I've always been a fan of the Malibu Jetprop, it looks like Piper sure stepped up the game with the M600. Likes / dislikes?

Paging Chuck Ivester!!! Paging Chuck Ivester!!! *laughing*

We bought serial 18 in March 2019. Love the plane. I have no issues with getting in and out of the cockpit - I'm 5'8" and heavier than I should be but it's really not a big deal. Took like 3x to get the hang of it. The right seat is a little more challenging as there is a bit less room. That's one downside. The other downside is the "always on" inertial separator, which probably costs 20-30 knots of cruise speed. It makes the plane almost idiot-proof (and as a card-carrying member of the Village Idiots Association, I can swear to that!) ... but there are times when I would appreciate the extra speed.

On the plus side, passenger comfort it excellent as is the A/C and heating system. I find the front seats very comfortable for long flights (4-5.5 hour legs are common for me). The G3000 is a dream system in my opinion. And the fuel burn is typically under 40 gph at cruise.

This plane has LEGS. I flew from KILG (Wilmington, DE) to Houston Executive last week and with the headwinds, averaged 227 knots ground speed. Took 5.5 flight time on the flight timer. Cruised at FL300 at normal cruise TQ settings (or very close to them). Shut down after taxi with 490 lbs of fuel - which was nearly two more hours of flight. This plane legitimately has 1600 nm capability as it outperforms the book by a few percentage points consistently.

Easy to fly, easy to land, low stall speed and VREF. Docile in the stall. I really like the airplane. Worth a look if you are looking at an SETP and you need something that can reliably go 1000 nm+ in the range department.

PS - the new versions have auto throttle and auto land capability (as does the TBM 940 and Vision Jet). Those things might be important to some folks ... although performance is otherwise the same

I own serial #25. I have never received any considerations from Piper or a Piper dealer.

The good:

It is the Meridian that Piper should have delivered in 2000. The combination of the increased useful load, larger fuel tanks and higher Vmo (250kts) mean that you have so many more options when flight planning. You can go high and really far or you can stay in the teens in the winter going west and dodge heavy headwinds and still go more than 1000nm.

With full fuel, I can put 400lbs of people and stuff in mine. That's enough for me, my wife and our bags to fly way further than we want to. Joel's 1600nm number, in still air, is realistic, and you'll be doing 255-260 kts at FL290/300. Faster lower.

But the nice thing is with 1750 pounds of fuel and 1400++nm of range, you rarely need full fuel. So it's a very real 4 adult + bags airplane.

It's also very easy to get full fuel into, unlike the Meridian. And if you tip the line guy, you can get it beyond full. With just me in the airplane and $20 to the line guy, I've reached FL270 wth 1750 pounds of fuel -- full fuel -- showing in the tanks.

The systems and avionics are ridiculously simple. Almost too simple -- it spoils you for almost any other cabin class aircraft.

The maintenance costs are typical Meridian costs, which is a big plus.

It's also the absolute perfect BasicMed airplane -- 6,000lbs and you still have real legs and real speed, even below FL180.

The bad:

The airplane desperately needs an external baggage area. You are allowed 100lbs of baggage behind the aft seats and while that's typically more than enough, weight-wise, it's often not enough in terms of volume, especially with four people.

Most owners will want one or both optional ballast kits in the nose, as the airplane is quite tail heavy without them. To me, that means they could have brought back the nose baggage compartment from the PA46 and killed two birds with one stone.

The fleet has had significant downtime due to ADs and SBs. Hopefully the really big ADs are now behind us, but early owners ate a lot of downtime while Piper fixed its mistakes. It was all covered under warranty, but as the fleet starts to age out of warranty coverage, you wonder whether there is something nasty lurking.

The tl;dr:

If you need the range and payload, it's hard to find a single that goes further, faster and less expensively than a M600.

Range payload flexibility. Technology, high/hot/short/contaminated capability, efficiency, comfort, reliability. As I toy with my next plane, as I always have, this one has me handicapped in that any replacement is going to lack something the M600 brings to the table. Piper just hit the sweet spot with this one. A lot of good planes out there, but none that do everything well. This one does most things pretty well. If you can have only one plane, this one is pretty versatile.

At 6ft4 I had a horrible time trying to fit up front, ended up just enjoying the ride in the back seat. Anyone know who makes the seat adjustments that give a little extra head room?

