Thinking about buying a SR 22 turbo

Guest Discussion
1

Hello esteemed Cirrus Pilots,

currently I’m an owner of a 2002 Socata TB21 (GT Version) and so far I’m very pleased with that aircraft. Currently I’m trying to complete my Intrument rating. Even though I’m using my aircraft for some business flights, it’s primarily used for weekend and holiday trips. I’m flying 70-100 hrs per year.

For some reason I’m thinking about buying another aircraft. First thing is the glass cockpit. Regarding the Upgrade cost of a Garmin 500 with new GPS and some other nice to haves, I would be nearly at the price of a SR 22 turbo

Second thing would be the parachaute, which is a very good life insurance, even for a well trained pilot.

By now I would need some first hand information about the operating cots of a G 1000 equipped SR 22 turbo. Believing the grapevine the annual cost of a SR 22 turbo are exorbitant. You hear figures between 7.000 and 10.000,00 EUR per year only for maintenance issues and annual examinations.

Here is a list of my actual annual cost:

Fuel burn (FL 100 - 140 @ 75%) is around 15-16 gal/h. You’ll see around 160-170 kts

Annual maintenance cost are around 4.000,00 EUR

Replacement engine (Lycoming TIO-540 @ 250 PS) should cost around 50.000,00 EUR (nor sure if the turbo is included) - what are the estimated replacement cost for the conti engine ?

So my annual operation cost (without amortization and capital cost) are around 20.000,00 - 25.000,00 EUR (including Hangar and Insurance). If I would make myself the effort I would have to add another 2500 EUR per year as reserve fund for engine replacement.

As I live and fly in Germany I would be glad to hear some figures of german or european SR 22 drivers, but I would appreciate all answers.

Thanks a lot to all of you helping me making a decision [:D]

Happy rest easter !!!

2

I can’t offer any specifics for you - but I do know that there is lots of similar questions answered in the members section. Join COPA - if you are going to buy a SR22 - no better $65.00 (US) you can spend to get your research started!

Lots of really valuable information in the members forums!

3

Not German but I do live in Germany. US experience for 22 Turbo Normalized operations has annual maintenance on components over 1000 hours TIS at about 15,000 US per year, sometimes more. That can be cylinder or exhaust related.

4

Hi Marco

I own and fly a 2009 SR22TN in Germany (well, currently in Switzerland) and have about 300 hours in the TB20.

With the SR22 more expensive than the TB21 you pay already 4-5 kEUR for insurance. Depending on where you fly add 4 kEUR for the hangar, another 2 kEUR for databases. That’s 10+ kEUR out of pocket per year.

Including taxi and take-off fuel you need 150+ EUR per flight hour for fuel and oil, at 100 hours that’s at least another 15 kEUR.

Which get’s you to 25 kEUR/year without even having touched maintenance, filled O2 or TKS etc. pp.

Plan at least another 10 kEUR/year for maintenance including 1.500 EUR chute repack reserve, 3.000 EUR engine reserve and I’m sure I’ve missed some things here.

I plan 400 EUR/hour with 100-125 h/year to keep the airplance and the pilot in tip-top shape as they would say here in Switzerland.

When you’re serious about a Cirrus join COPA. At 65 USD/year the best deal in aviation.

Bernd

5

I believe this might be the only cost lower in Europe. Due to our fuel prices most owners don’t fly at 85 % but more at 75 %, i.e. TIT always below 1580 and CHT in the 320-350 range which seems to help with cylinders and exhaust.

Bernd

6

I’m only speaking to the MX budget - nothing else. And it is at the lower end of the spectrum for an out of warranty aircraft.

7

Got that. My impression is/was that the lower power settings also lead to lower maintenance cost at least for exhaust and cylinders.

But I agree that your 15 kUSD number is most probably not that far off over a 10 year average. A chute at 15 kUSD, a TKS pump overhaul at 2 kUSD, a magneto here, a turbo there, a new CO sensor at one annual, a new airbag logic at the next one.

I’ll need a new chute mid-2018 and new turbo hoses early 2019. Gone will be the time of my <10 kUSD MX expense a year. It’s an expensive hobby.

Bernd

8

OK, thanks

Regarding to your figures I would have to add another 10.000 EUR to my current annual cost.

I’m not quite sure what the next aviation step for me would be. The main pro of the SR22 to me is the chaute (not for myself but for the passengers [:)])

My personal “dream aircraft” are the Mooney acclaim or ( to be honest) a Piper Malibu/Mirage.

Currently I’m collecting data, but I think if the annual cost of a Cirrus are that high, I think I would leave the chaute beside, add some Euros and go out for a Malibu, or if that one blows the budget an Acclaim

9

Marco,

Do you need a turbo? The NA SR22 is a pretty good performer without one. Obviously high altitude performance is improved with the turbo, but frankly the difference isn’t great until your over 10,000 feet. Mx costs are lower with the normally aspirated version. Just a suggestion.

10

Hi Roger,

I’m frequently crossing the alps, so a turbo is not a bad choice

11

I am crossing the alps a couple of times/year in my NA, at FL160 mostly, and i can tell you that the mx cost is probably 30-50 percent lower than on a T. I think a well equipped NA is a great compromise. lJust saying …

12

I fly my NA frequently up above 10,000’. 170 knots on 12.8 gph at 14,500’ is not bad. I’ve had no trouble getting up to 15,000’. Highest I’ve been though.

13

I used to routinely fly my NA up to 17. Not a problem at all.

If I get another cirrus, I will seriously consider getting a FIKI NA even though the conventional wisdom is against that.

don

14

I’m not the expert on engine choices, but I can definitely vouch for spending the $65 USD to join this forum. I have learned a tremendous amount about Cirrus aircraft, power plants and flying generally, as well as about other aircraft. Best $65 you will ever spend in aviation…

From my perspective, I would expect overall MX costs and experience to be similar between aircraft using either the Continental 550 turbocharged engine or the Lycoming 540 turbocharged engines, at least in general terms (cost of the chute repacking aside). I agree with the other posters that the main MX cost difference is between a normally aspirated aircraft vs. a turbocharged one, all other things being equal.

1 Like
15

I didn’t mean to suggest it was a bad choice, only that it is a less costly option. It’s all about mission, costs and balancing them.

If you cross the alps weekly, you NEED a turbo. If you cross it once per year you WANT a turbo. I’ve had my NA SR22 (bought before a turbo was an option) and had it to 17,500 multiple times. Does OK there, still will climb on AP 4-500 FPM. The 22 is pretty muscular.

Don’t get me wrong, a turbo will crush it performance wise up there, but the number of times I do it makes a turbo a want to have for me.