First Aircraft purchase... Mooney?

In the end it doesn't much matter, flying will be expensive no matter in what you do it. What are you comfortable in, what do you like, what does the job for you? The biggest determinant is load, and load dictates minimum HP. Above that, speed dictates required excess HP, and that is a geometric function to gain more speed.

The Mooney airframe is the slickest in class and also most stable for IFR work. The Comanche legend has it was a product of a stopover Al Mooney made in his plane at Lockhaven PA to wait out weather. Reportedly a bunch of reverse engineering went on. :dunno: The Bonanza airframe isn't quite as slick, but it's by no means dirty, and it's more for the Mercedes S Class crowd compared to the Mooney's Porsche 911 fit and feel. The Bo is not as stable and solid in IMC as the Mooney, but as for handling and having fun flying a light, responsive, aircraft the Bo beats the Mooney and Comanche hands down, same for ease of making a pretty landing. The Mooney and Comanche will do fine if the pilot keeps the plane on a precise profile or long floats or heavy drop ins occur. The Bonanza has a much larger window of approach energy that will result in landing scores of 8.5 or higher due to precise handling all the way to stall. The Bonanza also has the toughest gear out of the bunch, Mooney is a close second though with the early Johnston Bar gear being the simplest.
 
Last edited:
There's a beautiful 1970 M-20 E converted to a J on Barnstormers right now. I'd be all over that if I were you.
 
Henning said:
In the end it doesn't much matter, flying will be expensive no matter in what you do it.
Click to expand...

This is the solid truth. Beware, airplane ownership is the most expensive thing you'll ever do, except possibly a divorce.
 
I too am looking at planes, but looking at slightly newer Mooneys(M20J) the pricing never seems to make sense. There are people with mid-high time engines with all the gadgets for way too much and then the ones with low time engines that need a bunch of care and are plenty inexpensive but then they have a fair bit of deferred work coming. I saw one 1978 or 1979 that proudly stated the tanks had never been resealed.
 
I own a M20C purchased two years ago. I cruise at 140 Kts at 65% power burning 9GPH. my typical cruise altitude is between 7-10K and I plan for 4 hour legs with 1 hour reserve. The plane has been extremely reliable and easy to maintain. The manual gear is simple and reliable. My useful load is 1000 lbs and with a full fuel load I still have 650lbs to play with. Tall pilots are no problem at all as there is plenty of room with the seat back. Short pilots may be more of a problem as you may end up sitting too close to the yoke/panel. Some real short guys use rudder pedal extensions to solve that problem. I too was hesitant at first about the landing stories. I had no problem whatsoever. The long laminar flow wings generate a lot of lift so if you come in hot on final you will float in ground effect. Just don't force the airplane to land. Let it dissipate any extra speed and it will settle nicely when it's ready to land. If you are landing in a short runway then you need to nail the speed on final or you could float down the runway quite a ways. A few hours with a Mooney instructor and you will be good to go. An instrument rating will also be helpful as you become used to flying by the numbers and as the Mooney is a great XC machine with good range it is inevitable that you will run into weather.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Wow thanks for all the great replies!

To answer a few questions...yes Im quite a big guy, 6ft3,250lbs, but I think I shouldnt have a problem. Also I plan on doing my Intrument rating in the aircraft, and will have some time getting familiar with the aircraft with a good friend of mine who is a CFI

I done some research on some of of the other aircraft mentioned on here. I do like the Bo, but from what I have read I am pretty much convinced that a Mooney is the aircraft for me.

I have been looking around and seen some very reasonably priced earlier models, C's in particular. I have seen some aircraft with low time engines, but limited/old panels, and some higher time engines with newer panels. I feel that going with a low time engine would be the best purchase, am I right? Or would it be better to go for the higher time engine, with the knowledge that I would be doing the overhaul, and as such know exactly the condition of the engine. I intend to keep this aircraft for a while, not flip it for something better in a year or two.

I understand that corrosion can be a problem on Mooneys, is this something that I should be concerned about? I will obviously get a pre-purchase inspection.
 
Corrosion or lack of it should be your top concern, it can make a plane unairworthy and is super expensive to fix. In theory low time is better if the engine hasn't been sitting, but a well maintain engine will go past TBO. You will need to do transition training with a CFI who has experience with mooneys.
 
deftone said:
Wow thanks for all the great replies!

To answer a few questions...yes Im quite a big guy, 6ft3,250lbs, but I think I shouldnt have a problem. Also I plan on doing my Intrument rating in the aircraft, and will have some time getting familiar with the aircraft with a good friend of mine who is a CFI

I done some research on some of of the other aircraft mentioned on here. I do like the Bo, but from what I have read I am pretty much convinced that a Mooney is the aircraft for me.

