There are more myths, legends, and rumors about Mooneys than any other airplane I know of, and I want to make my next video on that topic. Any particular Mooney myths you want busted or confirmed?
Wish someone would do an STC for “Fowler flaps” on these planes, so they actually provide lift instead of just drag. Then an STC for a left side baggage door like a Comanche, then you could just seal up the useless one that opens to the sky which also pops open in flight. Ugh such a idiotic design that could really be a good airplane instead of pretending that it is.
Maybe for next topic talk about techniques for landing a mooney without floating, crosswind landings, short field, and back-country flying are some ideas.
That they over-run the runway. That could be dispelled by showing a short-field landing. As you know, it's all in decent planning, and speed control over the fence. I tell everyone that gear down and first notch, it's a Cherokee, nothing to be afraid of. But you've got to get it down to gear operating speed first!
@@dodgeplow SOG is not an abbreviation commonly used by pilots, so I'm going to guess it means speed over ground? If so, I can answer your question, if not, just explain what SOG means. There are four types of airspeed: Indicated airspeed is what the gauge says, simple enough. Calibrated airspeed is the indicated airspeed adjusted for installation and instrument error. Think of it as the airspeed the wings feel. True airspeed is the calibrated airspeed corrected for altitude and temperature. It's how fast you are actually moving through the air. Ground speed is the true airspeed plus or minus any headwind or tailwind component. (I think this is what you were really asking) Finally, equivalent airspeed is is the calibrated airspeed adjusted for the compressibility of air. This only comes into play as you go really fast at high altitudes, so for our type of flying, it's negligible.
I am a 25 year M20E owner. Love it. I can take it to the mountains and have been to both coasts. I was told that the door on the front was included because the cowling design is so poor that the engine cannot get normal atmospheric prfessure to breath correctly. I use it in clear air, at altitude. We call the door our "poor man's turbo"
Former M20C owner. Pro tip, when dealing with the old MPH/KTS airspeed indicators, when you're cruising between 7,500 and 9,500 on "normal" temp days (not standard), the MPH indicated is the same as KTS true, give or take 2%. This vid pretty much proves it if you take a second look at it.
Pa28-180 pilot here. Have been thinking Mooney. Thank you for your channel. Not only informative about Mooneys but operations in general. I had never ever considered the back pressure of a partially opened throttle. The lung test was so brilliant. Thanks!
I have about 200 hours in PA28-181 Archers. Nice easy fliers. Love them. Bought a ‘64 M20E two years ago. It’s a big step up. Love it so much! One big issue in transitioning has been landings. The Mooney loves to fly. It does not want to stop flying. Really need to nail speed control down final. If you don’t it’ll tell you. Go around, trying to force the landing will get you into PIO, after you porpoise you’ll wheelbarrow and have a prop strike. Also, from wat I’ve read spins are not easily recoverable, so avoid them diligently. Apart from those caveats it’s a wonderful airplane. I especially enjoy slowing to the Archer cruise speed before putting the gear down. That, and 150 knots on 8gph of course…
I never owned a Mooney but in my rental days I rented 201s and 231s out of Flightworks in Van Nuys, CA. Those were the airplanes in which I cut my complex/high performance teeth. Believe it or not, I flew a 231 with a close friend (also a pilot), my wife, and his girlfriend (and our baggage) on a two week journey from California to a convention in Montreal. We stopped for fuel in Utah, Kansas, Wisconsin, and the upper Peninsula of Michigan. We took the south route back, through New York, Tennessee, Texas, and Arizona. It was an awesome trip and a highlight of my aviation career. I’m flying a Cessna 441 Conquest II now which flies much higher and faster for a much longer distance and I love the airplane but I’ll always have a huge soft spot in my heart for Mooneys. And, by the way, very nice video, well-done on the data collection!
I wish everyone who reviewed an airplane did these type of tests. Thank you for the video. Your performance results are nearly identical to my ‘67 200hp injected m20f. I have a single probe egt so I don’t try lop
At higher altitudes above about 8-9000ft, just lean out until the engine gets slightly rough and then enrichen. Any operation LOP to pk EGT to 125 ROP will not be possible to hurt the normally aspirated engine because you'll typically be less than 65-70% HP even at WOT & ram air door open. At typical stabilized cruise speed with typical CHT's, you really can't hurt the engine. If unsure, settle in cruise for an extra couple of minutes before doing the leaning. In general, getting an engine analyzer is practically a necessity for safety reasons. You'll generally be able to see valve issues before the engine has serious catastrophic failure. At least, you can baby it for a precautionary landing. I typically fly my 1966 M20E at a minimum of 10,500 ft. Best TAS goes down but the CAFE score keeps going up and starts flattening at about 14-15,000 ft. At that point, I'm getting about 23 statute MPG with a fuel flow of about 7.1 gph (143 KTAS). For the E model with 48 gals usable, it increases the range so I don't have to stop or have more reserves.
What a nice and informative video. I get almost identical numbers in my 1966 E model with almost all the 201 mods. Have owned the plane for 30 years and with the price of fuel these days it’s almost unbeatable for a 4 place plane. It’s a keeper. Thank you. Well done!
I love the M20E. I had a 64 and a 66. One with the 201 windshield. Both with the Lasar cowl enclosure. Misc. fairings, etc. Wish I had the 201 cowl but didn’t. Keeping an eye on the Vne is important. They loved flying 8k to 10k. I also got a little over an inch of manifold pressure when I opened the ram air door. It has a lot more impact than 201 ram air door due to the more efficient induction system on the 201. You have a beauty! Makes me miss them. thanks for posting.
