By now all contract holder must have seen Cirrus offer covering upgrade from SR20 to SR22. I am a little upset about new CPI accurual if I upgrade to SR22. What do other contract holder think? I would be completly happy and content with SR20B with dual alternators. Given poor history of SR 20 deliveris to customers I am concerned that my #762 contract may be fullfiled sometime in 2004. At the same time Cirrus offer of extra $70K and CPI would set my delivery date for December 2002 with extra 20KTAS and 90lb of utility load,
and 17 gal/h fuel burn. Marginal gain in performance IMHO.
But don’t forget the extra miles when you only consider 90 pounds gain and of course the awesome climb (1400 ft/min) and short field take-off performance !
CPI is a big matter for me also. But the new Cirrus prices are fair considering the starting price + cpi = current price + better plane totals more money spend
As stated earlier planes has to be compared as IFR plane range = 4 people + fuel + 45min. Not full fuel range
Jaap
Marginal gain in performance IMHO<<
There’s a genuine question about whether the SR22 is a significant gain in value. It is a lot more money.
There is no question about whether it’s a significant gain in performance. Its climb performance is dramatically better than the SR20. The difference in cruise speed is more like 25-30kts. As countless posts have pointed out, the SR20s (incluidng mine) don’t really reach their book speed; the SR22s are over their book speed.
So, whether the planes are worth the difference is a question for each person. But there is a difference, and it’s not marginal.
As a -22 driver, I can reiterate Jim Fallows comments. Also, many are running their engines lean of peak and achieving substantial improvements in fuel economy for a modest loss of cruise speed. So, you do have the flexibility to get better mileage OR high performance. My partner and I are not running LOP right now because we want to get the ARNAV engine monitoring first. Finally, the climb rate just can’t be over emphasized. You can get the published rate or better at full gross. I hardly ever fly at full gross and can climb at 1500 FPM or better at 100kts all the time. I recently took off from Nashville, TN about 350 under gross on a 20 degree day and the VSI was pegged at 2000 FPM at 95-100kts until I lowered the nose around 4000’. When the tower handed me off to departure, I was already going through 3500’ and the first thing they asked was for me to verify my altitude. I replied “…going through 3600’, no 3800’, no 4000’”. ATC got a chuckle. The point I am making is, if you ever get used to that kind of performance, there is no turning back. On that same flight, I cruised to Columbia, SC at 11,500’ to get what turned out to be an 80-90 knot tailwind. GPS groundspeed was frequently 260 kts. The radio exchange with Columbia approach when I was approaching at over 300 mph is another story.
FWIW,
Greg
When Cirrus came out with the first offer to upgrade to the 22, I declined since I couldn’t justify the extra 86K bucks for only 20 kts and what I thought would be an almost doubling of the fuel burn.
After moving from CT (238’) to AZ (5000’), renting an Archer with 20 more HP and seeing how much the takeoff performance suffered because of the altitude, my wife twisted my arm again and we upgraded to the SR22.
Recently I was in MN for a 2-week business trip. Over the weekend I hooked up with a local (Thanks again John!) who took me up is his SR22. Although I have flown in other 22s, I’m still impressed with the take off performance. (Like a rocket!)
What was more impressive was when we landed back at his home base and filled up. After 6 take offs (lots of fuel burn!) and landings and 3.2 hours of flight time, the fuel used was 36.8 gallons. That’s 11.5 gallons/hr.
If you can afford it, take the 22!
Take care,
Walt N224AZ
The CPI on your SR20 will stop at your scheduled delivery date as specified on your contract if you do not convert.
Cirrus confirmed to me that my SR20 now due in 12/02 had the CPI clock stopped last Oct (01). If I convert to a 22 the CPI will calculate on the 20 price from contract date through 10/01 and on the 22 price from conversion date until delivery with no CPI adjustment for the period of 10/01 to 5/02. Keeping your 20 contract should not change your CPI adjustment even if your delivery does get pushed back some.
Greg,
Can you comment on your ROP fuel ?
As fuel/ avgas is about 4 times more expensive in Europe, it makes a big difference in my decision of going for the '22.
And anyone already calculated return on investment (LOP flying) on a JPI EDM 800 or the Avidyne engine monitoring ?
