Mooney?

[Scud_072]

So... I am on track to get my PP in a month or two... dreaming about buying a plane. I was thinking about an older Bonanza (fits my mission - I plan to do lots of XC, some for pleasure, some for business). Several people are suggesting that I start out and a couple hundered hours in somethlng not quite as "robust" as the Bonanza. One exerience pilot I know assessed them to be "slippery" in that if you don't handle them just right you could have compounding circumstances beyond the level my training would support. Fair enough. But what about the Mooney... I know it is a bit smaller (fortuneatly my wife and I are on the smaller side) but is it also "slippery?" Is it crazy to think about owning one with a fresh PP? Thanks.

 

[poadeleted21]

So... I am on track to get my PP in a month or two... dreaming about buying a plane. I was thinking about an older Bonanza (fits my mission - I plan to do lots of XC, some for pleasure, some for business). Several people are suggesting that I start out and a couple hundered hours in somethlng not quite as "robust" as the Bonanza. One exerience pilot I know assessed them to be "slippery" in that if you don't handle them just right you could have compounding circumstances beyond the level my training would support. Fair enough. But what about the Mooney... I know it is a bit smaller (fortuneatly my wife and I are on the smaller side) but is it also "slippery?" Is it crazy to think about owning one with a fresh PP? Thanks.

Biggest mistake I've made in aviation was buying a starter plane instead of a Bo.
Had I bought the Bonanza first, I would have spent far less money and be more proficient in the Bo and more confident in myself and the plane.

Bonanza is just as easy to fly as my Cherokee was and is easier land.

 

[Rwsavory]

Get a ride in both models and find out first-hand what you like best. And no, it's not too early to get a good XC machine. They are easier to fly than a trainer in a lot of respects. Get some transition training and you should be good to go.

 

[Henning]

Both planes are slippery, both planes can bite you, both planes can also be flown by low time pilots. If the plane gets ahead of you, you can always pull the throttle back. The Bo is a much easier and forgiving plane to fly than the Mooney, the Mooney will fly cheaper, the Bo will haul more. As for comfort, that's for you to decide, I'm more comfortable in the Bo especially on long flights.

 

[kgruber]

The Bonanza has very nice control harmony, making it a great airplane to hand fly.

The mooney, not so much, but has a huge following. Some pilots don't care or are oblivious.

 

[rbridges]

I have a C model mooney and bought it at 100hrs give or take. It gets better fuel economy than a Bo but has less useful load. The 200HP mooneys may compete with useful load better, but the Bo will have a little wider feel to it since the mooney cockpit curves in sooner towards the roofline.

Ride in both and decide. Both are great planes but you need to find which fits you and your missions better.

 

[LDJones]

I've had students transition into Mooneys and Bonanzas. With training, you can do either. One of my students just bought an A36 at 64 hours total time. We added 15 hours to his logbook flying the Bo this week on several cross country trips (one being a 5.5 hour leg....it has 7 hours endurance!). Insurance requires 25 hours dual with 10 instrument before he's insured to fly it solo. We will be pushing through his instrument right away.

There's something to be said for buying your last airplane first.

 

[Dav8or]

The mooney, not so much, but has a huge following. Some pilots don't care or are oblivious.

Count me oblivious. I'm also a cheap bastard and don't want to buy more gas than I have to. I also think Mooney's look super cool. I love the way they are built and designed. They were made with one mission in mind. Efficiency. Not only with fuel, but also maintenance. The Bo, not so much. Some pilot's don't care or are oblivious.

 

[kgruber]

Count me oblivious. I'm also a cheap bastard and don't want to buy more gas than I have to. I also think Mooney's look super cool. I love the way they are built and designed. They were made with one mission in mind. Efficiency. Not only with fuel, but also maintenance. The Bo, not so much. Some pilot's don't care or are oblivious.

If you don't mind driving a truck, no problem!

 

[warthog1984]

A Mooney is very slippery, flight wise. Probably more so than the Bo.

As others have said, either can be safely flown by an ALERT student or low time PP. Just understand that along with being much more capable than the average trainer they are: 1) not as stout/hefty and 2) much higher performance and correspondingly more demanding, quicker to get out of hand, and liable to bite an unwary or oblivious pilot.

 

[Cruiser]

If you have trouble with landings get a Bonanza. It takes s skilled pilot with good technique to consistently land a Mooney. Anybody can land a Bo

 

[brien23]

Stay away from the BO with the E series engines look for the O-470 ones. Look for the Mooney's with the newer type Prop no AD. Look for one with the best avionics, paint is cheap radio's and high time engines are not.