The biggest mods I did to my E model in importance was #1 Generator to alternator. I got stuck a couple times with a dead battery after night operations. #2 JPI engine monitor. #3 Cowling mod. I did Texas also and they did the alternator mod too. #4 Quartz landing light. LED wasn't a option at the time. But getting rid of the incandescent that burn out all the time was important. #5 Window mod. #6 Shark fin antennas. 5 and 6 really wasn't about performance but it did make it LOOK faster. 😁
Really great, informative, video. Makes me want to run a similar test on the airplanes I fly and find the "sweet spot". I love making data-driven decisions.
Thanks, Paul. I'm an engineer - using data to make decisions is how I operate. I know no other way. I find tests like these to be fun. The POH is great, but airplanes are hand built so they all behave a little differently (and they all age differently) so I like to do these tests. I'm glad you enjoyed it, and thanks for watching.
Awesome analogy using the breathing exercise. Thanks for the insightful tips, suggestions and passion shone towards the Mooney. It's one of my favorite aircraft, too.
I have a good friend in Sprindale AR with a Mooney. He simply loves it and has had it for over 20 years. He also says it's the scariest plane to land he has ever flown. He says it does not like the runway. He used to rent it out, but is had 3 hard landings that required airframe and landing gear work. So ne he is the only one who flies it. Said if it were not so fast and efficient he would sell it. I guess a true love hate relationship. Great video by the way.
The Mooney wing doesn't want to stop flying & the gear is short. But if u can fly a Piper Archer or Cessna 172 it's not a hard transition compared to other complex planes. If your use to flying a short wing plane like a Cherokee you will probably have problems till u learn good airspeed control. I have installed precise flight speed brakes on them which should help double the rate of descent. But I think its better to plan descents early it saves fuel & good airspeed control on landing.
Absurd? He has over 12,000 hours in the air. And has owned that plane for over 20 years. Ownes 3 other aircraft as well. He said exactly what the other commenter said. "It just keeps floating and tends to pourpus like a dolphin." He would say this all the time. And he LOVES that plane. I'm 100% sure he knows what he is talking about.
@@tireballastserviceofflorid7771 My dad, who also had thousands of hours in fighters and airliners, porpoised our Super 21 and had a prop strike, because he didn't respect how precise you need to be with speed control on approach in the Mooney. I believed the guy who checked us both out in the Mooney, and never had a problem...earned my private in that bird, and my commercial in a 201 at Flight Safety, where I convinced my instructor that HE (multi-thousand hours, flew C-130s, aerobatic, etc.) was carrying 5 too many knots down final...showed him that I could consistently touch down on the landing zone paint and make the turnoff, where he floated to the intersection from the same on-glideslope position over the threshold. I wish I could have afforded to buy the M20E when he and his partners sold it. The Mooney will teach you to be careful, and you'll find other airplanes, which are more tolerant of excess speed, also land better if you actually fly a stabilized approach right on speed. Come in 5 knots too fast, and you'll have a hell of a time getting it to land. 10 knots will add a mile to runway required.
What an excellent video, well made, to the point, great screenshots, good flying skills and a perfect chart at the end. Well done and thanks for sharing friend.
At higher altitudes above about 8-9000ft, just lean out until the engine gets slightly rough and then enrichen. Any operation LOP to pk EGT to 125 ROP will not be possible to hurt the normally aspirated engine because you'll typically be less than 65-70% HP even at WOT & ram air door open. At typical stabilized cruise speed with typical CHT's, you really can't hurt the engine. If unsure, settle in cruise for an extra couple of minutes before doing the leaning. In general, getting an engine analyzer is practically a necessity for safety reasons. You'll generally be able to see valve issues before the engine has serious catastrophic failure. At least, you can baby it for a precautionary landing. I typically fly my 1966 M20E at a minimum of 10,500 ft. Best TAS goes down but the CAFE score keeps going up and starts flattening at about 14-15,000 ft. At that point, I'm getting about 23 statute MPG with a fuel flow of about 7.1 gph (143 KTAS). For the E model with 48 gals usable, it increases the range so I don't have to stop or have more reserves.
for those wanting to have apples-apples comparison, convert the 7500ft altitude to a density altitude based on the temperature. Humidity is a factor but it appeared to me a low humidity day (ie. few clouds). I find that my best TAS is at about 8500ft MSL and about a 9500ft DA equivalent for moderate wingloading. Another thing to increase best TAS is to have some aft weight. This makes the horizontal tailplane with minimal negative angle of attack giving less pitch stability. As well, having the flaps set flush (ie. not extra downward camber) gives a bit of a better cruise TAS. Also, (rudder, aileron) trim the airplane (so that it is most efficient at the higher altitude) for the typical IAS, for example 130KIAS. If you want to get more accurate readings then in low winds aloft, do the 4 cardinal directions, preferably in alignment with the wind and throw out the crosswind affected directions. Note that the best TAS is going to be dependent on the total weight of the aircraft. At lower wingloading, the angle of attack will be less so the best TAS will be higher (and at higher altitude).
Great job on the data! I just found your channel and subscribed. I am a student pilot with a 20 year mission plan. A Mooney fits the mission well! I’ll be looking for your myth busting videos. Thank you.
I love that breathing analogy for engine efficiency vs throttle position. Never thought of it that way. The engineering perspective is very fun to hear. You're essentially talking about volumetric efficiency, right?
Yes, exactly. Volumetric efficiency. This is why people in the know fly WOTLOP. Wide open throttle, Lean of Peak. With more than 65% power (WOT down at lower altitudes) it is possible to climb and cruise LOP as long as you can get sufficiently LOP. More power=the need to be more LOP. The worst place to operate the engine (lowest detonation margin) is 50-75dF ROP. Of course, this is normally the “best power” mixture found in the performance charts.
