Operating Cost Analysis for SR22

Does anyone have a current operating cost analysis for the SR22, 2002 model?

I have a spreadsheet I used to evaluate operating costs on both the Sr20 and SR22, but its based on UK fuel prices and maintainence estimates.
As i don’t have your email address and the forums don’t seem to let you add an attatchment by editing a post, I’ll attatch it to the next post. But warning: I’m sure there are better ones this is rough ,

I hope its gets you going.



Just in case here is my email. raeiler@nuskin.com

The Attatchment.

(This was done to allow me to evaluate the differences between the 20 and 22, for example, the life of the engines and props are different, so is the fuel consumption.

The real operating costs need to factor in the unknowns Probably add 20%?



Thanks this will be of great help.


In reply to:

…the life of the engines and props are different…


I could have sworn that I heard from someone at Cirrus that the original TBO published for the SR22 engine was in error, and that it is in fact 2,000 hours. But… I’m not 100% sure. Can anyone confirm this?



I got these figures from General Enterprises in February this year when I was trying to decide between the second hand SR20 that was coming in and waiting for a new SR22.

I would hope that the figures were accurate but the shorter engine life on the 22 did surprise me at the time, I hope it is a mistake.

Eventually what swung the decision for me was the fuel costs. We pay £4.5 a gallon here in the UK ($7?). For the missions I had in mind, the SR20 was more than capable and much cheaper to run, de-ice may have changed my decision at the time, but there was “no plans” whan I asked.


what I noted from my beginning interest to slip on 22" from 20" was that in every brochure Cirrus say 1.700 Hours (despite Lancais with same engine say 2.000).
So I started to make my comparisation cost between the two aircraft also on earlier 22" TBO…

I had no official information on, but since few month ago, I saw that Cirrus show 2.000 H-TBO in all their brochure, press release etc. Maybe some is changed now.

I had scheduled a meeting in Holland with General Enterprise nex Sunday 8th August from my final decision on 20 or 22. I’ll clear also this issue and in case I’ll post here results ohn TBO learn.


Do you mean 8th September rather than August?

Good luck with the meeting, I’ve never flown an SR22, and only seen one on the ramp briefly in Holland. I’m sure if I flew it I would just want one!

I’d be interested in your final decision and the reasons, one thing, I’m sure of, if I had a 22, even though it costs more to run (especially in Europe) I doubt I would regret it. With the 20, you kinda wonder all the time if the 22 is really what you need…


Yes, september.
U"nfortunately" I tested two time 22 a never 20 that I’ll test next sept 9th.

Slip to 22 seems better choice despite higher ticket and future maintence. I’ just thinking that own a 20" will be a luxury, while 22" with his capability (payload, climbing and performance) maybe is a very capable business tool fully usable in all situation, especially in warm Italy. I read a lot here about 20 and 22 and this is what i start to think.

I’ll report here my later impression and maybe final decision.

Try looking at the SR20 vs. SR22 comparison a little differently. If you throttled back the 22 to cruise at around 155kts (the 20’s real world cruise speed), I’d bet you could get the fuel consumption down around 10-11 gallons per hour. I have never tried this on ours, I enjoy the speed too much. Compare the fuel burns for the two planes at the same speed and see how it comes out. Also, remember your cross country flights will be a little shorter with the 22 (is this a GOOD thing?) and you will have less time to burn fuel.

Hi Greg and thank.
What you said about fuel comsumption is something I check carefully andf a lot during my August holliday.

I compared SR20 vs 22 performances on same trip/altitude:
time to climb/fuel flow
cruise speed/feul flow ROP/LOP
time trip.

I used POH figures and “real” figures collected here from many COPA members.

While I’m been little benevolous with SR20 using better figures collected (better performance), I’m been little restrictive on 22" figures [just for to find some excuse to convince me to stay on SR20 already ordered ;-)]

“Virtual” result are impressive. I do not have here the excel file (on my notebook actually in my office - but if someone is interested, I can post it here later), but if I remember well, in one trip of5/600 NM, because of faster climbing of the 22" and his cruise speed that start early, while 20" stil is climbing,
you could see that 22’ fuel comsumption is VERY little more than 20", while time is less (apx 30 min.). So the more gallons (a couple) of the 22 is nothing vs time saved, especially is you calculate TBO cost saving on short time flight.

All this charging more payload for passenger and baggage.

Naturally this figures could mach some needs (like mine) or not…

I mean on this data, that, again FOR ME, own an SR20 will be a “luxury” while 22" an business tool.
I mean that the 20 (In italy where is so frequently find 38/40 C degrees at sea level and 30° C at 3.000 ft also, with necessity to cross the alps (above 12/15.000ft) will be a luxury toys that some time I couldn’t use for some mission - while 22 will not have any troble to be used:
20: expensive toys some time grounded that oblige me to fly by airlines;
22: business tool that I can use always.

Sounds like you’ll be getting the Sr22 then! You make a good argument for someone that has a SR20 on order!

I must admit I did not look at the fuel burn on a seanario basis. Just thought of how many pounds (£s) I would part with to “full her up”, and higher quoted fuel burn.

I’m sure I’d love the SR22, but if (when) I trade up on a few years, I’m sure they will have advanced even more.


Ian, yes, I’m close to decide for the 22" but,
I hope nobody misunderstood me.
I think SR20 is a really nice airplane, at really good price/avionics/comfort/performances and why not also for his payload if compared with “similar” other airplane at this price.
Infact, I ordered it!
22" was no yet available wen I ordered the 20, and also when 22 was announced I didn’t think at it because of his higher price.

Only checking later at 22" performances, i found that I could use it much more also for my European trip for business than 20.

In this way, 22 seems match my favour and his higher price start to become cheaper, also including higher insurance, maintenance and etc. cost… :frowning:

Despite all, maybe I’m deciding for 22 only because exchange rate between USD and Euro is now more convenient for us Europeans: now, adding only some thousand Euro to my previosly (2000) budget for buy an 20, I can buy the 22.


I’m sure this is the right choice for you.

I’ll wait for the turbocharged diesel with de-ice, PFD 190knots and retractable gear…

(Here’s hoping!)