I have been looking around and seen some very reasonably priced earlier models, C's in particular. I have seen some aircraft with low time engines, but limited/old panels, and some higher time engines with newer panels. I feel that going with a low time engine would be the best purchase, am I right? Or would it be better to go for the higher time engine, with the knowledge that I would be doing the overhaul, and as such know exactly the condition of the engine. I intend to keep this aircraft for a while, not flip it for something better in a year or two.

I understand that corrosion can be a problem on Mooneys, is this something that I should be concerned about? I will obviously get a pre-purchase inspection.
Click to expand...

Corrosion is your PRIMARY concern when buying any aircraft. Repairing is expensive, time consuming and detracts from you market value. Airframe condition is the prime determinant of your long term cost of ownership. In those regards, give preference to planes that have always been hangared, they are worth paying a premium for most of the time.

If you are doing your IR in the plane, unless you want to do a nice new glass panel, I would avoid the old 'shotgun panels', find one with a standard 6 pack. Whatever you can get included in the deal in modern avionics you'll get at a great discount.

As for engine time, this is a highly variable crap shoot. The Lycomings have an issue with camshaft rust and spalling. OTOH, I have seen IO-360s go 4000hrs and still not fail. The key factor between the two is frequency of use. I would have less concern with the 12 year old 1800 hr engine that has been flying 100-200hrs a year than the 8 year old engine with 100hrs on it unless there was a long term storage period it was pickled for, even then there will be seals to change. Preference goes to planes that have an oil analysis history.

Engine work is probably the least loss factor expense you go through with a plane.
 
Corrosion-free first.

As to the panel vs. engine, personal choice and a bit of a crap-shoot. Either one could have been done poorly, but from a resale perspective, the panel will end up being cheaper to let someone else pay for. So I would likely look at panel before engine. Keep in mind these Lycomings are also known for going past TBO, so getting a plane that's near TBO doesn't necessarily mean you'll have to replace the engine immediately.

If you look at an M20C, the M20E has the benefit of an extra 20 HP and faster. However, the E/F have angle-valve Lycomings, for which cylinders are more expensive.
 
Henning said:
The Bonanza also has the toughest gear out of the bunch, Mooney is a close second though with the early Johnston Bar gear being the simplest.
Click to expand...

My favourite Bonanza pilot:

 
I have about 20-25 hours in a c model that my friend bought. Don't be afraid of buying a manual gear "johnson bar" model. $40-50k will put you over budget and leave room for repairs and a few upgrades. I believe they paid vref value which was about 28,000 for a 1962 c model.

Just leave twice as much time to descend or you will find yourself circling around the destination trying to loose altitude. Great performer at 8000-10,000 feet. You can also run it at 18"/1800rpms and get around 100kts on 6gph.
 
Henning said:
This one is my favorite:

http://youtu.be/pnCT24qod4M
Click to expand...

The Duke one offers razor-shar wit, and it really hits where it hurts (like when it turns out that the animal aspiring to fly a Duke is currenly owns a Cirrus). But somehow it's just not as consistently funny. More of satire than humour.
 
Be sure you have a hangar before you buy anything. Sitting in a hangar for extended time like a month will not hurt it. I would buy a mooney in the best shape possible and be very careful about instrument flying until I became very proficient. Many low time IFR rated pilots die needlessly. Mooneys are fun to fly and easy to land if you ( as stated) watch your speed on final.
 
Ron Levy said:
Go find a Mooney M20C, climb in, sit there for two hours, and then climb out. See what you think after that.
Click to expand...


I sat in mine for 5.5 hrs on some trips....ended up far, far away from my launch point!
 
LDJones said:
I sat in mine for 5.5 hrs on some trips....ended up far, far away from my launch point!
Click to expand...
Oh god. Now I remember that we had a member who had a 201 series M20 in which he flew for 5 hours across ocean to visit his native country... every year... with his family. His wife was making comments like "how much longer of this torture" and "grandma sprung a leak, I told you she forgot her diaper".
 
Ron Levy said:
Are you "6ft3,250lbs"?
Click to expand...


Actually, I was 6'4" and 280 lbs and had no problem fitting in my Mooney that I have owned for 23 years. The width of a Mooney cabin is a bit wider than you might believe. And the leg room is great. You sit lower than a Cessna or Bo. I will say that at 6'4" and 225 lbs. I have given myself a little more room ;)

In fact, the most common "fit" question I hear is "where can I get rudder extensions". If you are short legged and barrel chested, you will have issues. Al Mooney was a tall man -- he was thinking of us big guys.
 
zaitcev said:
Oh god. Now I remember that we had a member who had a 201 series M20 in which he flew for 5 hours across ocean to visit his native country... every year... with his family. His wife was making comments like "how much longer of this torture" and "grandma sprung a leak, I told you she forgot her diaper".
Click to expand...

