Kevin, 36.5" MP is top of the green arc and recommended max MP on takeoff / climb. You are permitted short excursions in the yellow arc which is from 36.5"-37.5" MP.

On the TSIO550C in the Columba 400 and TTx the engine is derated to 310hp (standard rating for the -C) at 2600RPM, 36" MAP and 39.5 GPH.

Since it is all mechanical/oil controlled, setting it up perfectly on one day, won't quite get it right on other days. The Continental data allows a full power fuel pump setup that's too lean when set to the low end of the range, resulting in high CHT. When FF at full power is set to the maximum allowable range, I've found it works perfectly well.

Low compression engines will always have higher EGT than higher compression engines of similar size and power. The higher compression ratio equates to a larger expansion ratio on the power stroke. Simple physics dictate that the expelled exhaust gasses will thus have a lower temperature due to the expansion.

The Columbia factory engine installation is *excellent* by the way.

The Cessna TTx although using the same engine and components, skips some of the fine-tuning steps Columbia applied in the factory. There are some good shops who know how to tweek the TTx up to achieve the same excellent cooling results though.

I don’t believe that the Columbia, Corvalis, T240, TTx, et al, was a failure. I believe that Cessna failed it.

Brian,

8.5:1 pistons?

Who makes your TN setup?

Correct, tornado alley

The TL;dr of AGATE is Cirrus figured out how to adapt a kitplane to mass production and Columbia figured out how to certify a kitplane. Things that somehow passed the original certification like using Vaseline on fuel senders or tweaking fuel flow above Continental spec didn’t work with the recertification. And the fact that Cirrus is a marketing company that happens to be in the airplane business and Cessna has the junior varsity of marketing interns assigned to the piston division was the nail in the coffin for the TTx program.

I'm not sure that's fair. The Klapmeier brothers were true airplane builders before they started Cirrus. They did many innovations to the Glassair including the retractable landing gear before starting Cirrus. The first plane was the VK-30 where the V=Jeff Viken and K=Dale and Alan Klapmeier. Jeff currently works for NASA at Langley Research Center. I have known all three since the late 1990s.

Heads up, I find the two airplanes very compatible. The TTx is faster, the Cirrus, to me, more comfortable. Other than that, they are nip and tuck.

If you want to know why Cirrus succeeded, the number one reason, ask the 9,000 people that bought them.

The defining issue is the chute: period. You may not agree with that but 9,000 buyers obviously don't care.

I'm planning on buying a faster, turbo airplane. I'm not considering the TTX for one reason.

Want to guess?

Jg

Cause it ain’t got no chute!

And cause it ain’t no acclaim type S!

Cirrus having a superior product doesn’t exclude superior marketing.

Interesting. Why is that? Ive always liked the corvalis

[/quote]When we put potential buyers into demos of the TTx side by side with a Cirrus SR22T, NO ONE chose the TTx. No one. With no salesperson running numbers and pushing one over the other. Just a CFI and a mechanic to answer questions. No one chose the TTx, well before it was obvious it was going to be discontinued. Most people got into the TTx first, and then remarked how much nicer the Cirrus was. Over a quarter did not even want to fly the TTx after comparing it on the ground to the Cirrus.[/quote]

Curious what version of the cirrus was this. The early sr22 seemed pretty rough to me on fit and finish.

A new ttx would have been contemporary with a G5 22T. Not a beta version

Maybe it is the roominess of the Cirrus.
At 6’2” I fly with the seat all the way back and still the rear seat occupants have several inches of room between their knees and front seat back.
Contrast that to the Corvallis. If the same seat position is used as in the Cirrus then there is almost no room for even a childs legs. The Corvallis rep at the AOPA fly in (KGON) said and I quote “ it is really is a two seat plane” Obviously, if you are on the short side then things would be different for you