Not a pilot here but I enjoy these types of videos. May get my flying instruction one of these days. I do drive Chevy Corvairs - so I was wondering up there at 6500-7500 feet - Ahh!! Just as I was typing you answered my question!! CHT of 326.. Not bad!!!
Any videos to demonstrate the amount of room in the rear seat, say when your have the front seat in your normal flying position? Thanks. Great performance demonstration video
always heard abour u guys, never flew a mooney, looked at a few, fkew alot of other stuff. deb,skylane and t arrow not as efficient but not bad. skylane hard to beat for the carry and io 470 engine❤so many airplanes so little time😢
Amazing. Trying to save up for a medium body Mooney, but honestly, I would take any of them. They’re all awesome (well, except for the ones with that weird rear window cutout-not a fan).
E is one of the last short bodies. I am very happy with mine, seldom miss the extra rear seat legroom. As far as I’m concerned it’s as good as a J but without the premium pricing.
@@BruceM-o4h Nice. Yea, I got to go up and be at the controls of an E a few months ago. I liked it. The seating position was a little startling, but it’s something that I think I can adjust to.
The early M20J models did have the ram air inlet it was a round inlet. I have a M20C with a 201 cowling done by Mooney Mod Squad. The inlet hole is there but not connected probably cause its a carburetor engine.
Thanks for letting me know. I flew an M20J and I knew someone with an M20E with the real 201 cowl and neither had the power boost door so I assumed they were all that way.
@@FrugalMooney You should do a buyer's guide on the features plus pros & cons.When I worked at a Mooney dealership in the 90's the newer M20J Mooney MSE models had eliminated the ram air. But those later years had better corrosion protection with primer on inner structure. Some 80's Mooney's had almost all the primer falling off the tubular structure & badly rusted tubes when u pulled interior panels. The older ones like yours have good paint coatings on the tubing. I have seen a primer with coat of grey enamel on older ones. Great video 👍
@@Nord3202 Thanks for the idea - I might do something on the various models. I wanted an older model before the first bankruptcy and sale (before they started cutting corners to save money) - I've heard some stories about how things were cheapened after the sale to Republic.
@@FrugalMooney Also I like the older style fuel caps with the door & scupper drain. The 65 & up Mooney's had the more common flush fuel caps that water sits in the neck above the o ring & rust out the filler necks. But 65 to 66 where the fastest due to better quality control. The 64 was the last year for the crank up step. Then vacuum operated then finally just a fixed step. Also the older Mooney's had the smooth elevator & rudder instead of the beaded controls & larger rudder. Also the manual gear is a plus on the older models. Nice to make a video on all the changes over the years. I prefer the bullet proof 4 cylinder Lycoming engine Mooney's. After the J model it's all downhill especially with the Continental engine, alot more expensive to buy & maintain.
In the J they modified the intake, so the ram air barely had any effect, many older Js have had them removed to eliminate maintenance and clean up the cowling.
For those of us who live high humidity areas, we don’t get spec horsepower. Experiments show up to 10% reduction of horsepower because the water molecules take up space and displaces oxygen molecules. So less oxygen, the less fuel that you can burn. So if you want best performance, cold and dry is what you want.
Great video. I'm getting similar speeds in my '62 C but I'm using 20-30% more fuel. I'm not sure I'll ever try lean of peak with a carb, that and I've dumped a lot of money into making it go fast and very little into engine monitoring. Probably not the wisest approach.
Who's to say what the best approach is? I don't know if you've ever read the articles by John Deakin on AvWeb (link to a summary: www.csobeech.com/lean-of-peak.html), but he talks a bit about LOP operation (and engine operation in general) on a carbureted engine. I'm not necessarily saying I endorse it (or don't endorse it- I don't have enough information), but if you're interested, have a look to see what he has to say. Edit: here's a better link (cospilot.com/documents/Mixture%20Magic.pdf) but you can look him up on Google.
@@FrugalMooney Those are very interesting articles. The pdf will take reading a few times to fully sink in. The moral seems to be that we can experiment quite safely above 9000 ft. I'm curious if that also applies to rpm, I've got the MT prop as of last month with no rpm restrictions. I'd like to try cruising at 2000 and leaning it out... Regardless, I'll work on applying that info.
@@HairHelmet Nothing scary or dangerous about operating LOP in carb engine as long as you have a proper understanding of the principles and limits. Modern engine scanner instruments make it easy and give confidence that engine is happy.
Do elaborate on the difference in “valve geometry” please. I’ve never heard that before. There are certainly differences between the A1A and the engines installed on the 201 (the dual mag, counterweighted crankshaft, factory timing) but I’ve never heard that valve geometry was one of them.
A bit of a novel here (sorry). I've been searching for the reference where I may have read that but have had no luck so far. The hard drive died on my old computer so I lost some documents, so there's a decent possibility that I mis-remembered it (so it was probably a bit irresponsible for me to say that in the video purely based off of my memory). BUT, the power settings tables for the M20J vs the E and F models are considerably different (I do still have a copy of the power setting tables). For instance, at 24"/2400 RPM the E and F manuals list that as 74% of rated power, but the M20J POH lists that power setting as being 68.3% of rated power (I had to interpolate for that). A non-interpolated data point is for 55% power on the E and F is 18"/2400 RPM, but 55% power on the J is 20" / 2400 RPM. It's possible that it may have been the intake in the M20J installation was tuned to be slightly different than the E/F and my memory might just suck. Or it might be that the numbers are different because the dyno at Lycoming was changed and I'm just a fool. :)
@@FrugalMooney I think the bigger disparity has to do with inconsistency in POH’s from year to year. In terms of valve geometry I think you are confusing the angle valve 200 hp Lycomings with the parallel valve 180hp Lycomings. The early Lycomings did have smaller diameter valve stems but I doubt there are any of those still in service. There were also narrow deck crank cases in the 60s but they are rare these days as well.
