be retired with a B hub, or prop upgrade. The other gotcha is you need a special Mooney tool to check the gear pre-load, but that can be had for $200.

Rajay turbo models have a bonus AD where all turbo related hoses must be replaced every 5 years. I created new swear words replacing those hoses last annual. Rajay sells a kit with little thermal stickers that returns the hoses to replace on condition.

I love the turbo as it can take you up to 22K feet technically, though I’ve only had it to 16K. As you climb, you add a little boost every 1000’ and you keep climbing at 500 FPM. It will work great for high and hot takeoffs. I can lean it out to 8.5 gph and true at 145-150 kts depending on altitude and temperature.

Vs a Comanche, Mooney wins on looks, efficiency (mine is at 17 MPG over 500 hours), trim knob location, and less cylinders to care and feed (aka slightly cheaper to overhaul). It loses on payload, cabin comfort, and engine smoothness. The IO-360-A1A can be a real paint can shaker vs a 6 cylinder purring along. I’ve balanced my prop and replaced the engine mount pucks and it smoothed out to cezzna territory.

AFAICT all M20F speed mods are bull. Some do carry quality of mx bonuses or penalties. The one piece belly will save 5 hours at annual. So….many….screws….on my belly. The 201 windshield or swta cowling quiets things, but makes working on avionics a real PITA.
 
I don’t find Mooneys visually attractive in comparison with Comanches, but the main issue for me is that they maneuver like a flying school bus, to a greater or lesser degree depending on the particular variant. Regardless of Mooney efficiency and simplicity (the types biggest attributes) they are out of my consideration for that reason. As far as front seat comfort goes they are fine for me although the visibility is somewhat restricted and when so-equipped the engine does have the typical 4-cylinder Lycoming shake. YMMV.
 
Tusayan said:
I don’t find Mooneys visually attractive in comparison with Comanches, but the main issue for me is that they maneuver like a flying school bus, to a greater or lesser degree depending on the particular variant. Regardless of Mooney efficiency and simplicity (the types biggest attributes) they are out of my consideration for that reason. As far as front seat comfort goes they are fine for me although the visibility is somewhat restricted and when so-equipped the engine does have the typical 4-cylinder Lycoming shake. YMMV.
Click to expand...
Lol, saying the quiet part out loud in terms of my limited experience flying Mooneys. Compared to the Continental in the F33 Bonanza, I'm still getting used to the 6-cylinder Lycoming shake in the PA-24 but I do enjoy that it starts easy, warm or cold, using the more or less the same priming methods as an O-360. The Comanche doesn't land effortlessly like a Bonanza but is easy to fly and responsive otherwise without being overly sensitive for IFR work.
 
Tusayan said:
they maneuver like a flying school bus, to a greater or lesser degree depending on the particular variant
Click to expand...
That is the first I’ve heard of that said about Mooneys and have to disagree. All pushrods for control surfaces. 90 degrees turn lock to lock for ailerons. Whipping it into a 60 degree bank is no problem. Coming from a C172, took me a few hours to break out of over-controlling it.

Chrisgoesflying said:
That’s a lie. Lol.
Click to expand...

EdFred said:
Lies, on lies, on lies.
Click to expand...

Mxfarm said:
ROTFLMAO
;)
Click to expand...
Thou doth protest too much ;) :goofy:
 
Cherokee 235. Mines 130 knots, 5.5 hour range, 1345# useful load…….most bang for my bucks
 
My big concern with a Cherokee or Comanche is the AD for the wing spar. A friend of mine who is an AP and pilot has tried to talk me into a C172/182 to avoid that wing spar. From what I can tell more or less, the AD mainly affected retractable gear airframes. Is that correct?
 
Andrew Cobb said:
My big concern with a Cherokee or Comanche is the AD for the wing spar. A friend of mine who is an AP and pilot has tried to talk me into a C172/182 to avoid that wing spar. From what I can tell more or less, the AD mainly affected retractable gear airframes. Is that correct?
Click to expand...

no.

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...iness-directives-piper-aircraft-inc-airplanes

"The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Piper) Models PA–28–151, PA–28–161, PA–28–181, PA–28–235, PA–28R–180, PA–28R–200, PA–28R–201, PA–28R–201T, PA–28RT–201, PA–28RT–201T, PA–32–260, PA–32–300, PA–32R–300, PA–32RT–300, and PA–32RT–300T airplanes."
 
Andrew Cobb said:
My big concern with a Cherokee or Comanche is the AD for the wing spar. A friend of mine who is an AP and pilot has tried to talk me into a C172/182 to avoid that wing spar. From what I can tell more or less, the AD mainly affected retractable gear airframes. Is that correct?
Click to expand...
By now most of the affected planes have already had the inspection and either passed or got a new wing. Unless there are a bunch of 100 hour inspections in the logs or missing logs, the chances of hitting the factored TIS hours is pretty slim. You can find a plane that is in the affected list that neither requires the inspection to factored hours nor has a concern or spar integrity.
 
Bob Noel said:
no.

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...iness-directives-piper-aircraft-inc-airplanes

"The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Piper) Models PA–28–151, PA–28–161, PA–28–181, PA–28–235, PA–28R–180, PA–28R–200, PA–28R–201, PA–28R–201T, PA–28RT–201, PA–28RT–201T, PA–32–260, PA–32–300, PA–32R–300, PA–32RT–300, and PA–32RT–300T airplanes."
Click to expand...
Dangit, the one I saw had the “R” models on it but only a couple of fixed gear…guess it might have been the initial AD….
 
Mxfarm said:
please tell us about the Mooney tail... Good looking tails are important.
Click to expand...
I'll just quote aviation writer Scott Olsen:

"Perhaps the most recognizable tail in the sky belongs to the Mooney lineup. Instead of swept-back, it appears swept-forward. In truth, though, the leading edge is vertical and the trailing edge narrows toward the top. The airplane is fast and the tail makes it look that way. "
 
Andrew Cobb said:
This is great information and definitely makes a Mooney jump up on my list of looksies…I know there is a trade off everywhere with HP and fuel efficiency and speed/time. This sounds like a GREAT compromise to all of it. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Yea they really are… insane speed for 180/200hp bird… mine is non turbo, I didn’t want the complication or expense… but if I was doing lots of high alt airport stuff I might. But then again I flew my Cessna 140 in and out of the back country of Idaho twice w 85 hp- just need patience :).

But I’m glad you’re giving em a good look. They are certainly worth a good consideration.

Don’t let anyone tell ya the tail is backwards, Mooney tails are correct it’s everyone else’s tail that’s on backwards :)
 
brien23 said:
For $100K and what you want their is not much in that price range, 1960 to early 70 high time engines high time airframe poor interior, bad paint and poor radio's along with the other problems of low cost planes. You can't make a cheap plane as nice as you can buy a nice plane, engine overhaul, paint and radio upgrades let the previous owner suffer the loss, buy what you want not what you think you can fix it up too.
Click to expand...

There’s definitely some nice Mooney F or below and super Vikings in the price range. Certainly solid airworthy birds even if our paint ain’t great…
 
There are a few deals to be had around $100k mark . You will sacrifice something avionics or engine usually. I just pulled the trigger on a M20E so we will see how it works out . The key to buying a Mooney or camanche is retract time for insurance purposes many buys get to this hurdle and go to fixed gear.
 
i realize that he stated 100k, but i am amazed that 70 posts in and nobody has said "BO"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top