Anyone got an update on the often discussed possibility of getting an approval for increased gross weight for the SR20 ?
I’ve noticed a number of potential (and former) position holders opting for other aircraft in order to get a useable 4 seater. Afraid I have the same concern ?
Any encouragement ? ?
Anyone got an update on the often discussed possibility of getting an approval for increased gross weight for the SR20 ?
I’ve noticed a number of potential (and former) position holders opting for other aircraft in order to get a useable 4 seater. Afraid I have the same concern ?
Any encouragement ? ?
I have heard nothing, but would like to mention that Clyde’s plane is reported as having 920 pounds usable. The photos disclose it to be a 3 bladed prop model, meaning that another 20 pounds could be had with a 2 bladed prop. Things are looking up, and that’s before any increase in gross weight. I’d hang on. The weight issue is going to work itself out. The reason to buy a used plane is not weight, it would be value and personal finance issues. Cirrus is the best new plane value, but buying the right used plane does eliminate the depreciation that all new items carry. It’s a personal decision, of course.
IMHO, stick with the new cirrus. I doubt you’ll see significant early depreciation, and the shop dollars will be less than the Pipers I have owned. aa
Anyone got an update on the often discussed possibility of getting an approval for increased gross weight for the SR20 ?
I’ve noticed a number of potential (and former) position holders opting for other aircraft in order to get a useable 4 seater. Afraid I have the same concern ?
Any encouragement ? ?
My understanding is that the SR20 is CAPABLE of being certified at 150-200 lbs heavier than currently delivery specs. Cirrus needs to get approval fron the FAA for that additional weight increase and that is expected in late 2000. I do NOT know how far along they have come on this issue.
Brian
The projected 150-200 lb gross weight increase is very encouraging, and it makes the SR20 a plausible family airplane.
I am curious how it will affect the rate of degradation of the plane’s climb performance as density altitude increases. Right now it’s a good performer: 900-1000 fpm at sea level, with a rather good retention of performance as altitude & temperature increase (significantly better than Cherokees and the Tiger). However if it’s hauling 6-7% more weight, I suspect that service ceiling and climb performance will feel it. At what point would we start to consider the 200 hp version “underpowered,” especially for those of us west of Denver?
Have any current owners sweet-talked their maintenance guys into tweaking the output up to 2800 rpm/210 hp (and willing to admit it)? This wouldn’t enhance cruise speed much but might boost climb rate another 100 fpm or so.
Anyone know more about the interplay of these factors? This subject regrettably was not covered in my biochemistry and immunology studies…might have stayed awake more if it were!
Thanks in advance–Kevin Moore
Anyone got an update on the often discussed possibility of getting an approval for increased gross weight for the SR20 ?
I’ve noticed a number of potential (and former) position holders opting for other aircraft in order to get a useable 4 seater. Afraid I have the same concern ?
Any encouragement ? ?
Anyone got an update on the often discussed possibility of getting an approval for increased gross weight for the SR20 ?
I’ve noticed a number of potential (and former) position holders opting for other aircraft in order to get a useable 4 seater. Afraid I have the same concern ?
Any encouragement ? ?
I have heard nothing, but would like to mention that Clyde’s plane is reported as having 920 pounds usable. The photos disclose it to be a 3 bladed prop model, meaning that another 20 pounds could be had with a 2 bladed prop. Things are looking up, and that’s before any increase in gross weight. I’d hang on. The weight issue is going to work itself out. The reason to buy a used plane is not weight, it would be value and personal finance issues. Cirrus is the best new plane value, but buying the right used plane does eliminate the depreciation that all new items carry. It’s a personal decision, of course.
IMHO, stick with the new cirrus. I doubt you’ll see significant early depreciation, and the shop dollars will be less than the Pipers I have owned. aa
Thanks for the response.
Agree that weight isn’t a reason for purchasing a used aircraft - but, I need more useful load than the current SR20 seems to be delivering.
I have seen reports of useful load as low as 820 lbs - which effectively eliminates the SR20 as a 4 seater unless you drop fuel.
My alternative is not really a used plane (although I suppose that might be an option) - the competition would be the SR22, the Lancair, or maybe the TB20 / TB21TC. More cost / more airplane - but higher useful load. And, in the case of the TB20 / TB21TC earlier delivery, turbo (TB21TC) etc.
When you say the weight issue will get worked – how / by whom? Do we know that Cirrus has applied for an increase in GW ? Are flight test required ? Are they started / completed ?
Don’t mean to be skeptical, but there is an obvious concern re lack of delivery on prior indications of performance etc.
