Now you can’t count the Duke. Beech was asking too much of that engine. [;)]
I had never seen the performance numbers for the Evolution, performance wise (if they are accurate) thats the best piston single in that class. those are the type of numbers I hope cirrus is shooting to match in the near future! One question, why is it that owner-built aircraft seem to have such better performance (ie. Evolution, or Epic aircraft) than certified aircraft? is it harder to get something with those numbers certified? or would those owner-built not pass FAA certification?
Are you referring to the Lancair Evolution? If so, there are no piston versions, they are all turbo-props.
Information here.
Yes i am referring to the Lancair Evolution. The Evolution Piston has a Lycoming TEO-540 iE2 piston engine, while providing top speed of 240 KTS, range of 1800 NM, and useful load of 1800 lbs. Thats the kind of performance i would love to see out of a Cirrus.
Maybe…
But if I could afford that kind of money for a new plane (I can’t - not even close) I don’t think I would want to go through the 6-8 months of building it.
However, it sure looks like Lancair is doing their best to keep this process as easy as possible.
I just dont understand why their performance numbers are so much better in terms of useful load and range.
I’m not sure about the piston but was told by an owner that on the turboprop version if you do all the upgrades to get max gross weight it no longer meets the 61 knot stall speed requirement for certification. Also keep in mind that the weights may not include ice protection and if the plane is so equipped it can never be FIKI since that option is not available to experimental aircraft. Would also be interesting to see if that includes the chute since it is optional. With all the commotion on COPA recently about testing of the SF50 chute … well … how many times do you think the install has been tested on the Evolution?
I assume the massive range quoted on the piston is due to the large tanks necessary to feed the turboprop version. The Evolution is certainly an interesting aircraft but for less money you can get a lightly used PA46 with a similar power plant and avionics that is also pressurized but adds FIKI and onboard radar.
There was one piston Evolution made. It was a prototype… Lancair abandoned the idea and only sells kits and Pratt-Whitneys. http://www.lancair.com/evolution/
They sell both piston and turbine kits - and only kits, at least now. Check out evolutionaircraft.com. Piston kits estimated at 875k. … the iE2 engine is a Lycoming piston engine. And I love the green on your plane, BTW!
Joel,
I have flown an Evolution and have had dinner with there main test pilot and we discussed the piston version. He told me they did not proceed with the program because the performance was not as good as they were hoping for and they had some serious cooling issues.
The PT6 however is a dream to fly.
Jeff
Thanks much! I stand corrected - it’s odd that the specs and pricing are still on the website but appreciate the clarification! I can barely turn a screwdriver myself, so I sure as heck am never going to fly in anything that relies on my tool-handling skills …
Cheers!
Thanks.
We looked at Lancair pretty hard before we decided to go with the SR22T. We spoke with the Lancair people and were told they don’t really back the piston version. If you look at all the Evolutions built to date, only one plane, the prototype has the gas engine. Those plopping down over half a million on a kit seem to opt for the turbine engine and ultimately invest a full $1.5m on the finished build.
Anyway, it is an experimental…and if you have $1.5m to invest in such a plane it would seem you have plenty of cash to blow on a plane that once done will be all yours to maintain and keep healthy - no warranty, no factory training, the first 40 hours are also flown by a test pilot, unless you qualify to do it yourself.
They do now have a BRS option…but again, not really tested…
Well, new information on the piston Evolution. Got a look at there new piston. Watched it fly in formation with the pt6 sister ship. The FADEC Lycoming sounded awesome. There claiming 240 knots up at FL200 but CHTs around 410 degrees. Think down at fl180 it’s going in the 210-220 range. They say with FADEC it’s fine to run it there all day long but can’t help but think t would need top end work pretty soon with those temps. Still, pull back to stay under 380 and I bet you still see some great speeds up at FL200 plus. Probably 220 knots true in pressurized comfort. The seats in this new plane are much nicer than the ones in my buddies Evolution. Think he’s gonna upgrade his interior to be like this new piston.
They landed here at my airport before heading over to Sun and Fun and I got a chance to talk to the pilot. He was talking about the incredible range the plane has and how he helped them with the cooling issues. the useful load was amazing as well. Pretty awesome looking plane and this owner even put a custom porta-potty in the back seat for his wife. He mentioned running those high temps to me as well, and I didn’t like it either…he commented that with the Fadec they didn’t need to leave such wide detonation margins.
They are also talking about making the plane in such a way that the owner can put in a piston engine now, and then if they change their mind upgrade to the turbine engine at a later date. I am totally guessing, but I would assume price difference between the piston and turbine versions would be about 400 to 500K. They are definitely targeting it as an upgrade for the SR22T owner.
They told me it would be approx a 600k difference.
It’s an experimental. You have to build 51% and it’s your baby from then on maint. wise.
The cost differential will be between the $550k Pratt engine and the big gas engine ($280k)…the kit and build is the same, as is the test flying. That would put the piston version over $1m anyway. And that plane will have no warranty on the finished product and no factory support except for kit defects. This is a big reason Evo buyers put in the turbo-prop option…they want a plane they can’t buy unless they go with a Piper.
Also, check insurance on an experimental high performance aircraft with retractable gear…it will be well north of $20k a year. and that’s if you can even find insurance for it. That’s also why guys who can afford $1.5m for the Evo turbo-prop most often self-insure.
I was told engine cost were predicted at 125k. They are 3 months out from delivery of this engine.
My buddy has no trouble getting maintenance on his EVO. It’s cheap actually. He said he spends less than he did on his 2010 TN Cirrus
Insurance for him is only 14k on his pt6 evo. He’s 1000 plus hours and ifr. .
The complete engine installation including mount and cables will be over $200k for the gas version.
The maint. I refer to is YOUR cost from the second you get the kit (and you must build 51% yourself) over the complete life of the plane (there is no warranty on the completed plane, you built it, now you have to eat it). And there is always something that breaks in the first couple of years.
You must also hire or qualify to fly yourself the first 40 hours of test flying. And if you are going to compare the Evo to the Cirrus you need to add the untested BRS chute for an additional cost of around $55k. pre-installation cost (a lot of carbon work has to be done to anchor the chute in the airframe).
He got insurance for $14k on a $1.5 million buck experimental, retractable gear aircraft? You may want to talk to your insurance guy about it before you get serious about the plane.
I don’t understand why anyone would pay $1.5M for a turbine Evolution when you can get a very nice IFMS Eclipse (probably even a Total Eclipse) on the secondary market that is certified, FL 410, 370 knots, legally deiced, proven, supported, safe, etc etc. And my annual insurance bill is just over $9K. Operating costs are reasonable for anyone with that much money to spend on an airplane. Is it type rating fear?