What's the scoop on piston single GA lately?

[LoneRanger]

Had my head out of it snce 2002. Probably take 10+ hrs dual to get ready for VFR checkride if I decide to do this but... I've come into some money recently. Enough to pay cash for a nice Mooney M20J (201) '77 - '79 model, although I prefer the '77 due to the throttle quadrant (why did they go back to push/pull levers after '77?). If I do this I want the most efficient (speed vs fuel burn) piston single I can get for around $85 - 99K, and the mentioned vintage M20J fits the bill as far as I can tell, trueing @ 160kt on 10gph, although I've seen claims of 9gph which sound optimistic. Insurance will be high because I'm not intrument rated (would take instrument instruction in the owned M20J). and all my time in the past was Ce 152, 172, and Pa-28 140/160STC. Low time pilot going form simple to complex, ouch on premiums. Also realize the danger as far as handling the Mooney but there would no doubt be at least 15 - 20 hrs dual req'd in the M20 I'm guessing before any insurer would allow solo coverage.

Not even sure I'm ready for this yet. As some may recall, my wife passed in March and I'm just now beginning to get back into life a little bit at a time. I'd like to fly again and with the settlement I have the financial ability to cash buy something and avoid a promissory note on top of all the other overhead. Problem is I don't have anywhere to GO, or anyone to GO WITH me there for like trips, but if I get back into it I figure I might as well buy for speed and efficiency now instead of later, hence the Mooney J model idea.

I know 100LL is crazy $$, hence the need to cover as much ground on as little fuel as possible. Lol, every time I think of 100LL prices I start to talk myself out of it, but as those of you who have once owned and flown know, its a siren's song that always beckons.

 

[46Harry]

I fly an M20J occasionally as a friend owns one. They are fast fuel efficient airplanes, but along with fast, they aren't as forgiving of a ham handed pilot as the 172 or Cherokee. They don't bleed off air speed, so on final, speed is a major factor as the Mooney doesn't want to stop flying like a Cessna or Piper. I've been saying I want my own airplane for years, but everytime I buy fuel, I talk myself out of it. That being said, prices for general aviation aircraft are down considerably from several years ago, so now would be a good time to buy.

 

[Robster]

Whatever you buy, pay a QUALIFIED, EXPERIENCED mechanic that's familiar with Mooneys to do a pre-buy inspection--it's money well-spent in my experience.

I've noticed a LOT of GA aircraft sitting on the ramps over the last few years, obviously sitting idle due to the poor economy. Although purchase prices are lower now, I'd be worried about major future expenses due to sitting idle for long periods (engine / airframe corrosian etc.) on those aircraft.

Look for aircraft that have seen frequent / recent / regular use, preferably hangared.

I've not flown Mooneys at all, but I have friends that have 'em and by all accounts they're great airplanes--good speed / fuel burn ratios, good handling etc. The only negatives I've heard about them is the smallish size of their cabins and some models can be loud to ride in.

Good luck!

 

[Cujet]

I own a 200HP Cessna Cardinal RG (177RG) and in many ways, I'd prefer a Mooney M20F with Lopresti mods (like my friend owns) for the speed and efficiency. I don't buy that "hard to fly" stuff. The 4 cyl mooney is still a single engine, piston, light-GA aircraft, and it flies like it. It's small, light, efficient, lands slow and climbs slow. Is it faster than a typical Cessna, yes. However, with proper management, it's not harder. Fly it like a pro, with stabilized approaches, proper airspeeds and so on. It won't be problematic. In fact, in some ways it's easier. I believe the Mooney is more stable in turbulence and crosswinds.

Still, I like the Cardinal and it fits my needs quite well, as I often fit the big dog kennel in back. In fact, I can sleep in the plane with the kennel there too! My Cardinal overhaul is here: www.cujet.com

Interestingly enough, the Mooney is often more efficient than driving and faster or matches the airlines if the trip is 1000 miles or less. They are that good and consistently fast.