 

[mondtster]

The Bonanza has very nice control harmony, making it a great airplane to hand fly.

The mooney, not so much, but has a huge following. Some pilots don't care or are oblivious.

Well put. I own both a Mooney and a Bonanza and I'll take the Bo any day over the Mooney. They just fly nicer and the extra space is nice.

If you don't mind driving a truck, no problem!

Yep, the Mooney controls are heavy and not as responsive as a Bonanza. I'd say that control feel on a Mooney is similar to that of a Cherokee, if that is something the OP has experience with.

 

[poadeleted20]

Get a ride in both models and find out first-hand what you like best. And no, it's not too early to get a good XC machine. They are easier to fly than a trainer in a lot of respects. Get some transition training and you should be good to go.

It may take a few hours more transition training than, say, going from a 172 to a 182, but if you're buying a plane to keep, you should get a plane which does what you want.

Just keep in mind that Bonanzas with typical 225-285HP carry more load than the Mooneys with their typical 180-200HP, so figure out just what you want to haul, examine the W&B documents on the planes you look at, and make sure they'll still allow enough fuel to go where you want when you're carrying what you want.

 

[Einstein376]

I avoided the starter plane as well. After getting my PPL, started looking for a Commander and waited for the right one. Adding the high hp and complex ratings were easy and very worthwhile. I like the idea of having a plane to grow into. Still getting used to an hour flying time equals being a lot farther from home ;-)

 

[Flyhound]

I don't have any time in the Bo, but have 50-60 hours in an M-20E. They are really tight in the back seat. The F & J models are longer and that allows you to carry people with legs in the back. I liked the Johnson bar retract mechanism in the Mooney - there is no doubt where your gear is, and the manual system is cheap to maintain. Learning how to fly the plane to reduce the arm strength needed to retract the gear is something any good transition instructor should be able to help you with. I flew that plane on several long cross country flights from the Seattle area down to the Bay area around San Francisco. I liked it for XC work and I liked the low fuel burn. The advice to fly both planes and to decide based on what fits you and your flying needs (and pocketbook) best is worth paying attention to.

 

[timwinters]

There's something to be said for buying your last airplane first.

That certainly is an option and probably the most sensible way to proceed but think of all the fun and variety you might miss by doing it that way.

I equate it to getting married right out of high school instead of waiting until you're 28, like I did. I could further explain but I doubt I need to.

 

[Scud_072]

Thanks everyone for all the wonderful and wise feedback. Very much appreciated.

 

[Henning]

That certainly is an option and probably the most sensible way to proceed but think of all the fun and variety you might miss by doing it that way.

I equate it to getting married right out of high school instead of waiting until you're 28, like I did. I could further explain but I doubt I need to.

If you live somewhere where there is a large variety of rentals available, I'd agree, however in much of the country your options for rental are pretty limited to basic trainers anymore.

 

[Ted]

No reason why you couldn't get a Bo or a Mooney as your first plane. I started flying a Mooney at 85 hours. Only reason I didn't start sooner was because it wasn't available then.

 

[Ken Ibold]

No reason why you couldn't get a Bo or a Mooney as your first plane. I started flying a Mooney at 85 hours. Only reason I didn't start sooner was because it wasn't available then.

+1

I bought my M20J when I had 50 hours in C152s and about 10 in an Archer. Loved that plane.

Mind your approach speeds, and it's no harder to land than your average trainer. Add 5 knots for mom and 5 knots for god and country, and you can make it harder.

 

[Dav8or]

Well put. I own both a Mooney and a Bonanza and I'll take the Bo any day over the Mooney. They just fly nicer and the extra space is nice.

Then why in the world do you own a Mooney?? Sounds like a huge waste of money.

Yep, the Mooney controls are heavy and not as responsive as a Bonanza. I'd say that control feel on a Mooney is similar to that of a Cherokee, if that is something the OP has experience with.

And if the OP is thinking of getting the instrument rating and doing a lot of cross country flying, he will really appreciate the stability. The Mooney is made for one thing only pretty much, to go a distance either fast, or cheaply. People here have been saying Mooneys and meaning the 180-200 hp variety, but in fact the long body Mooneys they have been making for the last 25 years come with the same engines Bonanzas do. The combination of big engine in the Mooney airframe means = world's fastest certified, production piston single. Oh, and it has a very comparable usable load.

