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.

I see a lot of new G1000 Meridian being bought for over $2m, kept 3-400 hours then sold at a loss or traded on a TBM.






sold

Yes, someone who can afford a new Meridian should not buy a Meridian. They should either pony up for a new TBM or get a used one. Fortunately, people keep buying them so the people looking for a 6 figure SE turbine have something to buy 10 years later.

That's a great mission for a Mirage. Is APF-SBN going to be your milk run or just something really important/useful for you? This for football games (i.e. summer) or year round?

Is you wife OK with 5 hour legs?

Marc:

I know a few former TBM owners that are now happy Mustang owners. I think it is all about perspective. I know you don't like the Meridian, but it does fit a relatively big need for many people.

Sure, if you had 1.4M to spend (1.3 plus a new panel) you could get an older TBM. Or, for under 900k you could get a meridian. For some that is the difference between doing it or not. I am a happy Meridian owner, but would love to move up. Would I move to a TBM, no, it doesn't give me much more than what I have, except for a much higher price tag. I get some range and speed (I do about 268-270 in my meridian), but not the baggage or a much larger cabin. Would I move to a PC-12 or a jet, yes. The TBM is a nice plane, but, today, not necessarily a 'step up' entry turboprop for many people.

Charles is right, the malibu is super efficient and can make those long legs. My wife doesn't allow it. If I am lucky I get 3.5 hours, and maybe if I distract people enough, I could get 4... maybe, and I would pay for it later... I did love my 84 malibu.... :-)

Think of a TBM as an expanded mission airplane. It's much more of a workhorse, but....

Understand the capabilities of each single turbines instead of pitting them against each other. Of the three common single turbines on the market, there is one that is just right for you, and it could be any one of them....depending on you. There isn't just one right answer.

Owners stepping up to turbines often get comfortable with the mission capability and then change their mission. If you increase your mission from what a Meridian was intended, you'll be unhappy (to Marc's point).

I live near the Piper factory. I can tell you there is a large group of owners that absolutely love their Meridians. Those owners came out of something like a Bonanza or Cirrus. If you fly 100-150 hrs./yr., and hit the sweet spot of that intended market, you'll absolutely love the Meridian. Most owner/operators fly light. It does 4 people @ 600 NM (900 NM with 2-3)....much like a Bonanza, but a lot faster and more comfortable at altitude. But, don't forget the 4X operating budget. The simplicity of a Meridian was designed for the guy that flys once a week like many owner/operators do. We all think we are aces, but there aren't too many once-a-week aces.

Comparing purchase price without knowing anything about the other costs is way too common. There is a lot of moving pieces to consider, and don't forget the impact that hours have due to overhaul cost ($110.00/hr.)....that's nowhere close to a piston depreciation. Without all the math behind it, how do you compare a 2007 Meridian w/700 hrs. to a 1999 TBM with 2700 hrs.? The operating costs are substantially different too.

I could type 40 pages explaining the differences, but I'm exhausted from shopping. I've done the research. There's not just one perfect turbine choice, but there is a right decision for each owner. You can easily under buy, but you can just as easily over buy. We usually use one liner answers until we are really ready to lay down the money, and then we spend the time to learn. It's enough money you have to intelligently pick your poison.

Marc:

I know a few former TBM owners that are now happy Mustang owners. I think it is all about perspective. I know you don't like the Meridian, but it does fit a relatively big need for many people.

Sure, if you had 1.4M to spend (1.3 plus a new panel) you could get an older TBM. Or, for under 900k you could get a meridian. For some that is the difference between doing it or not. I am a happy Meridian owner, but would love to move up. Would I move to a TBM, no, it doesn't give me much more than what I have, except for a much higher price tag. I get some range and speed (I do about 268-270 in my meridian), but not the baggage or a much larger cabin. Would I move to a PC-12 or a jet, yes. The TBM is a nice plane, but, today, not necessarily a 'step up' entry turboprop for many people.

Charles is right, the malibu is super efficient and can make those long legs. My wife doesn't allow it. If I am lucky I get 3.5 hours, and maybe if I distract people enough, I could get 4... maybe, and I would pay for it later... I did love my 84 malibu.... :-)

Gerry,

We get the fact you do not like the Meridian or the PA46 line.
For many others, it is a great solution. It almost fit my mission, it was short on UL for my planned mission. If it fit, it would have been a stretch but one I would have seriously considered. There is no way I could stretch and get the TBM.

Tim

Meridians are not falling out of the air in pieces. They are built to Part 23 certification standards. Yes, they wrinkle wings sometimes. You can purchase spare wings and still come out spending far less to operate a Meridian vs. a TBM for a given mission.