Jaap
Jaap,
Fuel burns seem to be pretty close to book numbers. However, since we do not have the ARNAV engine monitoring installed yet, the only way to calculate with any degree of accuracy is to divide it out at the pump when I top off, and the taxi, climb, descent, taxi phases of the flight pollute the calculations a bit. Naturally, the POH gives you ‘standard’ numbers for taxi, runup, climb, & cruise, but it does not give you anything to use for the descent. This is significant because it can be a substantial portion of your flight if you are trying to ease your passengers down comfortably at 500 fpm or less. When I use the factory fuel flow guage and look up the numbers on the ARNAV, it appears to be just about right on the correct flow rates. Generally, it stays around 16-17 gph at 9-11,000’ altitudes, but you can throttle way back to 8-10 gph for 110-120 kts. approach & holding procedures. Others with the ARNAV engine monitoring package may have more accurate numbers for you since they have use of a digital transducer for fuel flow.
Greg
Japp, I almost always cruise 50 LOP and burn about 12.5 GPH at a TAS of about 165 (the numbers will vary somewhat with altitude and temperature). If I set up 75 ROP I will get a TAS in the 175-180 range and fuel burns in the vicinity of 17 GPH. You can do the math but on a typical (for me that means 500 NM) trip I use about 40 gallons LOP and about 50 gallons ROP including climb, cruise and descent.
Once the engine is broken in LOP is really the way to go, in my opinion anyway.
My impression from our SR20 is that LOP operation is not possible at all on the 20. As soon as you go LOP the engine doesn’t run very smooth anymore. Flying the SR22 recently I was very impressed by its LOP performance, even without an engine monitor. It seems like it’s possible to fly a 22 on the same amount of fuel as a 20 for a particular flight: climb takes far less time, in cruise you burn one gallon more, but you are 15 knots faster so the flight is shorter, too.
Phil N199CD
In reply to:
My impression from our SR20 is that LOP operation is not possible at all on the 20. As soon as you go LOP the engine doesn’t run very smooth anymore.
Phil,
I’ve run my SR20 LOP for about 400 very smooth hours. Possibly your engine has less even fuel distribution?
Mike.
In reply to:
It seems like it’s possible to fly a 22 on the same amount of fuel as a 20 for a particular flight: climb takes far less time, in cruise you burn one gallon more, but you are 15 knots faster so the flight is shorter, too.
Phil, that’s pretty accurate. I have no problem maintaining 165 -170 KTAS on 12.5 - 13.0 GPH at altitude. Since the spec for the '20 is 160 KTAS at 11.2 GPH and from what I’ve read, most fall a little short on speed, I think you are tight on the money. (I can’t say what the SR20’s best power/ROP fuel flow is at 75%.)
Marty
My impression from our SR20 is that LOP operation is not possible at all on the 20.
That is one area I can’t fault the SR20. I almost always run LOP at 25" (or 2500 at higher altitudes). I get book values for fuel (9 to 9.5) and speeds in the 140 to 150 range (unless it is raining). When I run ROP there is so little improvement that even though I pay for the plane wet, I can’t justify the extra 2 GPH.
Yeah, it seems so. Indeed, the speed decrease running LOP really is marginal so that wouldn’t justify ROP. But the engine sounds better at ROP so that’s usually the way to go for me. It’s a pity though, remember fuel is 5.50$ per gallon in Germany…
Phil N199CD
Marty, when I run my SR20 LOP it burns about 9 GPH and goes about 4 knots slower than ROP, which puts it at about 150 knots plus or minus.
My conclusion would be that the SR22 has wonderful climb, payload, and speed, all of which I envy. However, I think the SR20 does win the prize on fuel efficiency (MPG), apples to apples.
Andy
In reply to:
Yeah, it seems so. Indeed, the speed decrease running LOP really is marginal so that wouldn’t justify ROP. But the engine sounds better at ROP so that’s usually the way to go for me. It’s a pity though, remember fuel is 5.50$ per gallon in Germany.
Phil,
I’m not sure what the legalities are in Germany, but even at USA fuel prices, I’d probably have GAMIjectors (www.gami.com) installed on my engine before I’d forego the LOP option! Not sure what they cost, but it shouldn’t take you too long to recoup the outlay.
Mike.
Mike, the aircraft is US-registered of course, so no problem there. I also know that there are GAMIJECTORS certified for the Continental IO-360ES, and they are something around 900$ if I remember. We’d really like to go for that but as long as there aren’t any experiences with GAMIJECTORS and Cirusses I’m a little hesitant. Losing the engine warranty now would be no factor I think.
Phil N199CD
Phil,
I’d like to discuss this by email. Since you don’t list an email address, please drop me a line at mikerad@nerc.com if you’re interested.
Mike.