Did you try the pilot seat? A few more inches room over the copilot seat due to the fixed oxygen cabinet behind the copilot seat. What I find helpful is to maximize use of all 3 controls. Seat all the way back, all the way down, and then recline it a little which gives more headroom. There is an STC for the legacy malibus and mirages to extend the seatback over the wing spar, but the M600 has already incorporated most of that benefit with the thinner high density foam and seat back extenders, that go over the spar. At 6'4 you are pushing the cockpit, but I have seen taller people make it work. One thing I am running into this week, if I recline my seat, it keeps the rear facing seat sitting pretty upright. Flying 5 adults and a kid 3500 nm this week. Having to compromise on how much room I take as PIC

Uh oh Charles. Sounds like you might be outgrowing the airframe :-)

Hi All,

Thanks for all the M600 comments/insights. I'm curious if anyone knows the serial number cutoffs for each year and the feature changes for each year? Clearly the biggest change seems to be 2020 introduction of the SLS. But I'm curious about more minor changes and differences each year, like changes to interior, avionics (when was G3000 Nix introduced?), etc...

Thanks in advance!
Darren

2021 #155-196
2022 #198-236
2023 #237 and up
2024 ?

New nose gear #198 and up

Duplicate

I’ve always liked the PA46 series, and I worked with the original chief engineer’s brother and son at a different company, where we had discussions on the Malibu design philosophy, which I’ve always felt was excellent. I’d like to have a Malibu (even made an offer on one needing some TLC), but otherwise these are out of my price range, especially turbine.

My main concern for the series is the low life limits on major airframe parts. The pressure vessels on most of them is life limited to a bit over 10,000 hours. The wings on most models have more life, so the fuselage is the controlling number in most cases.

However, when the -600TP came out, it had some surprisingly low airframe life limits: 7632 hours for the vertical fin, 6143 hours for the fuselage, and 5132 hours for the wing, per TCDS A25SO Revision 26 (June, 17, 2016).

Piper assured customers that further fatigue testing was being conducted that when completed should support life extensions to improve these numbers.

However, when Revision 33 (Dec. 8, 2020) was published, the wing life was actually lowered based on test results to 3767 hours. This is an astonishingly low life limit for a new aircraft in this class; less than TBO if on an engine program!

In a move I’ve never seen before, the explicit life limits were deleted from the TCDS with Revision 35 on December 14, 2021; instead referring to Chapter 4 of the AMM (manual part number 767-617) for this data. Note the life limits were not eliminated; their value was just removed from the TCDS, so for anyone wanting to research this, they will have to obtain access to the AMM to get it. Typically prospective buyers don’t have ready access to it, though a shop doing a pre-buy should (if they don’t, you ought to reconsider having them do the pre-buy!)

I for one have not seen a recent AMM for the -600TP, so I have no easy way to know what the current life limits are, and further testing could change them (potentially better, but also could be worse). Maybe one of the owners posting here can provide the current numbers from Chapter 4 of the AMM.

And BTW, these numbers are absolute; both the TCDS and Chapter 4 of the AMM are legally binding, and at the life limit, the part must be taken out of service. There is no grace period. Also, the current limit applies to all serials, even an airplane delivered with the 5132 hour wing life limit is now subject to whatever is currently published in the AMM if different (the 3767 limit if unchanged since 2020).

The only other way to extend these would be by an STC which would require a full fatigue test article cycled over several lifetimes, so would be prohibitively expensive. I can’t imagine anyone but Piper being able to achieve this.

When the life limit is reached, the only real options are to replace the affected part (the entire wing assembly in this case) or part out the aircraft. This needs to be considered in the overall life-cycle cost of ownership. It will also impact resale value, at least with knowledge buyers.

Again, I like the planes, but this one aspect is so far out of the norm for this class aircraft that I think it is important prospective buyers be aware of it.

-Phil

Phil

I am not sure but perhaps it is easier for Piper to change numbers in the AMM than to change the TCDS? Or, some lawyer decided that the change reduced liability for Piper for some reason?

Given what you posted a current AMM would be real interesting reading.

RAS

I don't know why it was removed from the TCDS; the AMM should have always had it. It may be the FAA only wants the numbers in one spot to minimize the chance of a disagreement in sources, but as both have to be FAA approved, it requires the same level of FAA review.

Chapters 4 and 5 of the typical AMM format are FAA approved and legally binding on operators; the rest of it isn't (unless you are under a 91.409e maintenance program; seems there are always exceptions to any absolutes!)

-Phil