However, I consider the Mooney to be more of an ideal one to two person airplane and the Bonanza to be more of a family SUV. Yes, the Mooney has plenty of room in the back seats... once you actually get there. Getting in and out of a Mooney is the toughest of any plane I have ever flown. Some flexibility required. Some of my Mooney compatriots will probably come on here and tell how they travel with their families in their Mooneys all the time. I'm not saying it can't, or isn't done, just that if I were planning on flying a family around, I would likely choose another plane.

On the subject of other planes, if the OP is considering a Bonanza, he should also look at the C-210, the Commander 114, the Piper Saratoga, the Socata Trinidad and to make Geico happy, the Vans RV-10. Each plane has design trade offs that may, or may not be appealing for different reasons. If the OP desires to stay in the 200 hp range for economy of operation, then the Mooney is tough to beat.

 

[LDJones]

Count me oblivious. I'm also a cheap bastard and don't want to buy more gas than I have to. I also think Mooney's look super cool. I love the way they are built and designed. They were made with one mission in mind. Efficiency. Not only with fuel, but also maintenance. The Bo, not so much. Some pilot's don't care or are oblivious.

It depends on the mission. I loved my Mooney, but it would never have made the 423 nm trip with four men (three over 200 lbs....one WELL over!), plus bags, that I made yesterday while truing out at 203 kts. The Bo, especially a turbo-normalized one, is hard to beat.

 

[LDJones]

If you have trouble with landings get a Bonanza. It takes s skilled pilot with good technique to consistently land a Mooney. Anybody can land a Bo

Nah, I've taught a lot of people to land a Mooney. You start by taking them out and showing them that a Mooney can fly VERY slow. Most have been scared into thinking they have to be flown faster on approach than necessary. The Mooney is much less forgiving of excess speed over the numbers. Fix that problem and they're very easy to land.

 

[Henning]

Nah, I've taught a lot of people to land a Mooney. You start by taking them out and showing them that a Mooney can fly VERY slow. Most have been scared into thinking they have to be flown faster on approach than necessary. The Mooney is much less forgiving of excess speed over the numbers. Fix that problem and they're very easy to land.

Yep. I had a buddy who bought an Exec and was having trouble getting on the ground. I went up with him, did a couple stalls to find the speed, settled on 65 for the approach. He was freaking out because the instructor who checked him out told him 80 over the numbers. 65 had it doing nice landings.

 

[colojo]

However, I consider the Mooney to be more of an ideal one to two person airplane and the Bonanza to be more of a family SUV.

+1.

I own a Mooney Acclaim Type S and it's really built to fly two people and whatever fits into the baggage compartment high, fast and far. We're based in Denver, with high terrain and long distances separating us from our most common destinations: Orange County, the Bay Area and the Baja Peninsula. The Acclaim's turbo, big tanks and high speeds fit our mission perfectly. I'm sure a comparable, modern Bo would do the trick as well, but I'd be going a bit slower and hauling around a bunch of empty seats and cargo space we don't need. I think Bo's and Mooneys both rock... as always, it just depends on your mission and preferences.

Before the Acclaim I flew a K model for 11 years. Just a junior version of the Acclaim, also best suited for two people and their luggage.

Getting back to the OP's question: Any Mooney up to a J model would work for a new PPL. Maybe even the K if you really need a turbo. The long bodies not so much. Too much airplane for a newly-minted pilot, IMHO. But after you have a couple hundred hours and an instrument rating you should be able to handle any of them.

Can't comment on Bo ownership. I've never owned one.

Good luck!

 

[stratobee]

I've also had good experiences with buying aircraft that are over your pay grade or skills level, so to speak. Gives you something to grow into. Plus, it's going to take pretty much the same time to learn on a complex as a simple aircraft anyway - it will become second nature after time no matter how complex it is.

 

[Bill]

Nah, I've taught a lot of people to land a Mooney. You start by taking them out and showing them that a Mooney can fly VERY slow. Most have been scared into thinking they have to be flown faster on approach than necessary. The Mooney is much less forgiving of excess speed over the numbers. Fix that problem and they're very easy to land.

Bingo! Anytime I find my landings not up to snuff, I head to the practice area to cure my ills. Lots of slow flight. My J will hang at 56-57kts dirty. Yes, you're hanging on the prop and behind the power curve, but it will fly along just the same.

65kts is a very good ballpark short final number, I'll even let it edge down to 60kts short field.

 

[Bill]

He was freaking out because the instructor who checked him out told him 80 over the numbers. 65 had it doing nice landings.

