# Mooney M20J vs Piper PA-28R-200 Arrow

Page: https://www.aerscheduler.com/aircraft/compare/mooney-m20j-vs-piper-pa-28r-200
Guides: https://www.aerscheduler.com/aircraft/mooney-m20j, https://www.aerscheduler.com/aircraft/piper-pa-28r-200

## Where they differ

- The Mooney M20J fleet is younger: half of those registered were built by 1980, against 1973 for the Piper PA-28R-200.
- The Piper PA-28R-200 carries more airframe ADs with a repeat action, 3 against 2: inspections that come back for as long as the AD applies.
- Mechanics report the Mooney M20J's reciprocating engine cylinder section most, and the Piper PA-28R-200's wing spar.

## Side by side

| | Mooney M20J | Piper PA-28R-200 Arrow |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Registered in the US | 1,398 | 1,205 |
| Built | 1976 to 1998 | 1969 to 1976 |
| Half built by | 1980 | 1973 |
| Seats | 4 | 4 |
| Most common engine | Lycoming IO-360 | Lycoming IO-360 |
| Typical cruise fuel burn | 9.5 gal/hr | Not set |
| Engine overhaul interval | Not set | Not set |
| Current airframe ADs | 18 | 36 |
| Airframe ADs with a repeat action | 2 | 3 |
| Current ADs on the main engine | 29 | 29 |
| Service Difficulty Reports | 13 (9.3 per 1,000) | 19 (15.8 per 1,000) |
| Most-reported system | Reciprocating Engine Cylinder Section | Wing Spar |
| Accidents since 2008 | 96 (68.7 per 1,000) | 72 (59.8 per 1,000) |
| Fatal accidents since 2008 | 32 | 16 |
| Most common accident | Loss of engine power (total) | Loss of engine power (total) |

Report and accident counts are not rates: the hours each model flies are not published. Sources: the FAA aircraft registry, Airworthiness Directives and Service Difficulty Reports, and the NTSB aviation accident database.