Ya I used to own 6845u bought for 14k in1975 …today that would pay for an annual.Not to mention price for same airplane in 2023…Sad commentary on state of general aviation
I don't get it. At 8:47 You say: „with a wide open throttle, at the same power setting, in terms of manifold pressure, you'll achieve more power. That means faster airspeed.“ With what would You set the maifold pressure, if not with the throttle?
Forgive my ignorance Just starting to learn but why is your indicated airspeed frequently in the yellow zone? Is this not pushing the safety envelope? Love the Mooney Thank you in advance
A lot of high performance planes cruise in the yellow arc at a standard cruise power setting, which is never a problem in smooth air. Vno (start of yellow arc) and Vne (red line) were raised in later Mooneys after more analysis was done on the airframe (no change was made to the airframe - better analysis showed that it was stronger than previously thought).
All Mooneys I have flown will be in the yellow arc at 75% power. This means you are exceding Vno (normal operating speed) for flight in rough air. When encountering rough air, throttle back below the yellow arc. Most Mooney pilots just climb above the rough air for comfort and speed.
My RV7 is faster. HA HA.... Thanks for the data. That is cool. I love the Mooney. The club I was a flight instructor at a few decades ago had a 201 and 231. I enjoyed getting to fly it. Never owned one but if I did own a certified plane a Mooney would be #1 on the list.
@@FrugalMooney Been a pilot for 36 yrs, ATP and CFI, built two RV's and has owned a few other planes (including a Piper Apache PA23-160). I love the RV performance (better than most SE retracts) and freedom to maintain it and modify it. The RV7 is only two seats. The RV10 would be my choice over a Mooney but RV10's have become very expensive. I am glad I built my RV7 before the crazy inflation of everything. In my CFI days the flight school had 35 planes, including two Mooney's on lease back (201 and 231). I transitioned and checked out several pilots into the Mooney. We (insurance company) required an instrument rating and 25 hours retract gear time to rent our Mooney's. RUclips was not around then. Videos like yours are helpful to pilots transitioning to the type for the first time. A used Mooney like yours is a great value. Looks like an older but very nice panel upgrade in your Mooney. The windscreen upgrade is nice. I think the lopresti speed mods cowl (if they make it for that model is $16k) would be a great upgrade, but I would leave it alone. Spend the money on fuel... and go fly. Nice plane. Thanks for sharing,
You obviously fly Lean of Peak a lot, any considerations for maintenance with that approach to operating the IO360? I only ask because the POH only discusses ROP flying and not LOP.....thanks for the videos and any insight ...
I bought the airplane 11 years ago so my purchase price may no longer be relevant, but here's a website with listings for the same model: www.controller.com/listings/search?Category=6&ModelGroup=M20E&Manufacturer=MOONEY&ScopeCategoryIDs=13
Do you have all this information on a transcript. Very interesting. I just got a 1964 M20E and have not gotten the performance published numbers yet. This info will get me there.
If you have two stout bodied gentlemen could they sit up front without having to overlap shoulders? Been looking at Mooneys but I'm not sure about the fit.
![Stromae, Pomme - “Ma Meilleure Ennemie” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1F3OGIFnW1k/mqdefault.jpg)
There are more myths, legends, and rumors about Mooneys than any other airplane I know of, and I want to make my next video on that topic. Any particular Mooney myths you want busted or confirmed?
Wish someone would do an STC for “Fowler flaps” on these planes, so they actually provide lift instead of just drag. Then an STC for a left side baggage door like a Comanche, then you could just seal up the useless one that opens to the sky which also pops open in flight. Ugh such a idiotic design that could really be a good airplane instead of pretending that it is.
Maybe for next topic talk about techniques for landing a mooney without floating, crosswind landings, short field, and back-country flying are some ideas.
That they over-run the runway. That could be dispelled by showing a short-field landing. As you know, it's all in decent planning, and speed control over the fence. I tell everyone that gear down and first notch, it's a Cherokee, nothing to be afraid of. But you've got to get it down to gear operating speed first!
Not a pilot here. How does airspeed compare to SOG (assuming level flight)?
@@dodgeplow SOG is not an abbreviation commonly used by pilots, so I'm going to guess it means speed over ground? If so, I can answer your question, if not, just explain what SOG means.
There are four types of airspeed:
Indicated airspeed is what the gauge says, simple enough.
Calibrated airspeed is the indicated airspeed adjusted for installation and instrument error. Think of it as the airspeed the wings feel.
True airspeed is the calibrated airspeed corrected for altitude and temperature. It's how fast you are actually moving through the air.
Ground speed is the true airspeed plus or minus any headwind or tailwind component. (I think this is what you were really asking)
Finally, equivalent airspeed is is the calibrated airspeed adjusted for the compressibility of air. This only comes into play as you go really fast at high altitudes, so for our type of flying, it's negligible.
Hoping to procure an M20E soon. Love the videos.
I am a 25 year M20E owner. Love it. I can take it to the mountains and have been to both coasts. I was told that the door on the front was included because the cowling design is so poor that the engine cannot get normal atmospheric prfessure to breath correctly. I use it in clear air, at altitude. We call the door our "poor man's turbo"
Former M20C owner. Pro tip, when dealing with the old MPH/KTS airspeed indicators, when you're cruising between 7,500 and 9,500 on "normal" temp days (not standard), the MPH indicated is the same as KTS true, give or take 2%. This vid pretty much proves it if you take a second look at it.
