So I was ruined by a Mooney 231 today . . .

I (was) perfectly content with flying /riding around in Prop driven GA stuff till my good friend and neighbor bought a couple of CJ's.... There is NOTHING like zipping along at FL450 and non stopping it from -35f Jackson Hole to south fla and +80F in less then 4 1/2 hours.... :yesnod::yesnod::yesnod:...

Ps.. I have signed up for therapy to overcome my sickness.:idea::no::no:.

Ben.

Oh sure, rub it in a little more... :happydance:
 
I just wasn't impressed with the Bo. (...) I wouldn't like having to constantly worry about the CG either.
The only time I few a Mooney (M20E "Super 21"), we were pushed against the front of the envelope, just like in older Cherokees. I still have the data from that flight. My self was 235 lbs, instructor 190 lbs. Resulting arm 45.68 inches.
 
The only time I few a Mooney (M20E "Super 21"), we were pushed against the front of the envelope, just like in older Cherokees. I still have the data from that flight. My self was 235 lbs, instructor 190 lbs. Resulting arm 45.68 inches.

There's no question the Bo has CG aft enough to merit attention - but it has not been difficult to deal with using reasonable and prudent practices.

And, I don't have to tote around a big lead weight with a handle on it like we used to do in the club Cherokee.
 
So if the Mooney is "in the family" just don't get divorced from the wife and you should be able to fly it anytime you want. Maybe you could be a partial owner in it. :)
 
The only time I few a Mooney (M20E "Super 21"), we were pushed against the front of the envelope, just like in older Cherokees. I still have the data from that flight. My self was 235 lbs, instructor 190 lbs. Resulting arm 45.68 inches.

Yep, I ran your numbers in my table and with full fuel, you'd actually be to far forward and outside the envelope. Throw a few weight lifting plates in the baggage compartment and all is good... :D

For me, all of the flight data I ran for my trips fit comfortably within the CG range, including burning fuel during the trip. I ran the same thing with the Bo spreadsheets that are posted over on Beach Talk and watched the CG move all over the place. No weight needed in the baggage compartment either, although I need to keep my wife under control so we don't cube out the small baggage compartment on trips. She still figures out how to pack it full though... :dunno: :redface:

Brian
 
Last edited:
Lol this is some great stuff here guys, thanks!

I was gonna try and break my mooney habit but my uncle-in-law wants to go flying again tomorrow WTF :D ?

He really twisted my arm too!

I was looking at M20 models before this and ruled them out . . .now not so sure.

To be clear, I can't budget what a 231 costs (esp. one as nice as this one!) but M20 money is doable with comfort for any unforeseen costs near and longterm. Won't even need to sell the little C150 in AK (I might but gonna keep it for the next year or so and see what happens in my "real" life aka job(s) ).

Oh and yes i'm aware of "weeping" tanks but i still appreciate any and all advice!

-Rob

-Rob
 
I used to ave a '64 M20E. I loved that airplane and wish I still had it. The maintenance is not bad, the only issue is the time involved just getting the cowlings off. The aftermarket mods are definitely worth it. As far as the weeping tanks go, if you get one, just go on and have the tanks resealed and the donuts replaced when you get it. Money well spent and will save you time in the long run.
 
I think pretty much no matter what you have you will always drool over the next best thing. My skyhawk is equipped well, but I always wish it was a little faster. There is probably someone flying around thinking the same thing in a P210
 
This is my sixth year with my Mooney 252. She was a compromise when I bought her and is still a compromise today but for many different reasons. I love the performance and certainly the efficiency but as an airplane that's "fun" to fly? Naw. You can say a lot of great things about Mooneys and they are great traveling machines but right now most of the things that make it the great traveler that it is are wasted on me. I'd do fine with a 182 or even a 185.
 
I think this thread adequately shows why no one will ever walk by a Skycatcher and drool or post about flying one. ;)

Mooneys are cool.
 
I think pretty much no matter what you have you will always drool over the next best thing. My skyhawk is equipped well, but I always wish it was a little faster. There is probably someone flying around thinking the same thing in a P210

Keep in mind that even a P210 isn't a hugely fast airplane, albeit much faster than the Skyhawk. In your case, I can understand wanting a faster plane with the distances you travel with your Skyhawk.

As I'm building up hours in the Commander 690A, I definitely like the fact that I can eat breakfast, fly 800 nm, stop in Ohio on the way home, and still be back in time for dinner. But I find the Navajo, at 2/3 the speed, to be far more enjoyable to fly. I'm happy traveling 200 kts, hence why I'd like to get some more power in the 310. I find one can enjoy a plane for what it is.
 
It had a little bypass door on the cowl that when opened in flight bypassed the filter and gave close to another 1" in manifold pressure.

My buddy had that little door glassed over when he had his M20J repainted last year. He said he got higher MP and fuel burn and no noticable increase in speed, so why bother putting in unfiltered air.
 
My buddy had that little door glassed over when he had his M20J repainted last year. He said he got higher MP and fuel burn and no noticable increase in speed, so why bother putting in unfiltered air.

Because it also serves as alternate air should the air filter ice over or otherwise get clogged.
 
David White,

You are quite right about that phenomenon! (i.e. wanting something bigger, faster, etc).

In the boating world we call it "two-foot-itis" as in you always want a boat two feet longer.

I bought bigger and bigger boats, then went down to the one that was big enough (it is 30' long) and still ECONOMICAL enough to enjoy and not worry about fuel burn etc.

I think the Mooney fits that bill and would for a long while.

I still don't know if it's gonna be what I go with in addition to my little C150, but I will be posting another thread soon and all I can say is WOW WHAT AN AWESOME DAY OF FLYING I HAD TODAY :goofy:!!!!