I have heard nothing, but would like to mention that Clyde’s plane is reported as having 920 pounds usable.
Unfortunately this is not correct. The empty weight of N142CD is 2084lbs, leaving 816lbs useful load. If the gross weight increase gives an extra 200 lbs, then the useful load will exactly equal 4 170lb bodies plus full fuel.
At the moment it’s not even a 3 person plus full fuel plane.
Anyone got an update on the often discussed possibility of getting an approval for increased gross weight for the SR20 ?
I’ve noticed a number of potential (and former) position holders opting for other aircraft in order to get a useable 4 seater. Afraid I have the same concern ?
Any encouragement ? ?
I have heard nothing, but would like to mention that Clyde’s plane is reported as having 920 pounds usable. The photos disclose it to be a 3 bladed prop model, meaning that another 20 pounds could be had with a 2 bladed prop. Things are looking up, and that’s before any increase in gross weight. I’d hang on. The weight issue is going to work itself out. The reason to buy a used plane is not weight, it would be value and personal finance issues. Cirrus is the best new plane value, but buying the right used plane does eliminate the depreciation that all new items carry. It’s a personal decision, of course.
IMHO, stick with the new cirrus. I doubt you’ll see significant early depreciation, and the shop dollars will be less than the Pipers I have owned. aa
Thanks for the response.
Agree that weight isn’t a reason for purchasing a used aircraft - but, I need more useful load than the current SR20 seems to be delivering.
I have seen reports of useful load as low as 820 lbs - which effectively eliminates the SR20 as a 4 seater unless you drop fuel.
My alternative is not really a used plane (although I suppose that might be an option) - the competition would be the SR22, the Lancair, or maybe the TB20 / TB21TC. More cost / more airplane - but higher useful load. And, in the case of the TB20 / TB21TC earlier delivery, turbo (TB21TC) etc.
When you say the weight issue will get worked – how / by whom? Do we know that Cirrus has applied for an increase in GW ? Are flight test required ? Are they started / completed ?
Don’t mean to be skeptical, but there is an obvious concern re lack of delivery on prior indications of performance etc.
I am a former SR20 position holder. I was concerned about the useful load problem. I need to carry four adults and golf clubs and some luggage from time to time. Increasing the approved useful load will help, but how are they going to increase the amount of interior room. How are you going to get this kind of a load in an SR20) or SR22?
I purchased an nice used A36 Bonanza. It has a 1300 lb useful load, a VERY large CG area, and two good sized side doors. It has six seats and four of them are easily removeable. I have had no problem with weight or room in carrying four adults, golf clubs and luggage. The A36 came with some great gadgets - e.g. HSI, TCAD, EGM and Garmin 430. It cruises at an honest 180 kts. All of this cost less than an SR20.
It has all the bugs worked out and I don’t get swamped by the curious every time I land. The SR20 is a great airplane, but it is not the only game in town!
Hey Dave… Your Beach is a nice plane,but it cost more than twice as much(new),burns way more fuel,cost a lot more to service,and (GOD FORBID) if you ever have a heart attack or run into a Cessna as you buzz the club house,you and your three golf buddies can kiss it all good bye
Might as well jump in . . .
Yep, I did the same thing: bought a used A36. I can carry four adults, junk in the back, full tanks . . . thus loaded and with AC blasting,I climbed out of Big Bear Lake on a hot day, density altitude 8,500 feet. No problem. The A36’s gas consumption is about 50% more . . . but about the same as the SR20 per passenger.
(Dave, how do you get 180kts? I’m dubious. A new Bonanza A36 is rated at 176kts max cruise. Anyway, I prefer mid-cruise myself: nice 160 to 166 at a serenely quiet 23in./2300 . . . burning rich of peak at 15 gph to keep the engine cool and happy.)
I love my Bonanza. Still, I’m sticking with my SR22 deposit. I’m trusting its load will be up around 1200 pounds, owing to the 550 engine and wider wings. That would make it suitable for AC, four adults, and luggage. If the SR22 doesn’t manage to get there, I’ll probably stick with the Bonanza . . . until the Klapmeiers come out with a six-seater turbine.
Anyone got an update on the often discussed possibility of getting an approval for increased gross weight for the SR20 ?
I’ve noticed a number of potential (and former) position holders opting for other aircraft in order to get a useable 4 seater. Afraid I have the same concern ?
Any encouragement ? ?
