M20C vs M20G

eman1200

eman1200

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
18,900
Location
Oakland, CA
Display Name
Display name:
Bro do you even lift
yes, I posted this on mooneyspace as well...

1968 C vs 1968 G.

Assume very similar stats all around, similar avionics, TTAF/E, paint/interior. All very similar, the C is considerably cheaper in asking price. Vague, I know, just looking for thoughts, thanks!
 
eman1200 said:
yes, I posted this on mooneyspace as well...

1968 C vs 1968 G.

Assume very similar stats all around, similar avionics, TTAF/E, paint/interior. All very similar, the C is considerably cheaper in asking price. Vague, I know, just looking for thoughts, thanks!
Click to expand...

Legroom comes at a premium.

Also, asking price is a crapshoot. Different pricing strategies (needs to sell soon vs needs to tell the wife the airplane is for sale, for instance), and differences between how owners perceive reality. "M20C's are selling for X" or "I've got $XXX in my -G"...
 
The posts over on Mooneyspace pretty much sum it up. It's a little underpowered given it has the mid-length body and the same engine as the C. It all depends on your mission though. I don't need to carry around a lot of people or baggage, so the C works well for me.
 
kyleb said:
...Also, asking price is a crapshoot. Different pricing strategies (needs to sell soon vs needs to tell the wife the airplane is for sale, for instance), and differences between how owners perceive reality. "M20C's are selling for X" or "I've got $XXX in my -G"...
Click to expand...

very true, but that pretty much goes for any plane for sale, Cessna, Piper, etc...
 
G models didn't sell as well as the others. IMO, the perceived hit in speed with the additional length/weight didn't sit well with potential buyers. Personally, I would get a C if you got a 180hp model. I'd jump to the F if I needed the extra rear foot space.
 
eman1200 said:
yes, I posted this on mooneyspace as well...

1968 C vs 1968 G.

Assume very similar stats all around, similar avionics, TTAF/E, paint/interior. All very similar, the C is considerably cheaper in asking price. Vague, I know, just looking for thoughts, thanks!
Click to expand...

It's all about condition, not age or equipment. A clean C is worth more than a rotten G, but typically it works the other way around. If it's just front seat people, the C is fine.
 
Everyone says that for a given HP the shorter bodies are always faster in the Mooneys, so if speed is your concern, then the C will fit the bill better. If you have back seat passengers a lot then the G will probably be the better option.

Those both assume that everything else about the planes is equal, condition especially. In 45 years there's a lot that happens to a plane and conditions vary widely. That would be a bigger determining factor for me.

I love my C btw.
 
tough call, since neither of them is a bonanza
 
G was kind of an oddball, being mid-body with the lower power engine.

I guess it boils down to speed and price vs. rear seat legroom, although if I wanted the mid-body I'd be inclined to look for an F. (or what we ultimately did, look for a bargain J)
 
rbridges said:
G models didn't sell as well as the others. IMO, the perceived hit in speed with the additional length/weight didn't sit well with potential buyers. Personally, I would get a C if you got a 180hp model. I'd jump to the F if I needed the extra rear foot space.
Click to expand...

THIS ! If you take back seat pax I'd go with the "F" if not go with the "C"
 
Yeah, get the Golf if you're more interested in hauling pax than going fast.
 
I say if you're willing to pay more for the G but you'd be fine with the back seat space of the C, then the obvious solution is to get an E.
 
yeah I've seen a bunch of reasonably priced F models but they're a little outside my range. 1 solid partner is all it would take to jump up to J territory. stooped money.
 
Don't listen to the negativity here. C's are great planes!! and not just mine. :D
 
Also keep in mind the C is really only uncomfortable for back seat passengers if there are 2 of them, or if the front seat guys are really long legged. With 3 in the plane my back seat passenger usually just sits with their feet on the opposite side from their butt and are pretty comfy that way. The only time I've wished I had a longer body was flying to Mammoth to go snowboarding. With no hat rack in the back of mine the boards just barely fit going diagonally across the back seat and luggage area. The week before I did the same trip in a friends M20S with one of the back seats out and our boards fit easily down the one side.
 
I know this is slightly off topic, but if you are worried about room, and cost is a concern, I would like to remind you that the Piper Commache line of aircraft really works well.

If you look at a 250 with Tip Tanks you get a much larger cabin, abit more then 1,200 lbs of lift, great range (90 gal), well supported airplane.

The only downside is your fuel burn will be 12.5/13 gal per hour for 145 kts.

When I was looking to replace my 172, I had heard of a Commache but had no idea of it's overall capabilities. I was looking at the F bodies because I have a family of 4, but found that while I liked the economy, the Commache was just a better plane for what I wanted to do.

Flav
 
Hank S said:
Don't listen to the negativity here. C's are great planes!! and not just mine. :D
Click to expand...

yep. I'm capable of weeding thru the bs and making my own decision, but there IS plenty of good feedback as well.


Flavius Renatus said:
I know this is slightly off topic, but if you are worried about room, and cost is a concern, I would like to remind you that the Piper Commache line of aircraft really works well......
Click to expand...

always hear good things about commanches. overall useful load is not my #1 priority, as I'm not hauling a family around (maybe the occasional gaggle of hookers, but no family) although UL is important. 'most' of the commanches I've seen are even older than these 2 mooneys, which I'm already not thrilled with, but that's what u get in my price range.

I am partial to pipers, in fact a good arrow would do the trick for me but it seems the prices of those exceed even an early-mid 70's mooney and most likely they've been heavily used as trainers.
 
eman1200 said:
as I'm not hauling a family around
Click to expand...

Our CFI that checked us out in our J had never been in Mooneys before (that's another story), but was so impressed after flying in ours that he found his own. It's just he and his wife and they aren't going to have kids, so he bought a nice C and is happy as can be.

If you don't care about the back seat, it's a no brainer, buy the C and enjoy!
 
Bill Jennings said:
......

If you don't care about the back seat, it's a no brainer, buy the C and enjoy!
Click to expand...


Oh I care, it's just not the #1 on my list. Maybe #3 or so. I take 2 pax pretty regularly, but that's on shorter trips. The longer trips I'd take would prob be just me, sometimes +1.
 
eman1200 said:
sheeeit, are you in the charlotte area?
Click to expand...

Nope, a long ways north of there. Looking at a couple local, don't know if I'll spring for either. One's a VFR ship that hasn't flown much, the other a hangar queen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top