Sounds like the anecdotes of 'piloto' on here and mooneyspace regarding his flights from Florida to PR (not a country, btw) non-stop. Sounds like a rewarding trip to make solo. I'm planning on doing that trip myself one day when I have an airplane with the legs to make it non-stop (not interested in international stopovers and CBP kabuki).

I'd never do that trip on a single engine with family. To have to handle your loved ones in a water survival situation like that is not worth it to me, plus the trip is lengthy and thus not inherently comfortable to make frequently in piston equipment. To each their own though.
 
Marauder said:
Actually, I was 6'4" and 280 lbs and had no problem fitting in my Mooney that I have owned for 23 years. The width of a Mooney cabin is a bit wider than you might believe. And the leg room is great. You sit lower than a Cessna or Bo. I will say that at 6'4" and 225 lbs. I have given myself a little more room ;)

In fact, the most common "fit" question I hear is "where can I get rudder extensions". If you are short legged and barrel chested, you will have issues. Al Mooney was a tall man -- he was thinking of us big guys.
Click to expand...

Not to hijack the thread, but how does the Mooney compare in width to a PA-28? I'm training in an Archer II, so I have wondered about how close they are? How does the headroom compare - I'm only 5'11"" and with the headset on if I sit tall I can knock the ceiling. The Mooney is on my radar as I think about purchasing
 
Aircooled said:
Not to hijack the thread, but how does the Mooney compare in width to a PA-28? I'm training in an Archer II, so I have wondered about how close they are? How does the headroom compare - I'm only 5'11"" and with the headset on if I sit tall I can knock the ceiling. The Mooney is on my radar as I think about purchasing
Click to expand...
your problem won't be headroom, or width, if anything as already mention, if you have short legs you might need pedal extensions.
It's seating position reminds me of a corvette, plenty of room, but you sit down lower, getting out requires you to pull yourself up, unlike a cessna which reminds me of sitting in a truck, and you step down
 
Aircooled said:
Not to hijack the thread, but how does the Mooney compare in width to a PA-28? I'm training in an Archer II, so I have wondered about how close they are? How does the headroom compare - I'm only 5'11"" and with the headset on if I sit tall I can knock the ceiling. The Mooney is on my radar as I think about purchasing
Click to expand...

The headroom is fine, the leg room is fine, the shoulder width is fine. The difference you will find is the panel is closer to the pilot than the Piper, the roof line curves inward and so has a more claustrophobic feel, you sit lower to the floor, so your legs are more straight rather than bent and finally, the foot well is much narrower. It's the later that bugs me a little on long flights. The rest is perception and you get used to it really fast.

Overall, there is plenty of room. Some people do need pedal extensions. There are 1-1/2" and 3" available. I would like the 1-1/2" ones for ergonomics reasons, but I have gone over four years without them, so they aren't really needed, or high my list of needs.

Do yourself a favor and ignore the internet and hangar OWTs about the cramped horrible Mooney interior and go and sit in one. Better yet go for a flight in one. I won't lie, the PA-28 interior is ultimately more comfortable and easier to get in and out of. However, the trade off in efficiency is well worth the minor, minor downside. If we all really put a premium on comfort, we'd all be flying Rockwell Commanders.
 
teejayevans said:
your problem won't be headroom, or width, if anything as already mention, if you have short legs you might need pedal extensions.
It's seating position reminds me of a corvette, plenty of room, but you sit down lower, getting out requires you to pull yourself up, unlike a cessna which reminds me of sitting in a truck, and you step down
Click to expand...

I have quite abit of time in a 201 and a super 21. You sit exactly like you would in a porsche or corvette. Once in just fine. ( I'm 200 lbs, 6 foot.) plenty of room once in. Getting out similar to getting out of sports car. I currently own a cayman . Very similar comfort wise. Lots of fun. It's a three adult person air plane. Fast, fun to fly.
 
Aircooled said:
Not to hijack the thread, but how does the Mooney compare in width to a PA-28? I'm training in an Archer II, so I have wondered about how close they are? How does the headroom compare - I'm only 5'11"" and with the headset on if I sit tall I can knock the ceiling. The Mooney is on my radar as I think about purchasing
Click to expand...


Here are the dimensions of some comparisons:

Aircraft Cabin Width Cabin Height
Mooney 201 43.5″ 44.5″
Beechcraft V35 Bonanza 42.0″ 50.0″
Cessna 182 42.0″ 48.0″
Piper Arrow 41.0″ 45.0″

One reason people think Mooneys are small inside is because of the cabin height. Unless you have a really tall torso, you'll be fine. Like others have said, sit in one and decide.
 
I read a review of a pilot describe the difference between a bonanza and a mooney as the difference between sitting on the wing (bonanza) versus sitting in the wing (mooney).

All I know is go ride in a few. Personally, I haven't met many well cared for airplanes I didn't like...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top