Thanks Mooney Driver. Unfortunately I think Great Oakley is a bit rough for a Mooney. I have flown a ’78 M20C Ranger and I recall the prop clearance is inches. I could move to a paved strip but it would make 15 min drive house-to-airplane become a 1:20 drive.
Thanks for everyone’s input. 
As I stated in my original post, I’m not upgrading until next year. I just wanted to start thinking about it.
I think the following would suit my circumstances based on your recommendations and input:
TB20
Arrow III/IV
C182
C210
Commander 114
…now whether or not I can find a nice example in my budget range is another conundrum!!! 
All you ever wanted to know about Mooneys in one post .
I also thought about the AA5B. I did quite a lot of research, as we considered buying one in England before we fell for the ST10. However, I don’t think it is a particularly good IFR aircraft due to its limited climb performance, the very sensitive controls and the often very simple avionics.
That doesn’t mean I don’t like the Grummans. For VFR touring, they may well give the best bang for the buck.
There are actually quite a number of planes which will do this job, in the current description and accepting the compromises.
The main issue will be finding something in the budget and then going up the learning curve on maintenance. Ownership is a steep learning curve but a rather satisfying one especially if you are N-reg.
Jason,
understood. I don’t know the runway conditions there. My maintenance base is bloody awful but that is where that plane had been stationed for 30+ years. So far i said to myself if it can stand that runway, it can stand any runway… Especcially after I looked at this…
and
I reckon the TB20 might be the best bet, otherwise the Arrow doesn’t look to bad either, particularly the III.
blueline,
You prompted me :) Anyway, was as good a reason as any to research the M20K a bit better. Never really interested me because it’s turbo and out of my reach (at the time, not anymore, but I still can do without the Turbo). My database is growing, so maybe one day I might turn it into a book…
I have looked at the AA5 series quite a bit, thanks to a German mag which runs two Cheetahs. Somehow I think the Grummans were a predecessor to the Cirrus, fixed gear, fixed prop and still quite good speeds. They do run their Cheetahs IFR. But I fully agree, if there ever was a type which needs an autopilot it is the AA5.
Peter, I agree, it is a steep learning curve. However, it is not a bad thing if some of this happens during evaluation. Often enough, you find that you end up going into a direction you never would have thought possible, all things considered.
As an owner, I would put emphasis on quite some different things than I would as a renter or simply looking at what I like to look at. I love a variety of planes which would ruin me hands down, despite the fact that I could buy them. For me, with a limited budget and a life outside of flying, a plane has to be efficient, not a hangar queen (heavy on maintenance, have expensive recurring items) and serve my purpose. In my case, I had to compromise on range but got more than I actually aimed for in terms of speed and utility.
If I’ve learnt something on this trip it was, never say never. Things may turn out very different for good reasons and for the best.
The main issue will be finding something in the budget and then going up the learning curve on maintenance. Ownership is a steep learning curve but a rather satisfying one especially if you are N-reg.
Especially based on the available stock here in the UK. It’s a bi-modal distribution either: (1) completely ragged out, or (2) completely ragged out with a Garmin 430. LOL
Funny enough, it appears to apply to boats as well. I recently went with a mate of mine to look at sailboats for sale and almost every one of them was poorly cared for. Why!?
You could look into the classic european aircraft: Wassmer Super IV (http://planecheck.com/index.asp?ent=da&id=25071&cor=y). or the Robin HR 100 might do the trick: http://planecheck.com/index.asp?ent=da&id=25071&cor=y
And I disagree with Silvaire about wooden Aircraft. Most resentiments against wood are not substantiated on a technological basis. Especially the Vikings are very under-appreciated (budgetwise) and are said to be quite capable aircraft.
You could look into the classic european aircraft
As somebody who owns a French aircraft of which only 55 were built, with approximately 15 remaining and the manufacturer declining any support, I would be very careful with such suggestions.
Such a plane can be very rewarding, but only when you consider maintaining the aircraft, searching for parts on your own, persuading your mechanic to try this or that, contacting the other owners etc. part of the “fun”.
If you want to fly with as little disturbances as possible, stay away from these exotics.
That’s what I learned in three and half years with our ST-10 (which, despite or because of all that, I dearly love).
Funny enough, it appears to apply to boats as well. I recently went with a mate of mine to look at sailboats for sale and almost every one of them was poorly cared for. Why!?
Mentality. In the UK things are run until they fall apart. Then being rebuilt from scratch. Just look at the infrastructure of the country.
As somebody who owns a French aircraft of which only 55 were built, with approximately 15 remaining and the manufacturer declining any support, I would be very careful with such suggestions.
Hmm I think I keep forgetting the impact of an exotic plane, if you don’t maintain it yourself. But with the Robin HR100 I see not that big problems, since Robin tended to use many automotive parts and there is a good network of Robin operators. But again, this requires getting (being) very involved in maintenance. And since power plant, avionics and Prop is essentially american…
No comparison to Cessna or Piper, though. But more bang for the buck.
