Kestrel452
New Member
Thanks, but at this point its really a race between the Arrow and M20J.
Decisions, decisions... Which plane should I get???
- Thread starter Kestrel452
- Start date
Thanks, but at this point its really a race between the Arrow and M20J.
Bandit_Driver
Gold Member
I personally like the Mooney. I am not sure about the J as all my time is in the R model. I found the R to be conformatable and obvioiusly faster than the Pipers. The Mooney is also built quite well. I have some time in Pipers and just didn't care for them personally.
Baronman
Well-Known Member
I like the Dakota. I've never flown one but the Arrow is really nothing special. If you can go faster in a Dakota and get away from the costs and hastle of retractable gear, all the better.
The Dakota just seems like the best, simplest workhorse of the bunch. I'd say the same thing if you threw a 182 in the mix.
1- Dakota
2- Mooney
3- Arrow
The Dakota just seems like the best, simplest workhorse of the bunch. I'd say the same thing if you threw a 182 in the mix.
1- Dakota
2- Mooney
3- Arrow
anthenry
Well-Known Member
Dakota for me. I feel the Arrow would be out of the question in the 3. Dakota has only one draw back and that is fuel consumption, which can be curved. The cost of ownership, ie. mx, annual, ad's, insurance, and so on is far less. The speed is excellent for those long trips. It is also stable and reliable. The Mooney is an amazing aircraft, but I don't think the benifits outway the costs.
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
Kestrel,
Couple questions here...
1) Are you the one ponying up the money for the airplane, or is it a partnership considering this?
2) Insurance on a retractable is going to be MUCH higher than on a fixed-gear airplane.
Have you gotten insurance quotes on all these makes/models? Because that might make the decision for you.
Couple questions here...
1) Are you the one ponying up the money for the airplane, or is it a partnership considering this?
2) Insurance on a retractable is going to be MUCH higher than on a fixed-gear airplane.
Have you gotten insurance quotes on all these makes/models? Because that might make the decision for you.
LatitudeDancer
Well-Known Member
Why's that? I'm not familiar and know a guy with a Dakota. Just curious.
Here's a good article with the Skylanes vs the Dakota.
http://www.airbum.com/articles/ArticleSkylaneDakota.html
The 182QII's seem to be pretty nice on paper. Esp with this engine conversion (http://www.pponk.com/) it would be good Dakota competition. Not too familiar with the 470...Is it another engine that is to be afraid of? I think I heard they crack easily...could be thinking of something else
milleR
Well-Known Member
My vote is for the Mooney. I've never flown a J model but I have some time in the E and the K. The M20E would do 155 true on 10gph. Combined with mechanical gear and flaps it was an affordable, easy mx plane that would literally fly circles over and around a Piper. Mooney's also have a much higher "cool" factor imo. Nobody really says "sweet, it's a Piper" with any kind of enthusiasm.
dasleben
That's just, like, your opinion, man
Mooneys are nice (I have some time in them), but if your mission involves short hops with lots of load, I think the Dakota is going to be your best choice. I don't have the useful load numbers handy, but I will say that the Mooney is small on the inside. You sit like you're sitting in a race car; it's fun as hell, but you're going to be hard pressed to put 4 people comfortably in the thing.
jtrain,
Why the issue with the TIO-540? I don't have any time with one, but I've got a pretty decent amount of experience with TCM TSIO-520s and I love 'em. They're absolute tanks.
jtrain,
Why the issue with the TIO-540? I don't have any time with one, but I've got a pretty decent amount of experience with TCM TSIO-520s and I love 'em. They're absolute tanks.
Kestrel452
New Member
Nah, my dad is the one buying it. He just wants me to get people's opinions on which one to get. He is really leaning towards the Mooney since it's so fuel efficient and goes 40 knots faster than the arrow while burning less gas. Personally, I hope he gets the Mooney because I think it would be the most fun to fly.
milleR
Well-Known Member
This is true. The Mooney is a 2 person with stuff or 3 people without kind of plane. When they stretched the airframe it gave more legroom for the back seat but it's the narrowness that really limits comfort. I spent 30 hours giving dual in the E model with a guy my size (5'10" 185 lbs) and it was ok. One day I took my dad for a ride (6'2" 245 lbs) and it was a tight fit up front.
Joe Gremlin
Well-Known Member
And thus, the myth lives on... Get actual quotes from several companies and then decide. When I flew my first retract, it was a Mooney. I had less than 150TT and no IR. The premium for myself and another pilot with similar hours was $1800. At that time insurance on a 172 would have been around $1500 for the two of us. And after we both had 100 hours in type, the insurance dropped a couple hundred dollars. But we probably should have listened to everyone on the internet who said not to buy a retract because the insurance is so much higher. Sigh.
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
Man, I hear what you're saying about internet apocrypha but that was information that came from the insurance guy in the AOPA magazine. Maybe he's got some axe to grind, I dunno.