Pa28-180 pilot here. Have been thinking Mooney. Thank you for your channel. Not only informative about Mooneys but operations in general. I had never ever considered the back pressure of a partially opened throttle. The lung test was so brilliant. Thanks!
I have about 200 hours in PA28-181 Archers. Nice easy fliers. Love them. Bought a ‘64 M20E two years ago. It’s a big step up. Love it so much! One big issue in transitioning has been landings. The Mooney loves to fly. It does not want to stop flying. Really need to nail speed control down final. If you don’t it’ll tell you. Go around, trying to force the landing will get you into PIO, after you porpoise you’ll wheelbarrow and have a prop strike. Also, from wat I’ve read spins are not easily recoverable, so avoid them diligently. Apart from those caveats it’s a wonderful airplane. I especially enjoy slowing to the Archer cruise speed before putting the gear down. That, and 150 knots on 8gph of course…
Thanks!
I never owned a Mooney but in my rental days I rented 201s and 231s out of Flightworks in Van Nuys, CA. Those were the airplanes in which I cut my complex/high performance teeth. Believe it or not, I flew a 231 with a close friend (also a pilot), my wife, and his girlfriend (and our baggage) on a two week journey from California to a convention in Montreal. We stopped for fuel in Utah, Kansas, Wisconsin, and the upper Peninsula of Michigan. We took the south route back, through New York, Tennessee, Texas, and Arizona. It was an awesome trip and a highlight of my aviation career. I’m flying a Cessna 441 Conquest II now which flies much higher and faster for a much longer distance and I love the airplane but I’ll always have a huge soft spot in my heart for Mooneys. And, by the way, very nice video, well-done on the data collection!
Flew an M20E in 1971 out of Wenatchee, WA (Pangborn Field). Loved that plane!
I wish everyone who reviewed an airplane did these type of tests. Thank you for the video. Your performance results are nearly identical to my ‘67 200hp injected m20f. I have a single probe egt so I don’t try lop
At higher altitudes above about 8-9000ft, just lean out until the engine gets slightly rough and then enrichen. Any operation LOP to pk EGT to 125 ROP will not be possible to hurt the normally aspirated engine because you'll typically be less than 65-70% HP even at WOT & ram air door open. At typical stabilized cruise speed with typical CHT's, you really can't hurt the engine. If unsure, settle in cruise for an extra couple of minutes before doing the leaning.
In general, getting an engine analyzer is practically a necessity for safety reasons. You'll generally be able to see valve issues before the engine has serious catastrophic failure. At least, you can baby it for a precautionary landing.
I typically fly my 1966 M20E at a minimum of 10,500 ft. Best TAS goes down but the CAFE score keeps going up and starts flattening at about 14-15,000 ft.
At that point, I'm getting about 23 statute MPG with a fuel flow of about 7.1 gph (143 KTAS). For the E model with 48 gals usable, it increases the range so I don't have to stop or have more reserves.
Great video. Thanks for walking us through it and the tabulations. Really shows the economy of the Mooney.
Awesome video on non-turbocharged piston engine management. I love the M20 too. Best looking GA airplane ever.
What a nice and informative video. I get almost identical numbers in my 1966 E model with almost all the 201 mods. Have owned the plane for 30 years and with the price of fuel these days it’s almost unbeatable for a 4 place plane. It’s a keeper. Thank you. Well done!
I love the M20E. I had a 64 and a 66. One with the 201 windshield. Both with the Lasar cowl enclosure. Misc. fairings, etc. Wish I had the 201 cowl but didn’t. Keeping an eye on the Vne is important. They loved flying 8k to 10k. I also got a little over an inch of manifold pressure when I opened the ram air door. It has a lot more impact than 201 ram air door due to the more efficient induction system on the 201. You have a beauty! Makes me miss them. thanks for posting.
The biggest mods I did to my E model in importance was #1 Generator to alternator. I got stuck a couple times with a dead battery after night operations. #2 JPI engine monitor. #3 Cowling mod. I did Texas also and they did the alternator mod too. #4 Quartz landing light. LED wasn't a option at the time. But getting rid of the incandescent that burn out all the time was important. #5 Window mod. #6 Shark fin antennas.
5 and 6 really wasn't about performance but it did make it LOOK faster. 😁
Thanks for this. I have been considering an E or F model. This was great information.
Do you know a method to find a partner for an aircraft? It would be nice to have a Mooney ownership partners page.
@@brucecuratola6389 There is a Facebook page for people seeking partnerships.
Really great, informative, video. Makes me want to run a similar test on the airplanes I fly and find the "sweet spot". I love making data-driven decisions.
Thanks, Paul. I'm an engineer - using data to make decisions is how I operate. I know no other way. I find tests like these to be fun. The POH is great, but airplanes are hand built so they all behave a little differently (and they all age differently) so I like to do these tests. I'm glad you enjoyed it, and thanks for watching.
Awesome analogy using the breathing exercise. Thanks for the insightful tips, suggestions and passion shone towards the Mooney. It's one of my favorite aircraft, too.
I have a good friend in Sprindale AR with a Mooney. He simply loves it and has had it for over 20 years. He also says it's the scariest plane to land he has ever flown. He says it does not like the runway. He used to rent it out, but is had 3 hard landings that required airframe and landing gear work. So ne he is the only one who flies it. Said if it were not so fast and efficient he would sell it. I guess a true love hate relationship.
Great video by the way.
