The equal value TBM would be about 10yr older. The performance is clear, but what about maintenance? Is the additional TBM Mx worth the performance? How much more is the Mx?

Fly them both and it's pretty easy to distinguish the quality difference (TBM by a country mile).

Like you, I was considering both the last time I was shopping and ended up with a BE58.

I did a fair amount of research, but you should consider this still anecdotal.

We've got a Piper dealer here in KC and I imposed on them to get some real numbers. I also surveyed friends that have TBMs. Best I can tell, maintenance is similar. The Piper breaks a little more, but the parts are cheaper. The TBM rarely needs anything, but it costs more when it does.

Fixed costs were very similar. Operating cost per hour is higher on the TBM, but they're about equal per mile.

At that price point, avionics will be vastly different.

Several 1MM meridians have full Garmin glass. No TBMs do.

Also consider calendar and hourly mx items on TBM vs simple annual on meridian. Less a cost thing more about scheduling preferences.

-J

Also consider that if you foresee BasicMed in your future, the TBM is not eligible due to weight limits of 6000 lbs.

Anecdotal and not precise feedback here but after talking with owners of both, I would venture to say that if you looked at the total 10 year maintenance cost of both (non-engine related items), the mx on the TBM would look eye-watering compared to a Meridian. Meridian's typically go annual to annual with little / no mx events - just review a handful of their logbooks and you'll see this. TBM has many timed inspections and overhauls that add up to significant $$ over time. Some TBM owners may temporarily defer many items but then will likely have to pay for all the catch up work on the sale, so there's no avoiding it.

I think you'll find Don is correct on the costs (I'm sure I'm part of his "anecdotal" information ). But your question wasn't that but whether the performance increase is worth the additional maintenance costs. This is a purely subjective and personal question and I don't see how it can be answered empirically.

So, I'll just give my opinion. Yes. Charles will be along to say no. And Adam is undeniably right (though I expect a denial!).

The higher you fly and the longer you go I think the higher you wish you could go. Long trips which these planes do well mean weather is the number one differentiator in speed. If you don't have to dodge and weave as much times drop.

If you're flexible and don't mind the shuffle, in the faces of pax, then by all accounts the Meridian is comfortable for the pilot. I can't see how with the smaller cabin and wing comparison that the Meridian is as comfortable. And in my brief flying experience of the Meridian it wasn't.

What does that have to do with performance? A lot because all that matters in utility and utilization.

Both are good airplanes but when faced with a similar choice it was easy for me to buy the TBM and, despite the associated costs, I have a good period of ownership. If I were moving to a SETP again I'd buy the newest TBM I could afford.

BasicMed doesn't really work for either due to being limited to 18,000 ft. You want to fly higher than that for both of them.

Mike C.

Suppose someone was BM only. Wanted to fly higher, longer distances, older and wanted the comfort of pressurization, AC, known ice protection, then flying lower and slower could be accepted in some circumstances at higher fuel burns.

The meridian would be fine 18k and below. More fuel, more weather I think it would be a personal decision at that point Mike. It’s not all about numbers sometimes. Turbine brings safety and power which is ideal for x-country. I’ve considered these options myself…


TBM is too heavy to use with Basic Med(damn).

TBM has been a great bird. I had a 700C and now fly an 850G.
I couldn’t be happier.

And, the TBM maintenance must be done at a factory service center. If not, it will lose value. Only you can decide if the extra costs to maintain, and they are significant, is worth it to you.

The claims I have processed on the TBM we’re simply staggering.
So don’t hurt it.

Tj

I’ve come to the following economic conclusions:
The Meridian will average about $20k/year for maintenance.
The TBM will average about $40k/year for maintenance.
The TBM is 20% faster on 60% more fuel.
The TBM costs 70% more for a similar age, hours and equipment.

The TBM flies faster, further, and climbs better. The TBM has slightly better baggage. The TBM has significantly better door options (although I’m not sure that is the case on a $1M TBM). Passenger/Pilot room and comfort is comparable. The TBM is a better airplane. Is it better enough to warrant the additional cost? Not to me which is why I own a Meridian. Every time I run the math and consider what my time is worth I deduce that fuel stops aren’t so bad.

TBM is a bit of an odd duck to me, 441 or other twin Garrett aircraft are cheaper and about the same to run and about twice the size. Even if you rarely need the seats, the cockpit is much more comfortable. I do see an argument if you want a newer one or a warranty, but those are in a different price class. Most all of the 441 fleet is now running -10s and glass panel with new interior and paint, same as older TBM.

BasicMed doesn't really work for either due to being limited to 18,000 ft. You want to fly higher than that for both of them.

Mike C.