Our first transition instructor (who was supposedly a Mooney expert) had us coming in at 80kts. He never made it to the second lesson. We hired a local guy we knew with lots of complex time but no Mooney time. He had us fly by the book, no sweat learning how to land. He liked the J so much he went and bought his own Mooney!

 

[rbridges]

Bingo! Anytime I find my landings not up to snuff, I head to the practice area to cure my ills. Lots of slow flight. My J will hang at 56-57kts dirty. Yes, you're hanging on the prop and behind the power curve, but it will fly along just the same.

65kts is a very good ballpark short final number, I'll even let it edge down to 60kts short field.

personally I like 70 knots. It's a little fast, but I can touch down a little smoother. If I were at a short runway, I'd definitely shoot for 65.

 

[Bill]

personally I like 70 knots. It's a little fast, but I can touch down a little smoother. If I were at a short runway, I'd definitely shoot for 65.

To each his own, I don't like the extended float in ground effect at 70.

 

[rbridges]

To each his own, I don't like the extended float in ground effect at 70.

it definitely floats, and I don't like how much runway I use, but I seem to touch softer. I know it's my technique.

 

[Henning]

it definitely floats, and I don't like how much runway I use, but I seem to touch softer. I know it's my technique.

You touch softer because you're driving it on while still flying, one day that's gonna bite you. Drive some wheelies full length down the runway to get the correct sight picture to transition into.

 

[rbridges]

You touch softer because you're driving it on while still flying, one day that's gonna bite you. Drive some wheelies full length down the runway to get the correct sight picture to transition into.

thanks.

 

[furiousphoen1x]

You touch softer because you're driving it on while still flying, one day that's gonna bite you. Drive some wheelies full length down the runway to get the correct sight picture to transition into.

Explain how softer landings are going to bite somebody please?

 

[Jimmy cooper]

Nah, I've taught a lot of people to land a Mooney. You start by taking them out and showing them that a Mooney can fly VERY slow. Most have been scared into thinking they have to be flown faster on approach than necessary. The Mooney is much less forgiving of excess speed over the numbers. Fix that problem and they're very easy to land.

Exactly! A very stable, easy to fly aircraft. People got so wrapped around the axel that they put spoilers on them! If flown as above they are a ***** cat on landing. I don't understand the term " slick" as it applys to a mooney. It's low to the ground so ground effect has a lot to do with landing speed. Great airplane, but not for a family, nor is a porsche.

 

[nddons]

Biggest mistake I've made in aviation was buying a starter plane instead of a Bo.
Had I bought the Bonanza first, I would have spent far less money and be more proficient in the Bo and more confident in myself and the plane.

Bonanza is just as easy to fly as my Cherokee was and is easier land.

I just joined Beech Talk, and there is a very good discussion on this exact topic. As with most forums, there is a myriad of opinions, and even on that forum, it is not all pro-Bo. That being said, the general sense of the discussion seems to agree with Bart.

 

[Henning]

Explain how softer landings are going to bite somebody please?

It's not the softer part, it's the driving it on part, the faster you land, the lower your angle of attack. If you are flying into gusty winds and the gust dies out on you at an inopportune point in the settling, the nose drops, you get a bounce, and the typical result in a Mooney is a prop strike.

 

[nddons]

Yep. I had a buddy who bought an Exec and was having trouble getting on the ground. I went up with him, did a couple stalls to find the speed, settled on 65 for the approach. He was freaking out because the instructor who checked him out told him 80 over the numbers. 65 had it doing nice landings.

What did the POH say? I had a buddy down in Charlotte who was a pilot, and he always urged me to add 5 knots "for the wife and kids." and I did just that for years, and never had great landings.

When I was getting checked out in a 172 when I moved here, I had a great instructor who stressed speed control through the entire pattern bus especially from the base-to-final turn until landing. The 172R POH says 60-70 kts on final. If I'm at 60-65 over the fence, I'll have a good landing.

 

[Henning]

What did the POH say? I had a buddy down in Charlotte who was a pilot, and he always urged me to add 5 knots "for the wife and kids." and I did just that for years, and never had great landings.

When I was getting checked out in a 172 when I moved here, I had a great instructor who stressed speed control through the entire pattern bus especially from the base-to-final turn until landing. The 172R POH says 60-70 kts on final. If I'm at 60-65 over the fence, I'll have a good landing.

Didn't look, POH number is for max gross, I like going up and stalling and getting a 1.3Vso speed at current weight when I'm evaluating a plane. I never add energy to a landing speed, it's counter productive.