Joe Gremlin
Well-Known Member
Kestral, you do realize that the plane you should get is the one you like the best which you find the best deal on and which is best suited to YOUR mission. IOW, which one I'd buy is meaningless to you because I'm not you and my mission is not your mission.
I'm all for gathering opinions on which model might be worthwhile to avoid from a mx standpoint or nasty flight characteristics standpoint or something like that. But in those respects, all three of your choices are going to be in same ballpark. The Dekota will haul more, go slower and burn more gas doing it. It'll also cost more to overhaul due to the extra jugs. The Arrow will haul less than the Dekota, will go about the same speed on less fuel and the engine will cost less to OH. The Mooney will carry about what the Arrow does in a slightly narrower/tighter cabin and go a lot faster on the same fuel burn.
The gear systems on both the retracts are relatively trouble free and easy to maintain. Along with the cabin being tighter on the Mooney, everything else is tighter as well. Its got one of the tightest engine compartments I ever had to contort my fingers into. That's not a huge deal, its just something else to be aware of. Mooneys also have wet wings which need attention every 20 years or so. If the tanks haven't been completely stripped and resealed in 20 years, plan that job into your budget ($8k+/-).
Which one would I choose? None of them probably. I got to fly a Mooney quite a bit in my younger days and I really enjoyed the plane. But these days something like an older C180 is probably more suited to my mission. But like said, the only time you should give a lot of weight to what plane the jackass' on the internet tell you to buy is when the jackass' on the internet are going to be the ones paying for it and flying it.
I'm all for gathering opinions on which model might be worthwhile to avoid from a mx standpoint or nasty flight characteristics standpoint or something like that. But in those respects, all three of your choices are going to be in same ballpark. The Dekota will haul more, go slower and burn more gas doing it. It'll also cost more to overhaul due to the extra jugs. The Arrow will haul less than the Dekota, will go about the same speed on less fuel and the engine will cost less to OH. The Mooney will carry about what the Arrow does in a slightly narrower/tighter cabin and go a lot faster on the same fuel burn.
The gear systems on both the retracts are relatively trouble free and easy to maintain. Along with the cabin being tighter on the Mooney, everything else is tighter as well. Its got one of the tightest engine compartments I ever had to contort my fingers into. That's not a huge deal, its just something else to be aware of. Mooneys also have wet wings which need attention every 20 years or so. If the tanks haven't been completely stripped and resealed in 20 years, plan that job into your budget ($8k+/-).
Which one would I choose? None of them probably. I got to fly a Mooney quite a bit in my younger days and I really enjoyed the plane. But these days something like an older C180 is probably more suited to my mission. But like said, the only time you should give a lot of weight to what plane the jackass' on the internet tell you to buy is when the jackass' on the internet are going to be the ones paying for it and flying it.
Joe Gremlin
Well-Known Member
Well there is something to myth, but its still a myth none the less. In the Mooney situation I mentioned, I was a non-equity partner in the deal. The Mooney was an 68' with hull value of around $60k. We had no problem getting insurance and the premiums were not significantly higher than they would have been for a fixed gear single of similar hull value. But at one point a freind of my partner wanted to put him on the insurance for his own Mooney. That Mooney was a '97 Ovation. With around 250 hours (over 100 in Mooney) and no instrument rating, the insurance company laughed at him. If he had gotten an instrument rating, they'd would have put him on the policy and the premiums would have increased by $5k.
They wanted to see high times for that airframe. So there really are cases where the premiums are significantly higher for a given set of circumstances on a retract. But based on what I've seen, I'd say its much more complicated than simply saying that retracts cost a lot more. In the example I gave, I suspect the high premium had much more to do with age, hull value and speed of the airframe than simply because it was a retract.
Retracts tend to be more expensive to insure. But not always signifcantly so. Especially after you get 100 hours in type. And while you have to swing the gear at annual and maintain the system over time, you also go faster than a comparable fixed gear model which equates to lower fuel burn per trip and lower airframe hours per year for a given set of trips. This in turn can be considered an offset in the increased costs vs a fixed gear plane over the long haul. Indeed I know of several owners who have been flying retracts for years and they feel the retract is actually cheaper to own over the long haul when you calculate in the fuel savings and lower accumulation of airframe hours over a given set of trips. The bottome line like I said is to get quotes from every insurance company you can find, and then decide for yourself.
Douglas
Old School KSUX
Is part or majority of the mission time building?
----
On a side note, I disliked the Dakota, compared to the C-182rg. It handles just like any other PA-28, stable with mondo skin friction.
For the size of the engine, you just want to get out and push. She feels like a million bucks when you put the power on for take-off...then you level out to find disappointment.
If it had to be out of those three, it would be the Mooney. I have more room in the Mooney than the Bonanza. 6'5 190.
----
On a side note, I disliked the Dakota, compared to the C-182rg. It handles just like any other PA-28, stable with mondo skin friction.
For the size of the engine, you just want to get out and push. She feels like a million bucks when you put the power on for take-off...then you level out to find disappointment.
If it had to be out of those three, it would be the Mooney. I have more room in the Mooney than the Bonanza. 6'5 190.