The Mooney wing doesn't want to stop flying & the gear is short. But if u can fly a Piper Archer or Cessna 172 it's not a hard transition compared to other complex planes. If your use to flying a short wing plane like a Cherokee you will probably have problems till u learn good airspeed control. I have installed precise flight speed brakes on them which should help double the rate of descent. But I think its better to plan descents early it saves fuel & good airspeed control on landing.
That’s absurd. I have a m20c very easy to land. I even go in out of grass strip part of the year. Just lean to manage airspeed.
Absurd? He has over 12,000 hours in the air. And has owned that plane for over 20 years. Ownes 3 other aircraft as well. He said exactly what the other commenter said. "It just keeps floating and tends to pourpus like a dolphin." He would say this all the time. And he LOVES that plane. I'm 100% sure he knows what he is talking about.
@@tireballastserviceofflorid7771 My dad, who also had thousands of hours in fighters and airliners, porpoised our Super 21 and had a prop strike, because he didn't respect how precise you need to be with speed control on approach in the Mooney. I believed the guy who checked us both out in the Mooney, and never had a problem...earned my private in that bird, and my commercial in a 201 at Flight Safety, where I convinced my instructor that HE (multi-thousand hours, flew C-130s, aerobatic, etc.) was carrying 5 too many knots down final...showed him that I could consistently touch down on the landing zone paint and make the turnoff, where he floated to the intersection from the same on-glideslope position over the threshold. I wish I could have afforded to buy the M20E when he and his partners sold it. The Mooney will teach you to be careful, and you'll find other airplanes, which are more tolerant of excess speed, also land better if you actually fly a stabilized approach right on speed.
Come in 5 knots too fast, and you'll have a hell of a time getting it to land. 10 knots will add a mile to runway required.
@@richsarchet9762 My point exactly. Great plane just not forgiving on landing. 5 knots in a C182 or C210 is nothing.
What an excellent video, well made, to the point, great screenshots, good flying skills and a perfect chart at the end. Well done and thanks for sharing friend.
Thanks for the kind words.
Definitely love Mooneys! I'm hoping they make a comeback. Fly well brother!
Great video, thanks for sharing. Very impressive numbers all round
At higher altitudes above about 8-9000ft, just lean out until the engine gets slightly rough and then enrichen. Any operation LOP to pk EGT to 125 ROP will not be possible to hurt the normally aspirated engine because you'll typically be less than 65-70% HP even at WOT & ram air door open. At typical stabilized cruise speed with typical CHT's, you really can't hurt the engine. If unsure, settle in cruise for an extra couple of minutes before doing the leaning.
In general, getting an engine analyzer is practically a necessity for safety reasons. You'll generally be able to see valve issues before the engine has serious catastrophic failure. At least, you can baby it for a precautionary landing.
I typically fly my 1966 M20E at a minimum of 10,500 ft. Best TAS goes down but the CAFE score keeps going up and starts flattening at about 14-15,000 ft.
At that point, I'm getting about 23 statute MPG with a fuel flow of about 7.1 gph (143 KTAS). For the E model with 48 gals usable, it increases the range so I don't have to stop or have more reserves.
for those wanting to have apples-apples comparison, convert the 7500ft altitude to a density altitude based on the temperature.
Humidity is a factor but it appeared to me a low humidity day (ie. few clouds).
I find that my best TAS is at about 8500ft MSL and about a 9500ft DA equivalent for moderate wingloading.
Another thing to increase best TAS is to have some aft weight. This makes the horizontal tailplane with minimal negative angle of attack giving less pitch stability.
As well, having the flaps set flush (ie. not extra downward camber) gives a bit of a better cruise TAS.
Also, (rudder, aileron) trim the airplane (so that it is most efficient at the higher altitude) for the typical IAS, for example 130KIAS.
If you want to get more accurate readings then in low winds aloft, do the 4 cardinal directions, preferably in alignment with the wind and throw out the crosswind affected directions.
Note that the best TAS is going to be dependent on the total weight of the aircraft. At lower wingloading, the angle of attack will be less so the best TAS will be higher (and at higher altitude).
Great job on the data! I just found your channel and subscribed. I am a student pilot with a 20 year mission plan. A Mooney fits the mission well! I’ll be looking for your myth busting videos. Thank you.
Great video!! Nice to see an aviation RUclipsr in my area!
I love that breathing analogy for engine efficiency vs throttle position. Never thought of it that way. The engineering perspective is very fun to hear. You're essentially talking about volumetric efficiency, right?
Yes, exactly. Volumetric efficiency. This is why people in the know fly WOTLOP. Wide open throttle, Lean of Peak.
With more than 65% power (WOT down at lower altitudes) it is possible to climb and cruise LOP as long as you can get sufficiently LOP. More power=the need to be more LOP.
The worst place to operate the engine (lowest detonation margin) is 50-75dF ROP. Of course, this is normally the “best power” mixture found in the performance charts.
You just gained a subscriber, loved this video!
Not a pilot here but I enjoy these types of videos. May get my flying instruction one of these days. I do drive Chevy Corvairs - so I was wondering up there at 6500-7500 feet - Ahh!! Just as I was typing you answered my question!! CHT of 326.. Not bad!!!
As a student that loves Mooneys, I really appreciate the look at the gauges and the performance test you've done here. Thanks!
Of course you love Mooneys, what's not to love!?! But seriously, thanks for watching.
As another student/Mooney shopper I agree.
This was very informative. Thanks!
Some M20 owners have removed the Ram Air because of trouble with it, including opening on it's own, or getting stuck.
Any videos to demonstrate the amount of room in the rear seat, say when your have the front seat in your normal flying position? Thanks. Great performance demonstration video
Do you sir have GAMI injector on the engine? Great vid, thanks for posting!
Good video good aircraft
Very, very nice. Subscribed!
