Hello

I've been flying an 01 cirrus for the last 5 years but the family just hit the 6 person mark last week so the cirrus is failing in the family hauler department now.

Been looking at 206's and A36's. I live in Grand Junction colorado so almost all my flying is at 10k plus.
The 36 seems like a good fit. The family is light (495 lbs total) I would like to avoid a turbo from a maintance perspective but the few local pilots i have talked to say the NA 36 will not offer good preformance here in the summer. I live in a valley at 5000' but need to be at 9-10k within 15 miles to get over the rocks on most trips.
I have never had the chance to fly a bonanza but hear they are built well and handle very well. Honestly it would not take much to beat the cirrus in the handling department.
Anyway thought i better start doing some research on the next plane and seems like the best place is owner forums.
Blu

Blu, welcome.

I would have a hard time NOT considering a TN if I were in your shoes.

Good luck.

Agree with Steve,

A TN Bonanza would do a good job of filling the bill.

While the NA 36 would do ok, there will be times loaded in the summer with gusty winds where it will be very marginal even with that 10,500 ft runway. Sure it will get off but the rate of climb could be a lot less that you'd feel comfy with.

And, while getting over those hills won't be a huge problem in an NA, you may have to circle.

I run my NA Baron out there a bit, and rarely take off of a 4000 AGL strip at gross unless it's really cold.

You will want a TN A36 - both for the altitude and the gross weight increase.

My family of 4 with luggage and full fuel is at the 3600lbs limit. I have a 2400lb airplane, so I have roughly 1200lbs of useful load. I am looking forward to the extra 400lbs of gross weight increase with an IO-550 upgrade in a couple of years.

Also if you are going to fill all 6 seats you will want a 79' or later so you have the baggage space behind the rear seats. Without it, you will have very limited baggage storage space.

The amount of additional maintenance is minimal and while I didn't look for a TN airplane when I bought mine, I wouldn't 'trade it for anything now that I have it.

With the TN, leaving Grand Junction you will be climbing at 500-800FPM and be able to maintain that up to FL180 instead of anemically climbing to 12,000 or 13,000.

Kevin

Good info
What kinda climb rate would you estimate for the NA in my situation?

In a NA A36 with an IO-550, the book rate of climb at 3650 GW at 5,000 feet on an 85dF day is around 800 fpm at Vy, which is pretty good. However, an A36TN is ideal for flying in mountainous areas. It will give you 800-1000 fpm all the way up to FL200.

Blu, think hard about the turbo, I had them once, and I miss them now.

Some people had scanned their poh, maybe someone could email you the performance section of a NA plane a TN?

I have a TN'd G36 and I get a steady 800fpm at 125KIAS all the way into the teens. Haven't been up to 20k (yet).

How accurate is the "book"? I had a 182 for a while and it seemed that the numbers where pretty optimistic. Well except for the fuel burn, it always made that number or better

The book numbers are optimal, but they are supported with manufacturer's data. My gut feeling is that your initial ROC under the conditions I mentioned would hit book, but then obviously deteriorate with altitude. Obviously, the book numbers are reflective of ideal performance. Full power, no problems, proper CG loading, everything performing 100%.

Keith, you need to take it on up! Give FL180 or FL190 a try.

Keith, you need to take it on up! Give FL180 or FL190 a try.

High teens works really well for 1.5 hrs if you have favorable winds up high.

Well I'll make my first real post heretically promoting a Piper. Take a look at a Malibu. Pressurization and turbo are really nice in the mountains!