Cirrus SR20 verus Socata TB20 ?

Guest Discussion
41

You are right on the speed difference. Of course the speed limitations are based on KIAS/KCAS but cruising speed is based on KTAS.

At sea level TAS and KCAS are very close.

You are right, at altitude your TAS is higher than IAS/CAS (for TB20 is about +1.5 kt per 1000ft upto 6500ft). According to the POH, the 160 quoted was for cruise at 6500 ft and 2943lb weight. No antennas and No external lights present.

Again for TB20, TAS can be reduced by 1 kt for every 1000ft increase in altitude over 6500ft, so if you need to cruise at 12000ft then your TAS will be reduced to 154kt.

Subjecting an aircraft to turbulence at high speed whilst may not initially seem to cause problems, long terms will result in intermittent electrical faults and excessive wear and tear on various mechanical parts. Think of a car that is being driven on a muddy rough countryside road regularly, is that car ever going to be as good as one that has been driven on a smooth ground?? Or an aircraft that is subjected to poor landing regularly, would it be as good as an aircraft that is properly landed??

42

That is a lot of time in a TB20. I have always liked the way they look.

1588.socata-tb20-2-big.jpg
1588.socata-tb20-2-big.jpg1152×985 148 KB

43

Off field landing where the chute would have been a better alternative. The main landing gear broke off too.

44

Unless you’re really enamored of CAPS, or want a ‘gee whiz’ airplane, a Cirrus probably isn’t the plane for you. I am, therefore I have one. First, it’s a lot more expensive to operate. Figure $1.5k a year for a caps repack, another $1.5k a year for an Avidyine warranty, which you definitely need. They fail quite often, 3 times in 5 years for me, and cost around $4,500 to fix. Your annuals will run 50-100% more, since they mostly have to be done by a Cirrus Service Center, which charge much more than your typical A&P, around $2-3k plus repairs.

Cirrus is fun to fly, and I’m happy I have one, even if only a 20. But there are many more airplanes out there that give you more bang for your buck.

45

Uh, groundspeed is irrelevant due to the obvious effects of wind. IAS 150 - at what altitude?

46

For under 100k, the Beechcraft Bonanza is best buy especially an S35 or Debonair for 60-80k.

47

I was at 6500’ altitude in the TB20

48

you sure you were seeing the KIAS and not the TAS?

49

Yes, I looked at KIAS and GS

50

You are correct. My friend’s TB20 will not do faster than 142.

51

That must be one draggy airframe. Even my Katmai (260 hp IO-470) would do 140-143 KTAS lean of peak and 149-152 KTAS rich of peak, and that’s a fixed gear Cessna 182 airframe.

52

Of course the TB21 is much faster:

53

After I got my PPL I tried both the TB20 and the SR20.

I went for the SR20.

Integrated avionics ( Generation 1 ) , chute and the new design got me there.

The SR20 is slightly slower than an TB20, with a lower fuel burn, but much nicer in flying characteristics…

54

I have 1500hrs in a TB20GT. The in-flight pics posted above are my aircraft
http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/tb20-experience/index.html

I am prob99 way too late in here to reply usefully to the OP (though I notice that he is in the Socata owners’ group right now looking for a TB20, while getting ridiculed there for asking here also!) but let me just say a few things:

The above performance comparisons of a TB20 with the SR20 or SR22 are nonsense. The MPG of all three is actually very similar if you are very careful to set up identical flight conditions i.e. same IAS (i.e. same thrust), same altitude, same OAT, same engine operating point (peak EGT i.e. stochiometric). I have measured all these in flight. I have also done the same with the Cessna 400 and surprisingly the DA42. At low level, say 3000ft, all of these do very close to 140kt IAS at 11.5 USG/hour, which in the TB20 is about 65% power. Evidently the Cirruses and the C400 have more slippery airframes than a TB20, but then throw away the advantage by having fixed gear and (in the case of the Cirruses) having to run the engine at a higher RPM which one can trivially verify in flight as being worth a few % (2500 versus 2300, say). The DA42 is perhaps the bigger surprise because it is a substantially bigger aircraft and is hauling along an extra engine, but the much higher compression ratio of a diesel does deliver a better SFC (the SFC increment is proportional to some root of the CR increment; I don’t recall the actual figure). The bottom line is that there is no free lunch in physics if you compare similar cockpit volumes and a 1950 Bonanza will deliver a very similar MPG.

The SR22 is of course faster than a TB20 - it has 300HP versus 250HP!

Socata parts are not generally more expensive than US aircraft parts. The engine related stuff (filters, etc) and avionics /electricals should never (!!!) be bought from the aircraft manufacturer (and every A&P with an IQ above 20 should know that) which basically leaves airframe parts. All airframe related parts are outrageously pricey and some selected examples (across all makes) are completely outrageous. Socata part costs have been creeping up lately but I still don’t think the costs are exceptional against US aircraft, in the context of normal servicing of an aircraft which has been properly looked after in terms of lubrication (yeah that is quite a condition to throw in…).