-Rob
 
1. A Mooney M20J has been great for me.
2. In spite of 1 I've never flown a Bo I didn't like.
3. Flying a Lear and similar airplanes gives me permagrin every time, but I don't go out and buy one.

So, define your mission, know your ability to pay, find pilots with planes you're considering and go for a ride.
 
Because it also serves as alternate air should the air filter ice over or otherwise get clogged.

Alternate air comes from a spring loaded plate inside the engine compartment not the ram air inlet.
 
My buddy had that little door glassed over when he had his M20J repainted last year. He said he got higher MP and fuel burn and no noticable increase in speed, so why bother putting in unfiltered air.

The ram air door added quite a bit to the E & F cowls. Not so much to the J version.

For turbo I'd look for a 252 or a modified 231. Stock 231 had several temp and over boose issues.
 
Alternate air comes from a spring loaded plate inside the engine compartment not the ram air inlet.

Hmm, nevermind then. I'd thought on the F model I flew the ram air inlet was the alternate air. My mistake.
 
I used to ave a '64 M20E. I loved that airplane and wish I still had it. The maintenance is not bad, the only issue is the time involved just getting the cowlings off. The aftermarket mods are definitely worth it. As far as the weeping tanks go, if you get one, just go on and have the tanks resealed and the donuts replaced when you get it. Money well spent and will save you time in the long run.

Mine has Camlocks for the cowl, so it takes about 2 minutes to remove the upper cowl and another 2 minutes to remove the side cheek panels on each side. I raced my friend who has a '65 E and had mine off and back on again before he finished one sides worth of screws on his. He's looking for a mod now... :idea:I believe everything '67 and on has the camlocks on the cowling. Certainly makes it easier to preflight the lower engine compartment.

Brian
 
There's a Mooney fly-in at Hicks in Ft Worth next Saturday if you want to see a bunch of planes, but the 172 would be a great plane particularly if you'd want to operate off of a turf strip in LA. If you want a little more speed you might think about a 177FG.

Do you have any more information on the Mooney fly-in? A website, perhaps?

I love Mooneys... have time in both an M20E and a Turbo M20K, both flown out of Hicks when the club I was in had Mooneys and was based there.
 
I am trying to picture Troy in a Mooney... with the seat not reclined.
 
Reading the enthusiasm that is oozing from you is like getting a fix for us airplane junkies. I'm truly happy for you that an airplane ride has brought you such joy and appears to have lit a fire in you to own one. Mooneys are fine planes and obviously there is a reason for the way owners dote over them. I gotta admit I like them as well as Cardinal RG's even though I've never flown in either.


Yeah so I can never look at my C150 the same, and as much as I LOVE C172's, and probably will end up with one, and should from a LOGICAL standpoint:

I was RUINED by a flight in a Mooney 231 today!!!!

Cruising at 150 kt and 12.5 gph really got my attention. Next thing I know I'm passing an airport I never had before and it was like only 10 minutes flying.

Climb? OMG.

So now, even though I ruled them out, I want a mooney.

I can't afford a 231, but an M20 in good condition is definitely doable.

Big thanks to my "uncle-in-law" Scott for taking me up and letting my fly that beautiful aircraft!

Has this happened to anyone else???

-Rob
 
I always thought the Mooney 201/231 series were wonderful flying machines...just tough to stuff anyone very large into it.
 
I always thought the Mooney 201/231 series were wonderful flying machines...just tough to stuff anyone very large into it.

Have to define large. Width maybe especially with manual gear. (I'd warn new pax that I wasn't getting friendly.:)). Tall well not so much. I'm 6'2" / 190 and fit in my M20F just fine. You gotta like the sports car seating but I was more comfortable there than on a bench seat Bonanza. My LARGE friends do lean towards BOs or 210s.
 
I'm 6'2" / 190 and fit in my M20F just fine.
I do not remember being much taller than Eric, but ostensibly I am 6'5" and I had no trouble fitting into M20E. I think it was the first aircraft where I did not have to put the seat at the rearmost notch (I only flew C172 much later, and those seat rails almost have no end - no wonder people kill themselves with unlatched seats in it).

P.S. To give you an idea what height we're talking about, I can look into fuel tanks of a C150, but I do not see the bottom.
 
I was speaking more about the rear seats....from my recollection they seemed a little small....but yeah the fronts no problem. Don't get me wrong....I love the Mooney's! Fast, economical, and fun to fly! I'd love to fly a 252!:)
 
If you have the need for speed, a 231 Mooney Rocket conversion is really a great machine. I've been flying one for 16 years & can't say enough good things about the performance. MC
 
I hopped from a C-172 to a Mooney 231, and 30-some years later, I'm still very pleased with the move. I had family about 700 miles away. In my C-172, it was over 6 hours, and a fuel stop. No autopilot. Minimal IFR package. Anemic climb rate, and pretty much out of ideas by 11,000 feet. With the very well equipped Mooney I found could leave my home in Ohio after breakfast, and have lunch overlooking the Gulf of Mexico. Much easier to sell antsy kids an all morning ride than an all-day ride. It's a one-tank trip unless the headwinds are ferocious. If the summer buildups are ugly, an easy climb to 15,000 or 16,000 allows me to see and circumnavigate the tops in cool, haze-free comfort. Yes, it's a bit more expensive to maintain, but such a great cross-country machine it is. I can reach most of the eastern US from where I live on one five-hour tank of gas. And compared to asking prices for C-182s, C-210s, Bonanzas, etc, a really nicely equipped Mooney 231 can be had quite reasonably. They're much less thirsty than comparable airplanes, were built very well, and can be flown with fingertips. Yes, I like flying Cubs, and other 'fun' around-the-patch airplanes, but most of my flying is to get somewhere at a reasonable price, and for that, my Mooney fits my needs better than almost any other.
 
Back
Top