banner
banner

17 Jun 2025, 12:48 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Garmin International (Banner)



Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 18:51 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/22/07
Posts: 14334
Post Likes: +16304
Company: Midwest Chemtrails, LLC
Location: KPTK (SE Michigan)
Aircraft: C205
What is your mission?

Distance?
How much weight in the cabin?

Remember; the easiest way to improve your block:block speed ... is being able to skip a fuel stop.

_________________
Holoholo …


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 19:12 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/07/08
Posts: 3975
Post Likes: +3744
Location: Columbus, OH (4I3)
Aircraft: 1957 Twin Bonanza
I remember reading this article in Flying in the late 80's. Maybe it'll help in your decision making.

https://books.google.com/books?id=9S6jt ... 52&f=false

_________________
Chris White
Ex-Twin Bonanza
N261B
N695PV
N9616Y


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 20:23 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/03/08
Posts: 16153
Post Likes: +8869
Location: 2W5
Aircraft: A36
The correct answer to that binary question is : A36


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 21:20 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 08/30/13
Posts: 417
Post Likes: +71
Company: Cruce Aircraft Services
Location: KPGD
Aircraft: Learjet 55, C-310
Need TKS already installed. A36 is out of my price range. Is the mooneys useful load of 900 pounds seems low. After filling the tanks you're talking about 460lbs for adults and luggage? My wife wieghts 90 pounds which helps lol.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 21:25 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12806
Post Likes: +5255
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
900lbs is good for a 200hp plane. If you need to lift more you will need a bigger engine.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 21:26 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 08/30/13
Posts: 417
Post Likes: +71
Company: Cruce Aircraft Services
Location: KPGD
Aircraft: Learjet 55, C-310
What kind of TAS can you plan on in the non turbo 210L/M?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 21:34 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/09/11
Posts: 652
Post Likes: +102
Company: Aero Teknic Inc.
Location: CYHU / Montreal St-Hubert
Aircraft: MU-2B-60, SR22,C182Q
Username Protected wrote:
What kind of TAS can you plan on in the non turbo 210L/M?


I have seen up to 175 KTAS when alone and light in a C210N at 7,500 feet. The 210L/M should be basically the same. It's more realistic to plan for 165 KTAS.

-Pascal

_________________
http://www.wi-flight.net/


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 22:15 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 08/30/13
Posts: 417
Post Likes: +71
Company: Cruce Aircraft Services
Location: KPGD
Aircraft: Learjet 55, C-310
Is youre the 285HP or 300?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 22:24 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/09/11
Posts: 652
Post Likes: +102
Company: Aero Teknic Inc.
Location: CYHU / Montreal St-Hubert
Aircraft: MU-2B-60, SR22,C182Q
Username Protected wrote:
Is youre the 285HP or 300?


I don't think it matters. The fastest speeds for a normally aspirated Cessna 210 are attained at altitudes where you are getting perhaps 22 inches of manifold pressure and likely running at 2500 RPM. The 300 HP engines I believe have a 5 minute limitation for running at maximum RPM, the reduced, continuous RPM maximum RPM gives you 285 HP.

Note I have less than 35 hours of experience on normally aspirated 210s versus about 1,000 hours in P210s (various P210Ns and the P210R).

-Pascal

_________________
http://www.wi-flight.net/


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 22:26 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/16/11
Posts: 11068
Post Likes: +7095
Location: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Aircraft: PC12NG, G3Tat
Username Protected wrote:
900lbs is good for a 200hp plane. If you need to lift more you will need a bigger engine.


and mo money ;)

_________________
---Rusty Shoe Keeper---


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 22:39 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 06/02/13
Posts: 1806
Post Likes: +540
Aircraft: 1976 V35B
I was seriously considering a M252 Last year, until I learned that the Useful load with full fuel was in the neighborhood of 350-400lbs :eek:

190kt cruise was sure tantalizing though. Would just have to mail my children ahead of time. :D


MJ


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 22:44 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/16/11
Posts: 11068
Post Likes: +7095
Location: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Aircraft: PC12NG, G3Tat
Username Protected wrote:
I was seriously considering a M252 Last year, until I learned that the Useful load with full fuel was in the neighborhood of 350-400lbs :eek:

MJ


that's kinda misleading though...

My 201 has 100 usable or about 1800 mile range. 60 gallons get's me in the 1100 mile range.

That being said, an A36 is a much larger interior plane with more people options.

_________________
---Rusty Shoe Keeper---


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 22:44 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 09/03/10
Posts: 273
Post Likes: +45
Location: KFCM
Aircraft: A36
Username Protected wrote:
900lbs is good for a 200hp plane. If you need to lift more you will need a bigger engine.


Charles, Not that 10hp is a big deal but the M20K carries a TSIO-360-GB or LB is a 210 HP engine (6cly). The M20Js are IO 360 NA engines. And I agree that the Mooney have decent payload for their HP. They also have excellent range, baggage for 4, not so much.

To the original question and comments, Its fun the hear real world numbers on aircraft but like many comments stated...mission, and budget are the main drivers. This was positioned as "vs" question and the 210 and 20K have different strengths.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 22:52 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 07/13/11
Posts: 2755
Post Likes: +2186
Company: Aeronautical People Shuffler
Location: Picayune, MS (KHSA)
Aircraft: KA350/E55/DA-62
I think an old ovation would compare a little better than a 231/252. The airplane decision is up to your needs. The mooney interior space is not bad. It's not the roomiest feeling but it's because of how you sit and where the panel is. When I sit in a mooney I like that I don't have to lean forward to reach anything on the panel. I personally think the mooney is a better airplame Thant the 210. But hauling four 200 lb guys a 210 would be better..


P.S. Why not a nice A36?

_________________
The sound of a second engine still running after the first engine fails is why I like having two.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna 210L/M vs Mooney 231/252 M20K
PostPosted: 12 May 2015, 22:55 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 06/02/13
Posts: 1806
Post Likes: +540
Aircraft: 1976 V35B
Username Protected wrote:
I was seriously considering a M252 Last year, until I learned that the Useful load with full fuel was in the neighborhood of 350-400lbs :eek:

MJ


that's kinda misleading though...

My 201 has 100 usable or about 1800 mile range. 60 gallons get's me in the 1100 mile range.

That being said, an A36 is a much larger interior plane with more people options.


Michael,

I'm serious. For the 252 I was looking at out in Washington state with TKS. These were the numbers. I ran them over and over. I really liked everything about this plane. I was ready to to fly out and make an offer, until a friend pointed out the obvious. I couldn't carry my family without dumping fuel. I crunched the numbers.

All the best,

Mark

Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next



PWI, Inc. (Banner)

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025

.dbm.jpg.
.rnp.85x50.png.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.Elite-85x50.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.b-kool-85x50.png.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.Latitude.jpg.
.performanceaero-85x50.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.aerox_85x100.png.
.puremedical-85x200.jpg.
.ocraviation-85x50.png.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.KingAirMaint85_50.png.
.midwest2.jpg.
.mcfarlane-85x50.png.
.holymicro-85x50.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.