The comment about lead times going way out during a summer shutdown has never been my experience. The shutdown is only a few weeks. For US owners, there is parts stock at Socata Florida. For European owners, yeah, the distis do just buy parts back to back and add zero value, but that is how distribution works mostly everywhere…

The retractable gear is not a significant additional cost. I would estimate it at about $300/year and that is only if you use a really stupid company to do your Annuals, whose arm has to be twisted to use the right grease instead of squirting in some WD40. My expenditure since 2002 has been zero on parts, and the gear still looks like new in terms of wear. I used to pay extra to get it greased properly (the company refused to do it, saying it is not included in their fixed price Annual) but nowadays I do the Annual in a rented hangar, with an A&P/IA, and we just do it all correctly. It takes a few hours so it is just the labour cost of that. The TB20 has perhaps the most trouble-free and simple retractable gear system in the business which gives very little trouble - except on aircraft which has been utterly abused in terms of maintenance, but anybody buying an SR20/22 and not maintaining it is an idi0t anyway.

As regards which is nice to fly, that will always be subjective. I find the TB20 handling to be superb, and very precise. I did my FAA commercial/instrument in it and was amazed at how it deals with the chandelle. The Cirrus sidestick needs regular trimming to avoid one’s wrist getting tired and this tends to drive a lot more autopilot use. That’s not an uncommon comment for IFR tourers with a stick. But really all of these (TB20, SR20, SR22, DA42) handle very similarly in pitch and roll and all make good instrument platforms.

You can buy the most recent (2002 or 2003) TB20GT, in mint condition, with everything working, for about USD 220, and most go for less.

55

Thanks, That is all great info, I was honored to have about 900 hours in two TB20 an 1985 in 1989 and I owned a 1991, N28079 that they show in the picture you link to that show tks setup. and a loved both them planes and I am pretty certain if they would have kept building them I would have purchased new, although I have really enjoyed my Cirrus planes. But still look at the used ones from time to time. Never know might get one again. Don

56

Hi Peter,

Your blog website was very helpful to me when learning on high performance singles. I’ve flown TB20 and Bonanzas and today flying a Cirrus SR22 before making my decision which plane fits me best. It’s a buyers market right now and used planes are dropping still in price. I like the ergonomics and comfort of the TB20 and will be good to get a feel for the Cirrus SR22 performance to that. I can get an older Cirrus SR22 like 2001 model for less than a Socata TB20 and for less than a late model Bonanza. My only real concern about Cirrus is the airframe limitation over time since it’s a composite build versus the aluminum construction of the Socata and Bonanza.

Cheers,

Ben

57

Used planes are indeed going “cheap” but you still pay for quality. Most planes for sale are for sale for a pressing reason and often the owner has been running them down for years beforehand. Same with a house…

I get asked to do informal prebuys on TBs and rarely see one which has ever seen grease let alone had some applied to it. You will get the same on Cirruses. The way the maintenance scene is operated is exactly the same across the types and I have personally had some absolutely atrocious and dangerous work done by a FAA 145 firm which is, shall we say, very prominent in that line of work.

So make sure you get a prebuy done by an A&P who is intimately familiar with the type, and get a flight test done by someone who is intimately familiar with the equipment. If something doesn’t work, you could be looking at $10k-20k.

There is a lot of rubbish out there for sale. For example there is a fair number of IO540 engined planes on which SB569 is applicable (basically anything 1997-2003 or so) but has not been done. Is all cases the IA who signed off the Annual is an ignorant and incompetent xxx and in some cases the seller is aware and looking for a buyer who is not going to be too diligent in the prebuy. One guy I know in Germany, who missed out on the 2009 deadline for the $2500 crank kit offer, has just paid 44k euros ($60k) for the most economic way of getting out of this mess which is a remanufactured exchange engine from Lyco… And a lot of avionics don’t work, but it takes a pilot with specialist knowledge of the exact item to spot it on a test flight.

I doubt you will reach the airframe limit on a Cirrus, as a private pilot, but you may not like the cost of the chute re-work at the 10 year point.

Now I need to get my coat on quick before Thomas B drops in and calls me a “glass half empty Peter” as he likes to do online :wink:

58

Paging Art Pileggi.

59

I don’t understand the above post, and google doesn’t turn up anything.

60

Art Pileggi was a famous Cirrus basher, favoring the TB20.

We are al very polite here, nobody said the TBxx 's are old junk or losing rivets all the time.

At one point Art Pillegi disapeared, and nobody ever heared of him since.