I have been researching the heck out of this! Meridian would probably work great for most of my missions. Usually 500nm with 3 people and light bags. Sometimes I need to fly 1000nm with 4 or 5. Ideally the TBM would fit the bill. Cost of acquisition is a stretch.
I still love the KA 90. It is just so much slower and higher operating cost.

Jason,

Its not that I dont like the Meridian its just that its not for me.
I need more payload, range and then I hate wrinkled wings.
The TBM is so more better built and I dont worry when I get in turbulence.
I just feel a TBM is a better value over time that a Meridian.








Marc:

I know a few former TBM owners that are now happy Mustang owners. I think it is all about perspective. I know you don't like the Meridian, but it does fit a relatively big need for many people.

Sure, if you had 1.4M to spend (1.3 plus a new panel) you could get an older TBM. Or, for under 900k you could get a meridian. For some that is the difference between doing it or not. I am a happy Meridian owner, but would love to move up. Would I move to a TBM, no, it doesn't give me much more than what I have, except for a much higher price tag. I get some range and speed (I do about 268-270 in my meridian), but not the baggage or a much larger cabin. Would I move to a PC-12 or a jet, yes. The TBM is a nice plane, but, today, not necessarily a 'step up' entry turboprop for many people.

Charles is right, the malibu is super efficient and can make those long legs. My wife doesn't allow it. If I am lucky I get 3.5 hours, and maybe if I distract people enough, I could get 4... maybe, and I would pay for it later... I did love my 84 malibu.... :-)

Marc:

I like the TBM too, truth be told, if I could have gotten into one for what I got into the meridian for, I would have done it. No brainer for me between a new meridian versus a used TBM, hands down TBM every time.

I think the wrinkled wings are caused by bad pilots, not bad airframes. You fly your airplane over redline into severe turbulence, bad stuff happens.

Regarding turbulence, I had an interesting conversation with a TBM pilot a few months ago when we both landed in Phoenix. It was a typical July afternoon, and we were all getting beat up from the thermals. I asked him what it was like for him, he said it was bad and he had to pull back to maneuvering speed because his passengers were getting beat up. I had to do the same thing. Of course, the TBM has a higher maneuvering speed than the meridian, but I guess I was surprised he would do that too. However, I was looking at PC-12s recently and heard the same thing. I think you just need a heavier plane to get through that stuff at any reasonable speed.

I ask this without wanting to start a debate, but one of the things that kind of scared me about the TBM were comments I heard about the landing gear inspection costing 50-60k. Is there truth to that. It kind of scared me off and I have heard it from at least 3 shops and 4 owners.

First off I don't hate Meridians. But I'm with Marc in that I don't want to have to worry about wrinkling my wings. When Rocket did certification on both the Jetprop and the Bonanza they said they were surprised at the result. The Piper wing didn't bend much and as they said it to me "crumpled like a pop can" where as the Bonanza wing took an incredible amount of load in which the wing bent to about a 45 degree angle before they snapped. Knowing that and hearing about people having wrinkled wings just says to me that they weren't too far off from falling out of the sky as you put it. Again, I don't hate the airplane, heck I almost bought one. But I would rather spend a little more and get a lot more airplane.

The only reason I would step up in airplane from what I have now is to carry more load. It's just a lot more feasible to take 6 full sized adults in a TBM and leave a little fuel off and still make my destination than to do so in a Meridian. The range isn't good enough in a Meridian to leave off fuel and do this for my mission.

Also, yes a landing gear overhaul can cost about $40-50k. It used to be a mandatory 10 year event. Now it's an on condition inspection. Meaning that you could go 15-20 years before needing to do the overhaul now.

Dont know about these turboprops but jets typically have a rough air penetration speed. In the G450/550 its 270KIAS/.80M above 10,000ft and 240 KIAS below. Whereas maneuvering speed is 206KIAS. Not sure you'd need to slow all the way down to Va to keep from bending the airframe.

WDIK?

Meridians don't wrinkle wings unless you fly it outside the certified flight parameters. Piper has had about a dozen experiences out of 2000 PA 46 airframes built.

The PA 46 was intended for the owner flown market, and that brings in a lot of different experience levels. TBM and Pilatus are often professionally flown, and that helps improve their incident rate. Training makes all the difference.

One determination was made when pilots fly above the freezing levels without pitot heat, and over speed on the way down. It's always been low time pilots that don't operate an airplane within approved procedures that led to the wrinkling.

The issue has been corrected with transition and recurrent training.