I have heard nothing, but would like to mention that Clyde’s plane is reported as having 920 pounds usable. The photos disclose it to be a 3 bladed prop model, meaning that another 20 pounds could be had with a 2 bladed prop. Things are looking up, and that’s before any increase in gross weight. I’d hang on. The weight issue is going to work itself out. The reason to buy a used plane is not weight, it would be value and personal finance issues. Cirrus is the best new plane value, but buying the right used plane does eliminate the depreciation that all new items carry. It’s a personal decision, of course.
IMHO, stick with the new cirrus. I doubt you’ll see significant early depreciation, and the shop dollars will be less than the Pipers I have owned. aa
Thanks for the response.
Agree that weight isn’t a reason for purchasing a used aircraft - but, I need more useful load than the current SR20 seems to be delivering.
I have seen reports of useful load as low as 820 lbs - which effectively eliminates the SR20 as a 4 seater unless you drop fuel.
My alternative is not really a used plane (although I suppose that might be an option) - the competition would be the SR22, the Lancair, or maybe the TB20 / TB21TC. More cost / more airplane - but higher useful load. And, in the case of the TB20 / TB21TC earlier delivery, turbo (TB21TC) etc.
When you say the weight issue will get worked – how / by whom? Do we know that Cirrus has applied for an increase in GW ? Are flight test required ? Are they started / completed ?
Don’t mean to be skeptical, but there is an obvious concern re lack of delivery on prior indications of performance etc.
I am a former SR20 position holder. I was concerned about the useful load problem. I need to carry four adults and golf clubs and some luggage from time to time. Increasing the approved useful load will help, but how are they going to increase the amount of interior room. How are you going to get this kind of a load in an SR20) or SR22?
I purchased an nice used A36 Bonanza. It has a 1300 lb useful load, a VERY large CG area, and two good sized side doors. It has six seats and four of them are easily removeable. I have had no problem with weight or room in carrying four adults, golf clubs and luggage. The A36 came with some great gadgets - e.g. HSI, TCAD, EGM and Garmin 430. It cruises at an honest 180 kts. All of this cost less than an SR20.
It has all the bugs worked out and I don’t get swamped by the curious every time I land. The SR20 is a great airplane, but it is not the only game in town!
Hey Dave… Your Beach is a nice plane,but it cost more than twice as much(new),burns way more fuel,cost a lot more to service,and (GOD FORBID) if you ever have a heart attack or run into a Cessna as you buzz the club house,you and your three golf buddies can kiss it all good bye
Hey Dave Flick, be careful what you say to the bonanza drive he sounds like a lawyer!!
Rich - Sorry for the delay. I have been out of town and out of touch with the web.
Several factors account for the 180 kts. First of all it is a 1973 model which is lighter than later models, and I don’t have air conditioning. Second, it has the 550B conversion. Third it has what they call Kelly speed mods. Mostly that means gap seals on the ailerons and elevator, but they also removed the step which is a pain, but supposedly ads 3 kts. There are a few other minor changes involved.
Based on what I learned at the BPPP school, I fly it at 21 in. MP, 2200 RPM and 10 1/2 gal. per hour. You give up ten knots, but improve fuel economy and engine life.
Space is a very real problem for the SR20 and SR22. Otherwise they are GREAT airplanes. If you want to chat more about the A36 you can reach me directly at dhumphreys@rvia.org.
Might as well jump in . . .
Yep, I did the same thing: bought a used A36. I can carry four adults, junk in the back, full tanks . . . thus loaded and with AC blasting,I climbed out of Big Bear Lake on a hot day, density altitude 8,500 feet. No problem. The A36’s gas consumption is about 50% more . . . but about the same as the SR20 per passenger.
(Dave, how do you get 180kts? I’m dubious. A new Bonanza A36 is rated at 176kts max cruise. Anyway, I prefer mid-cruise myself: nice 160 to 166 at a serenely quiet 23in./2300 . . . burning rich of peak at 15 gph to keep the engine cool and happy.)
I love my Bonanza. Still, I’m sticking with my SR22 deposit. I’m trusting its load will be up around 1200 pounds, owing to the 550 engine and wider wings. That would make it suitable for AC, four adults, and luggage. If the SR22 doesn’t manage to get there, I’ll probably stick with the Bonanza . . . until the Klapmeiers come out with a six-seater turbine.
Anyone got an update on the often discussed possibility of getting an approval for increased gross weight for the SR20 ?
I’ve noticed a number of potential (and former) position holders opting for other aircraft in order to get a useable 4 seater. Afraid I have the same concern ?
Any encouragement ? ?
