28 Mar 2024, 16:30 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 28 Apr 2017, 08:07 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/02/09 Posts: 8415 Post Likes: +8303 Company: OAA Location: Oklahoma City - PWA/Calistoga KSTS
Aircraft: UMF3, UBF 2, P180 II
|
|
I can't speak to any performance differences between the two systems in the same airframe. I can say that I have operated both a TAT TN system and the Turbo system installed in the G5 Cirrus with excellent experience in both cases. Both systems ran well and smoothly LOP. My TN aircraft had several cylinder replacements in its first 1000 hours. I did not fly the Cirrus that long and had no cylinder issues during my ownership.
I think that your friend should buy the best example he can find of either plane within his budget. If his budget allows for a G5 Cirrus I would highly recommend that over the G3 even if he had an engine preference. The G5 is a significant improvement in airframe and avionics.
_________________ Travel Air B4000, Waco UBF2,UMF3,YMF5, UPF7,YKS 6, Fairchild 24W, Cessna 120 Never enough!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 28 Apr 2017, 12:19 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/16/12 Posts: 5 Post Likes: +4 Location: Tampa, FL
Aircraft: SR22
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I've got a buddy that is most likely going to purchase an SR22 Turbo. He has told me that he doesn't want the TN version because of all of the engine problems. When the source of information was questioned, he said COPA, and several of the larger brokers.
I have heard in passing where cylinder replacement at 500hrs was common on the turbos, but never paid much attention to whether it was in reference to TN or Turbo.
I know we are all biased on this board to TAT (myself included), but I'd like to be able to get some more factual information about the differences between the two engine options.
Are there performance differences? In general, they are about the same in performance (within a few knots) - the bigger variable is the pilot and how we manage the engine. It is hard to compare POH values, because the SR22T uses CHT at 420 in cruise, but the SR22 TAT supplement targets CHT of 380. The two POH docs don't have fuel flows you can directly line up to get an apples to apples comparison. https://cirrusaircraft.com/service-support/G3 TAT Supplement: http://www.netefb.com/Documentation/Cir ... lement.pdfG3TPOH: http://servicecenters.cirrusdesign.com/ ... 72-003.pdfG5T POH: http://servicecenters.cirrusdesign.com/ ... 72-005.pdfUnfortunately, we can't easily compare them head to head because Cirrus never delivered them from the factory at the same time. Cirrus first made the TAT an option in 2006, but stopped sometime in early 2010. Then in 2010, they changed to the Continental Turbo from the factory and discontinued the TAT option. So that does mean there are more older TAT planes in the fleet which may skew the maintenance picture. TAT has a brief comparison on their site of the two engines as well: http://www.taturbo.com/sr22/tat_vs_tcm.pdfBudget will typically drive the decision more than the engine type. TAT planes are 2007-2010 and T planes are 2010-today. If I were advising your friend, this is the decision tree I would use: 1) Do I need to have extra 200 pounds of useful load (3600 pounds versus 3400 pounds)? If yes, 2013+ G5 planes are your only choice. 2) Do I need FIKI (flight into known ice)? If yes, 2009+ G3 and 2013+ G5 planes 3) Do I need Garmin G1000 avionics versus Avidyne? If yes, 2008+ G3 planes That will help you narrow it down. Both the TAT and T planes don't seem to make it to TBO without some cylinder work. How early that cylinder work happens directly depends on how hard the engine is run. Hope that helps. Good luck!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 28 Apr 2017, 12:56 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/01/11 Posts: 6689 Post Likes: +4354 Location: In between the opioid and marijuana epidemics
Aircraft: 182, A36TC
|
|
Aviation Consumer looked into this. A T is slower, burns more fuel, and runs hotter. Both can be destroyed by ignorant pilots and instructors. If you want new, you do not have much of a choice. The T does climb better and takeoff sooner because it produces more HP.
_________________ Fly High,
Ryan Holt CFI
"Paranoia and PTSD are requirements not diseases"
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 11:22 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/14/10 Posts: 23 Post Likes: +7
|
|
No more TNs from Cirrus, they will only supply the IO550-K.
Ralph at the Cirrus Service Center in Tulsa said its normal to get about 1000 to 1200 hours before TBO on the TN engine.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 30 Apr 2017, 18:17 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/01/11 Posts: 6689 Post Likes: +4354 Location: In between the opioid and marijuana epidemics
Aircraft: 182, A36TC
|
|
Brian,
AFAIK the Garmin will not speak TN. The kind of boxed the TAT out with avionics. Not nice.
_________________ Fly High,
Ryan Holt CFI
"Paranoia and PTSD are requirements not diseases"
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 30 Apr 2017, 19:38 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/02/09 Posts: 8415 Post Likes: +8303 Company: OAA Location: Oklahoma City - PWA/Calistoga KSTS
Aircraft: UMF3, UBF 2, P180 II
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Brian,
AFAIK the Garmin will not speak TN. The kind of boxed the TAT out with avionics. Not nice. This is correct. When I was ordering my plane in 2013 I discussed this with TAT. There may have been a possibility of a work around but I don't know if that ever happened. As far as it not being nice, it's business. And, the continuing integration of the Perspective version of the G1000 with the airplane and its systems probably had something to do with it. Buy the version of the plane that best fits the budget and mission.
_________________ Travel Air B4000, Waco UBF2,UMF3,YMF5, UPF7,YKS 6, Fairchild 24W, Cessna 120 Never enough!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 02 May 2017, 11:12 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/16/12 Posts: 5 Post Likes: +4 Location: Tampa, FL
Aircraft: SR22
|
|
Username Protected wrote: This is correct. When I was ordering my plane in 2013 I discussed this with TAT. There may have been a possibility of a work around but I don't know if that ever happened.
Something must have changed since you talked to Cirrus and TAT in 2013.
http://servicecenters.cirrusdesign.com/ ... -42-11.pdf
The latest released version of the G1000/perspective is v24, and the service bulletin for v24 clearly applies to TAT installations as well.
I don't know if anyone has asked if the G6/G1000+ software supports the TAT STC.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 02 May 2017, 16:17 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/01/11 Posts: 6689 Post Likes: +4354 Location: In between the opioid and marijuana epidemics
Aircraft: 182, A36TC
|
|
Very interesting Steve. I should be flying a Cirrus, but my decision was made for me when they would not support the TN installation. I do not quite understand that whole document. Anymore insight or specifics?
_________________ Fly High,
Ryan Holt CFI
"Paranoia and PTSD are requirements not diseases"
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 02 May 2017, 19:45 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/21/10 Posts: 433 Post Likes: +212 Location: Sugar Land, TX
Aircraft: V35B TN
|
|
Quote: http://www.taturbo.com/sr22/tat_vs_tcm.pdf Item #9 has my interest - would love to see the density/mixture control for the Bonanza.
_________________ Aviation Weather Theory; If they understood how it worked, it would be Aviation Weather Fact.
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|