Your damn smart great instruction!
always heard abour u guys, never flew a mooney, looked at a few, fkew alot of other stuff. deb,skylane and t arrow not as efficient but not bad. skylane hard to beat for the carry and io 470 engine❤so many airplanes so little time😢
Do you have Gami injectors or stock for LOP operations? Also Fine Wire plugs or Massive?
Amazing. Trying to save up for a medium body Mooney, but honestly, I would take any of them. They’re all awesome (well, except for the ones with that weird rear window cutout-not a fan).
E is one of the last short bodies. I am very happy with mine, seldom miss the extra rear seat legroom. As far as I’m concerned it’s as good as a J but without the premium pricing.
@@BruceM-o4h Nice. Yea, I got to go up and be at the controls of an E a few months ago. I liked it. The seating position was a little startling, but it’s something that I think I can adjust to.
Thanks for the video. Hard to find anything in running a Lycoming LOP. Sounds like you are having success with it.
Beautiful plane Nice vid
The early M20J models did have the ram air inlet it was a round inlet. I have a M20C with a 201 cowling done by Mooney Mod Squad. The inlet hole is there but not connected probably cause its a carburetor engine.
Thanks for letting me know. I flew an M20J and I knew someone with an M20E with the real 201 cowl and neither had the power boost door so I assumed they were all that way.
@@FrugalMooney You should do a buyer's guide on the features plus pros & cons.When I worked at a Mooney dealership in the 90's the newer M20J Mooney MSE models had eliminated the ram air. But those later years had better corrosion protection with primer on inner structure. Some 80's Mooney's had almost all the primer falling off the tubular structure & badly rusted tubes when u pulled interior panels. The older ones like yours have good paint coatings on the tubing. I have seen a primer with coat of grey enamel on older ones. Great video 👍
@@Nord3202 Thanks for the idea - I might do something on the various models.
I wanted an older model before the first bankruptcy and sale (before they started cutting corners to save money) - I've heard some stories about how things were cheapened after the sale to Republic.
@@FrugalMooney Also I like the older style fuel caps with the door & scupper drain. The 65 & up Mooney's had the more common flush fuel caps that water sits in the neck above the o ring & rust out the filler necks. But 65 to 66 where the fastest due to better quality control. The 64 was the last year for the crank up step. Then vacuum operated then finally just a fixed step. Also the older Mooney's had the smooth elevator & rudder instead of the beaded controls & larger rudder. Also the manual gear is a plus on the older models. Nice to make a video on all the changes over the years. I prefer the bullet proof 4 cylinder Lycoming engine Mooney's. After the J model it's all downhill especially with the Continental engine, alot more expensive to buy & maintain.
In the J they modified the intake, so the ram air barely had any effect, many older Js have had them removed to eliminate maintenance and clean up the cowling.
Whats the outer speed ring?? Mph? Seemed like it was marching your true spds. Inner ring is??
For those of us who live high humidity areas, we don’t get spec horsepower. Experiments show up to 10% reduction of horsepower because the water molecules take up space and displaces oxygen molecules. So less oxygen, the less fuel that you can burn. So if you want best performance, cold and dry is what you want.
Partial pressure of O2 is effectively reduced. Can effectively think of it as a higher density altitude.
The power boost gives some performance in lieu of a turbo, since the turbocharged Mooneys are much much more expensive.
Sounds quite counter intuitive that more efficient with thrortle fully open. Hadnt realised suction drag on pistob was a thing
Awesome video I would love to fly but I’m a big guy at 400 lbs and I don’t think I could fit in them training planes. Keep up the good videos
Great video. I'm getting similar speeds in my '62 C but I'm using 20-30% more fuel. I'm not sure I'll ever try lean of peak with a carb, that and I've dumped a lot of money into making it go fast and very little into engine monitoring. Probably not the wisest approach.
Who's to say what the best approach is? I don't know if you've ever read the articles by John Deakin on AvWeb (link to a summary: www.csobeech.com/lean-of-peak.html), but he talks a bit about LOP operation (and engine operation in general) on a carbureted engine. I'm not necessarily saying I endorse it (or don't endorse it- I don't have enough information), but if you're interested, have a look to see what he has to say. Edit: here's a better link (cospilot.com/documents/Mixture%20Magic.pdf) but you can look him up on Google.
@@FrugalMooney Those are very interesting articles. The pdf will take reading a few times to fully sink in. The moral seems to be that we can experiment quite safely above 9000 ft. I'm curious if that also applies to rpm, I've got the MT prop as of last month with no rpm restrictions. I'd like to try cruising at 2000 and leaning it out... Regardless, I'll work on applying that info.
@@HairHelmet Nothing scary or dangerous about operating LOP in carb engine as long as you have a proper understanding of the principles and limits. Modern engine scanner instruments make it easy and give confidence that engine is happy.
Is this Birdcage Hangers at Willow Run?
Awesome airplane.
Donizete Braganca pt SP ✈✈✈ Brasil
welp, thats better mileage than my SUV
Did yours have electric gear? I don't see a Johnson bar like I had. Oops, caught it in another of your vids.
Do elaborate on the difference in “valve geometry” please. I’ve never heard that before. There are certainly differences between the A1A and the engines installed on the 201 (the dual mag, counterweighted crankshaft, factory timing) but I’ve never heard that valve geometry was one of them.
