Insurance costs for Mooney M20C vs. tailwheel Vans RV:

[DMD3.]

When it comes to to purchasing an M20C versus a taildragger Vans RV 6-9 and insure it for the same price (let’s say $100k), which aircraft would have the higher insurance premium? We’ll assume the pilot buying the aircraft has the bare minimum complex time (if any is required at all) and/or the bare minimum tailwheel time logged in order to qualify for insurance.

In addition to being a taildragger, the RV is also experimental, which will probably increase the cost a bit. While the Mooney is retractable-gear, it’s supposedly less likely to malfunction and result in a forced gear-up landing due to the simplicity of the landing gear. Perhaps insurance companies take this into consideration in comparison to other similar priced RG aircraft such as the Arrow, Super Viking, etc.

I realize it could depend on the insurance company as to which aircraft would cost more to insure. And performance and maintenance costs are also determining factors on which aircraft to buy. But as far as insurance goes, how do these two compare?

 

[Salty]

Generally experimental doesn’t raise the cost.

for a 100k M20C, you’re looking at 1800-3000 depending on how many hours retract and m20 time you have. I see “bare minimum” after a second read. I had to get 10 hours in type before flying with someone in my m20, and the rates were high the first 100 hours. And they are worse about it these days.

 

[David Lloyd]

Three years ago I sold my RV7 and bought a M20C. Only had 450 hours tailwheel but 6000 complex including 450 M20C. Hull value the same, cost of insurance within $50 of being the same. Next renewal, the insurance market was changing and I got older. Officially old. This year's renewal will be double from 3 years ago.