Just an FYI, the 177RG is 143Kts, and it's only significant advantage is that it is much larger inside. As I mentioned, it's big enough to sleep in if configured correctly (no backseat, flip the co-pilot seat on top of pilot seat, I do this regularly) And, it's useful load is reasonable. However, an accurate view is that the 200HP Mooney is a 160Kt airplane, with about 1/2 the "time to climb" at the same loads. The Mooney also has higher airspeed limitations, such as Vy, top of the green arc and redline.

While I don't have any belief that my Cardinal can match a Mooney, I'm adding a few mods to increase power and speed (powerflow exhaust, K+N filter, GAMI injectors) and possibly the Lopresti cowl in the future (the power and cowl combo makes it a 156Kt aircraft)

 

[LoneRanger]

156kts in a Cardinal is sweet. What of the 9gph @ 160kts I saw in a few ads for M20J's? Seems shady. Or too close to lean peak and cooking the cyls and valves.

 

[Cujet]

A Mooney 201 (or an F model with Lopresti cowl/Powerflow exhaust) will achieve near 160Kt cruise speeds in most conditions. It's a sleek airframe and it does not take a huge engine to achieve those kinds of speeds.

However, the way they achieve the speed is not just through aerodynamics. Mooney/lopresti includes a "ram air" valve that bypasses the air filter. AND, the Powerflow exhaust is a true tuned, equal length header.

That truly means the engine is capable of producing MORE HP in cruise flight. More air (the ram air system) and tuned exhaust (the Powerflow) do equate to more fuel consumption. It's my experience that 12GPH at moderate altitudes in cruise flight is more "normal" at those "near" 160Kt speeds.

Remember, the higher you go, the less fuel you burn. So, it's possible that some operators are getting 160/9 in the flight levels, winds permitting.

Also, remember that you don't have to tweak the engine for maximum output in cruise flight. One can save plenty of fuel by running at a slightly reduced power setting, and/or lean of peak.

(Oh, as for a Cardinal @156Kts, that's not likely without serious attention to mods, and probably achievable only at low altitude/full power)

 

[Mr_Joe]

I own a Warrior, not the fastest in the sky but somewhat economical to own. I burn 7.25 GPH as checked on several flights. I'm off to Airventure in Oshkosh next week.

 

[LoneRanger]

Sounds reasonable on the Warrior. I once had a '67 Cherokee 140 w/ the RAM 160hp STC. I burned about the same, but was slower than your taper wing Warrior thanks to the Hershey bar wing and standard factory tips. I had a set of Metco wingtips but sold the airplane before ever having them installed.

 

[LoneRanger]

You are totally right about this. I'm seeing birds advertised with "low time" engines where the hours are low but the date of overhaul or reman is 10 or 15 yrs old, beyond "Calendar TBO" so to speak. Which translates to a lot of sitting parked which may translate to corrosion in the engine. I'm actually seeing a lot of the low hour time engined airplanes in this situation where they just haven't been getting flown enough, yet the seller has the price high because of the low elapsed hour time on the overhaul. There was one with about 300 SMOH but the job was done in the late 90's.


Originally Posted By: Robster
Whatever you buy, pay a QUALIFIED, EXPERIENCED mechanic that's familiar with Mooneys to do a pre-buy inspection--it's money well-spent in my experience.

I've noticed a LOT of GA aircraft sitting on the ramps over the last few years, obviously sitting idle due to the poor economy. Although purchase prices are lower now, I'd be worried about major future expenses due to sitting idle for long periods (engine / airframe corrosian etc.) on those aircraft.

Look for aircraft that have seen frequent / recent / regular use, preferably hangared.

I've not flown Mooneys at all, but I have friends that have 'em and by all accounts they're great airplanes--good speed / fuel burn ratios, good handling etc. The only negatives I've heard about them is the smallish size of their cabins and some models can be loud to ride in.

Good luck!