Mooney Acclaim vs. Columbia 350/400 (which has fixed landing gear??)

"Justin Gombos" wrote in message
news:HNFbi.8949$Ar5.5244@trndny01...
Doesn't it bother you Columbia fanatics that the manufacturer designed
the landing gear to be fixed?


Not at all.

Here's a pricey high-end aircraft where
most of the design decisions favored speed and range, then they
compromised the aerodynamics of it by using fixed landing gear.

Retractable gear would have added over 120 lbs to the weight and gained
about 3 knots.


Columbia is claiming their 400 model is the fastest single engine prop
aircraft on the planet (max cruise speed of 235 kts on their
comparison chart), though it's surprising that they can claim that
title with fixed landing gear.

Super-clean design, high aspect ratio wing...

That number is probably worthless
since the manual spec'd the never exceed speed to be 230 kias.

INDICATED Air Speed, not TAS (you do know the difference, don't you?

Mooney is also claiming to have the fastest single engine - in their
Acclaim which allegedly has a normal cruise speed of 237 kts (at
FL250), yet Columbia is claiming that the same model has a max cruise
of 220 kts. The Columbia has 40 HP more, but I'm inclined to think
that some of that extra horsepower is being wasted on the drag of the
landing gear.

Not to mention the much bigger/wider cabin.


Mooney didn't publish their manual, so a realistic comparison on the
performance is difficult. It's not real useful to compare marketing
spin to marketing spin, or even the Columbia manual to Mooney's
marketing spin.

How about cost of insurance?

Does anyone have a better idea of the performance and
efficiency differences?

I can verify the C400 numbers, at least to 21,000 feet. As for the Mooney,
it achieves it's performance (a review by FLYING, verified them both at
235kts. IIRC, the Mooney would be running hotter to do it.).

BTW, is the Columbia they only single engine prop that has a side
stick?

Nope, Cirrus.
--
Matt Barrow
Performace Homes, LLC.
Cheyenne, WY