Here you go. Tons of power out of the PT6-64. The TBM was built for speed and high altitude performance. I dont see anyone would want a lower performance piston version.

The original 700A has a max gross of 6600 lbs, roughly the same as a Cessna 414. 400hp is going to be marginal for that. For arguments sake and to make the numbers easier, lets assume the greater efficiency of the diesel allows a 600 lb drop in MGW to 6000 lb. Give a 15 lb/hp power to weight ratio - roughly the same as a 1670 lb Cessna 152 at 110hp (power/weight ratio of 15.2).

A TN36 would have 2/3 the weight on 75% of the horsepower compared to that hypothetical TBM400.

Diesels have also been a real cooling challenge even at NA altitudes. Could be a real challenge in the flight levels. And climbing up there would be slow and hard on the engine.

An underpower piston TBM woud never sell. Even if its $500k cheaper because of the cheapy engine would you pay $3m for one ?
Not a chance.

Mac,

You are right. I was playing around on controller and had to many windows open. The one I was looking at was the JetProp. The TBMs I was looking at were in the other browser.

Tim

The doors are designed so that they will close and provide more torque when your temp limited (With the -42's on a Meridian, you rarely are).

If you was in a Meridian and your at max torque, andIFyou had a door, closing it would then direct more more air into the engine. However, you would then have to pull the power back to bring it in limits bringing the engine into the same torque/fuel flow settings it was in the first place.

The argument that inertial seperator doors would make a Meridian more efficient is false.

Jetprop and King Air, yes, a door is needed because they tend to temp out and you need every ounce of air for cooling as possible so you can pull more torque. Meridians were designed to be user friendly and with the big engine, you can get full (derated) power without the doors.

Also it wont reduce fuel flow as that is a direct result of torque (open the inertia door and watch your fuel flows and torque drop, then bring up power to where torque was before you opened it, and fuel flow is identical)

You guys are missing the point on why Piper chose the -42. According to what I have heard, there were two main reasons. The first was they wanted a super simple to operate airplane, and reverting to the same methodology that they had used in the Cheyenne was not what they wanted (having flown a cheyenne, I can somewhat understand that). Secondly, they wanted to ensure that they never had to worry about temps in the aircraft. Every turbine aircraft I have flown is flown by temps. In the meridian, you fly with a torque chart, somewhat like what you do in a PC-12. You set your torque based upon altitude and OAT.

Yes, you can get a more efficient setup if you have oil cooler doors and ice doors. But, you make it more complex, and that was not the direction piper wanted to go.

I am quite ambivalent about both setups, although I must admit it is nice to not have to worry about it. The biggest thing I think that the Meridian has going for it is that it is a newer model airplane, with newer systems, most of which I like. The engine displays are digital, not analog gauges. The switches and systems are controlled by relays and more automated systems. Some may not like this, but I do.

While I would have no problem flying a jetprop (and actually tried to buy one prior to the Meridian), there is the unmistakable truth that some people will not buy an airplane that has been modified by an STC (just like some won't touch an airplane with damage history). The Meridian came from the factory as a turboprop and was certified to those requirements. The Jetprop is a conversion. In many cases, that means they could do things you couldn't do in a newly certified airplane. (for instance, how many wheels does a meridian have versus a jetprop)...

-jason

Jason,

When I looked at the Mirage, one of the items the salesman kept coming back to was the Meridian is designed as an Entry TurboProp for the first time TurboProp owner.
That really rings true with the information you posted. Now if only I actually understood most of it...

Tim

I understand what they were trying to do, but IMO it just doesn't make sense. Just want to make it clear that that's my opinion. A turboprop is so dang easy to fly as it is. It's not like they did something to drastically reduce the work load. So they made it so you didn't have to flip a switch every once in a while and you look at a torque gauge instead of a temp gauge. I'm sure there area a couple other things they did also, but nothing much else of significance. They could have done everything exactly the same when they made the airplane but used the -135 instead of the -42 and would have had a much better plane IMO because it would do everything it does now but go farther and cost less doing it. A Meridian with a -135 would be able to cruise ~1100 nm AND still have IFR reserves vs the current range of ~890 nm with IFR reserves. BIG difference in capable range.

Edit: Also wanted to point out that my TurbineAir is flown by torque vs temps. I do not know for sure, but I would also think they rigged the JetProp to do the same.

Edit: I agree that not everyone is going to want to buy a converted airplane. With that said, I think it is telling that when you look on the market (controller) there are about 40 Meridians for sale but only 8-9 JetProps. That tells me that the people generally hold on the the JetProp more than the Meridian, for whatever that is worth.

Im with Gerry, how hard is it to open an inertial seperator? I lose 35 kts when I open my inertial seperator in cruise in the TBM. I use less fuel but my engine is not as efficient. Im glad I have the option.
Also a -135 would burn less fuel idling and at low altitude.
Most of the modification they did was because of that bigger engine. The bigger tail was done mostly because of that bigger and heavier engine.

Jason, Marc,

In the Cirrus you have two engine handles. A throttle and mixture. The prop speed is automatically controlled via linkages to the throttle. I mean how hard is it to move one more lever right? Yet Cirrus has been out selling everyone else for fifteen years. (not saying this is why, just showing it is part of the package)

Sure it might be easy for YOU, but it goes back to the KISS principle and target market.

Tim

That could be true. It was explained to me however that the tail was made bigger because of the wedges that Piper added to the wing to add more fuel because the engine burned so much. The wing wedges negatively effected stall characteristics, so they increased the size of the tail to help offset what was going on.

I am a Cirrus driver and reasonably active on the COPA site. I am enjoying this site as well since I joined a couple of weeks ago.

I am intrigued by this post on the Meridian, as I have been thinking that my next "move up" would be the Mirage,not a Meridian. Most likely a 2008 or 2009 with the G1000 avionics, which my present plane has.

The Mirage while 50 kts slower burns half the fuel, has a 25% further range and costs probably $600k less, comparing similar year models.

A dream mission of mine, which my Cirrus cannot do, is Naples to Notre Dame non stop....a 960 NM trip. The Mirage with its 1,250 NM range seems to have the ability to do it. The Meridian not so much, with a similar range as my Cirrus at a little less than 1,000 NM.

Most writers on this thread seem to think the turbine is worth the price/cost. Is this mostly a safety issue based on the reliability of the turbine, or are there other important factors? If the engine out safety record is somewhat similar, I would gladly give up the speed for the increased range, fuel efficiency and reduced acquisition costs (I am aware of the difference in TBO).

What are your thoughts...

T

Tom,

I hear where you are coming from. My mission usually is around 500 miles. I wanted to get turbine reliability, known ice and increased speed and pressurization. I love the TBM, price may be prohibitive. I also love the twin redundancy of KA 90.

The major benefits of the turbine are speed and simplicity. The engine out safety record is similar in that engine failure fatalities are vanishingly rare in both machines. That is not to say each engine is equally reliable - turbine is better (but not perfect). But the piston PA46's glide really, really well. Given that most of your time is spent up high, there are lots of choices most times when an engine quits. PA46 pilots - piston or turbine - mostly kill perfectly good airplanes along with themselves.

A mirage is a much better fit for a 1000nm trip than a Meridian. The Mirage can take 140 gals fuel with STC'd wingtip fuel ports. How much load do you need over that range? G1000 mirages aren't huge load haulers.