A bit of a novel here (sorry). I've been searching for the reference where I may have read that but have had no luck so far. The hard drive died on my old computer so I lost some documents, so there's a decent possibility that I mis-remembered it (so it was probably a bit irresponsible for me to say that in the video purely based off of my memory). BUT, the power settings tables for the M20J vs the E and F models are considerably different (I do still have a copy of the power setting tables). For instance, at 24"/2400 RPM the E and F manuals list that as 74% of rated power, but the M20J POH lists that power setting as being 68.3% of rated power (I had to interpolate for that). A non-interpolated data point is for 55% power on the E and F is 18"/2400 RPM, but 55% power on the J is 20" / 2400 RPM. It's possible that it may have been the intake in the M20J installation was tuned to be slightly different than the E/F and my memory might just suck. Or it might be that the numbers are different because the dyno at Lycoming was changed and I'm just a fool. :)
@@FrugalMooney I think the bigger disparity has to do with inconsistency in POH’s from year to year. In terms of valve geometry I think you are confusing the angle valve 200 hp Lycomings with the parallel valve 180hp Lycomings. The early Lycomings did have smaller diameter valve stems but I doubt there are any of those still in service. There were also narrow deck crank cases in the 60s but they are rare these days as well.
Great video , thank you for posting. I am considering an M20, do you offer check outs?
Ya I used to own 6845u bought for 14k in1975 …today that would pay for an annual.Not to mention price for same airplane in 2023…Sad commentary on state of general aviation
Mooneys rule.
I don't get it. At 8:47 You say: „with a wide open throttle, at the same power setting, in terms of manifold pressure, you'll achieve more power. That means faster airspeed.“
With what would You set the maifold pressure, if not with the throttle?
Prop pitch
Are you based is Michigan!? I want to see a mooney in person!
Yes sir - Willow Run in Belleville.
Forgive my ignorance
Just starting to learn but why is your indicated airspeed frequently in the yellow zone? Is this not pushing the safety envelope?
Love the Mooney
Thank you in advance
A lot of high performance planes cruise in the yellow arc at a standard cruise power setting, which is never a problem in smooth air. Vno (start of yellow arc) and Vne (red line) were raised in later Mooneys after more analysis was done on the airframe (no change was made to the airframe - better analysis showed that it was stronger than previously thought).
How about performance at max gross?
@Frugal Mooney Subscribing after I saw N9156Z come down 100' from me.
Newbie here: is it normal to cruise in the yellow arc?
All Mooneys I have flown will be in the yellow arc at 75% power. This means you are exceding Vno (normal operating speed) for flight in rough air. When encountering rough air, throttle back below the yellow arc. Most Mooney pilots just climb above the rough air for comfort and speed.
My RV7 is faster. HA HA.... Thanks for the data. That is cool. I love the Mooney. The club I was a flight instructor at a few decades ago had a 201 and 231. I enjoyed getting to fly it. Never owned one but if I did own a certified plane a Mooney would be #1 on the list.
Experimentals can be pretty cool - that's for sure. If I didn't get a Mooney I would look into the experimental route. Thanks for checking in.
@@FrugalMooney Been a pilot for 36 yrs, ATP and CFI, built two RV's and has owned a few other planes (including a Piper Apache PA23-160). I love the RV performance (better than most SE retracts) and freedom to maintain it and modify it. The RV7 is only two seats. The RV10 would be my choice over a Mooney but RV10's have become very expensive. I am glad I built my RV7 before the crazy inflation of everything.
In my CFI days the flight school had 35 planes, including two Mooney's on lease back (201 and 231). I transitioned and checked out several pilots into the Mooney. We (insurance company) required an instrument rating and 25 hours retract gear time to rent our Mooney's.
RUclips was not around then. Videos like yours are helpful to pilots transitioning to the type for the first time. A used Mooney like yours is a great value. Looks like an older but very nice panel upgrade in your Mooney. The windscreen upgrade is nice. I think the lopresti speed mods cowl (if they make it for that model is $16k) would be a great upgrade, but I would leave it alone. Spend the money on fuel... and go fly. Nice plane. Thanks for sharing,
Uhhhh , isn't Mustang Aero at Troy???
What RPM are you running during those tests?
2400
The "D" ✌
You obviously fly Lean of Peak a lot, any considerations for maintenance with that approach to operating the IO360? I only ask because the POH only discusses ROP flying and not LOP.....thanks for the videos and any insight ...
BH: Maintenance is maintenance in a properly operated engine. LOP is safe and causes no damage to engine when done correctly. Dig into the books.
LOP generally reduces maintenance costs by running cooler cylinders.
Hey I drive Corvairs so a Mooney may be a good fit. (in response to your last words)... Too crampt, cant work on them, parts all the other no sense.
El precio de la avioneta por favor saludos
I bought the airplane 11 years ago so my purchase price may no longer be relevant, but here's a website with listings for the same model: www.controller.com/listings/search?Category=6&ModelGroup=M20E&Manufacturer=MOONEY&ScopeCategoryIDs=13
Do you have all this information on a transcript. Very interesting. I just got a 1964 M20E and have not gotten the performance published numbers yet. This info will get me there.
Near the end of the video I showed a table of the test points with the power settings and the speeds. I hope that helps.
that 8/…150 is very appealing. nice paint scheme. is this a wood main spar?
The M20A was the last model with wood in it - I believe that was discontinued in 1960.
I fly an archer out of PTK and an arrow from Romeo. I’m very interested in the Mooney. Any chance i could go for a a ride sometime?
If you have two stout bodied gentlemen could they sit up front without having to overlap shoulders? Been looking at Mooneys but I'm not sure about the fit.
you should be getting 9gph, not 17.9mpg if you are only traveling 17 miles per gallon that suck if you are going 146 mph
Such kool planes but a pita to land I hear. They sit to low to the ground for my liking. I'd be worried about the prop.
Your total wrong on throttle position. Carb lab Tec Chrysler proving grounds.
you don't know jack squat about engines... i can tell...LOL