I have heard nothing, but would like to mention that Clyde’s plane is reported as having 920 pounds usable. The photos disclose it to be a 3 bladed prop model, meaning that another 20 pounds could be had with a 2 bladed prop. Things are looking up, and that’s before any increase in gross weight. I’d hang on. The weight issue is going to work itself out. The reason to buy a used plane is not weight, it would be value and personal finance issues. Cirrus is the best new plane value, but buying the right used plane does eliminate the depreciation that all new items carry. It’s a personal decision, of course.
IMHO, stick with the new cirrus. I doubt you’ll see significant early depreciation, and the shop dollars will be less than the Pipers I have owned. aa
Thanks for the response.
Agree that weight isn’t a reason for purchasing a used aircraft - but, I need more useful load than the current SR20 seems to be delivering.
I have seen reports of useful load as low as 820 lbs - which effectively eliminates the SR20 as a 4 seater unless you drop fuel.
My alternative is not really a used plane (although I suppose that might be an option) - the competition would be the SR22, the Lancair, or maybe the TB20 / TB21TC. More cost / more airplane - but higher useful load. And, in the case of the TB20 / TB21TC earlier delivery, turbo (TB21TC) etc.
When you say the weight issue will get worked – how / by whom? Do we know that Cirrus has applied for an increase in GW ? Are flight test required ? Are they started / completed ?
Don’t mean to be skeptical, but there is an obvious concern re lack of delivery on prior indications of performance etc.
I am a former SR20 position holder. I was concerned about the useful load problem. I need to carry four adults and golf clubs and some luggage from time to time. Increasing the approved useful load will help, but how are they going to increase the amount of interior room. How are you going to get this kind of a load in an SR20) or SR22?
I purchased an nice used A36 Bonanza. It has a 1300 lb useful load, a VERY large CG area, and two good sized side doors. It has six seats and four of them are easily removeable. I have had no problem with weight or room in carrying four adults, golf clubs and luggage. The A36 came with some great gadgets - e.g. HSI, TCAD, EGM and Garmin 430. It cruises at an honest 180 kts. All of this cost less than an SR20.
It has all the bugs worked out and I don’t get swamped by the curious every time I land. The SR20 is a great airplane, but it is not the only game in town!
Cirrus needs to get approval fron the FAA for that additional weight increase and that is expected in late 2000.
I have a little info from Cirrus on this - there has been quite a bit of progress on this front, and Cirrus still hope to have the gross weight increase in place by the end of the 3rd quarter, but like anything it could slip. The end of the year seems certain, however.
The process is slow simply because almost every aspect of certification has to be re-examined, although the biggies, like the airframe structure and the parachute, are ok because tests were done at higher weights in anticipation of the SR22.
In fact the gross weight increase work is being done in conjunction with the SR22 development, which probably slows it a little, but avoids Cirrus having to duplicate work.
But, there seems no doubt that by the end of this year, there will be a gross weight increase, retrofittable to existing planes, of between 150-200 lbs, involving a paperwork change, and possibly some minor parts, e.g. it seems likely that the seats will need some foam replaced.
The CG envelope will also be expanded - the current envelope does not represent any limits of the plane, just the limits of what was demonstrated during certification. I gather that with the 3-blade prop and two big guys in the front seats, the CG can be forward of the limit.
Cirrus needs to get approval fron the FAA for that additional weight increase and that is expected in late 2000.
I have a little info from Cirrus on this - there has been quite a bit of progress on this front, and Cirrus still hope to have the gross weight increase in place by the end of the 3rd quarter, but like anything it could slip. The end of the year seems certain, however.
The process is slow simply because almost every aspect of certification has to be re-examined, although the biggies, like the airframe structure and the parachute, are ok because tests were done at higher weights in anticipation of the SR22.
In fact the gross weight increase work is being done in conjunction with the SR22 development, which probably slows it a little, but avoids Cirrus having to duplicate work.
But, there seems no doubt that by the end of this year, there will be a gross weight increase, retrofittable to existing planes, of between 150-200 lbs, involving a paperwork change, and possibly some minor parts, e.g. it seems likely that the seats will need some foam replaced.
The CG envelope will also be expanded - the current envelope does not represent any limits of the plane, just the limits of what was demonstrated during certification. I gather that with the 3-blade prop and two big guys in the front seats, the CG can be forward of the limit.
Clyde,
could you check if your useful load is really 920 lbs? It looks like a typo to me, I think it should be 820 with the 3 blade prop and the general overweight the plane is facing for the moment. It would come as a total surprise if CD had brought down the empty weight of the SR20 to the original 1950 lbs in such a short time.
Placido