This is obviously an off topic, but I was looking to see if people out there would have some input.

Who out there has been able to take a closer look at the Evo? How was the construction quality? Anyone know how different the PT6-135A is vs the -35? According to the PT6 Wiki they are both the same HP but the -135A has a 1900 rpm gear box and the -35 has a 2200 rpm. I would have thought the higher RPM would have given them a tad better climb and speed. Also, it seems crazy that a new -135A is $500k.

Other thoughts?

Don't know much about the airframe, but I believe you are correct regarding the engines: That a -135A and a -35 are almost identical except that the -135A has a higher gearbox reduction ratio, making the propeller turn at a slower speed. Since shaft horsepower is the product of Torque and propeller Speed, 750 SHP can be developed at 2,200 RPM using about 1,790 ft-lbs of torque but at 1,900 RPM torque would be about 2,080 ft-lbs. The slower propeller speed has the advantage of less noise but the disadvantage is, sometimes, a noticeable decrease in propeller efficiency, especially at takeoff and climb speeds.

Test flew one a few years ago. Still in contact with the salesman if you want an introduction.
I love the plane, it was what convinced me pressurization is the way to go if flying long daya or far.
The construction quality is incredible. The plane is very well behaved, stalls easy, flays fast or slow. Glides like you would not believe.
The downside. $$$$$

In terms of the PT6 Engines. The 135A is more fuel efficient, the prop is more efficient at a slower speed. I do not recall why, but the engine will temp out at higher altitudes. If I recall correctly the 135A also had a lower fuel burn at idle on the ramp and a more powerful beta.

If you gave other questions, post em. I will dig out notes and memories and answer what I can. What I cannot, I will ask the salesman.

Tim

This is what I'm not understanding. How is the -135A more efficient? I would guess that the prop could make that so if it was built for 1900 rpm efficiency, but wouldn't the higher rpm engine be able to do more? I was under the impression that the -135A and the -35 had the same components other than the gear box. The salesman that I spoke to said that the -135A is new and the -135 is the same as the -35 but the -135A is different. But he was unsure of that statement himself.

Wouldn't a lower RPM allow a longer prop (limited by the tips going supersonic at takeoff RPM)?

And wouldn't the resulting larger prop disk offer more static thrust to get "out of the hole" in addition to offering a quieter cabin in flight?

FWIW, my understanding is that the PT6A-135 and the -34 are nearly identical, except for the slower turning propeller (due to the higher RGB ratio), whereas the -135A and the -35 are comparable except for the RGB difference.

The -34 and -135 came out long before the -35 and -135A.

Dont know anything about the aircraft but I know Vincent Gagnon from Quebec, he sells firewall forward PT6-42A for the Evo. He did the one for Austin Myers.

http://www.aerotekaviation.ca/

There's a guy I see routinely ripping down the horizon at 230kts overhead my place of work.

I love watching that airplane flyby. Looks like a racer not a passenger hauling airplane. Very sleek lines and it doesn't even look/sound like its workin hard to attain the speeds I see it flying by at.

The pilot must be a very happy man.

Yep, I've seen that conversion already. Interesting part about this is #1 that the original Engineer of the Evolution designed this mod and #2 Lancair is pulling functions out of the G900X if they know a person is going to install the -42 so that the engine instruments and G700X autopilot won't work with this engine. It's a childish way of Lancair trying to get people to buy everything from them, and from what I understand they have already lost some sales because of this.

Another thing that I can't seem to comprehend is the cost of the Evolution. I thought the benefit of a kit plane is that it is cheaper. Yet a brand new SR22T with G1000, 210 ktas, 1100 nm range, CERTIFIED airplane (made of carbon fiber) can be bought for ~$760,000, and it's built for you. But the Evolution that uses the G900X (very cheap version of the G1000), totally built (which you have to do a good amount of) experimental so it can be a little more difficult to insure, costs $800,000... WITHOUT AN ENGINE, PROP OR MOUNTS!!! How is that possible?

The Cirrus SR22 G5 airframe uses more carbon fiber than the previous G3 which created an allowance for 200 lb gross weight increase. The Evolution is practically 100% carbon fiber and it is a pressurized airframe with a cabin pressure differential of 6.5psi, which provides an 8000 ft. cabin altitude at FL280.

Standing next to the two airframes, you can easily see the Evolution is much larger and more robust.

I used to have a G36, just bought a Meridian in September.

I've been thru all the comparison exercises. I think the Evolution is cool, but it doesn't make it to into the finals when you're actually separating yourself from your cash.

When you move into a pressurized turbine, you want a cabin class air frame with an air stair door, deice, real radar, and especially something that's a lot easier to insure than a non-certified aircraft. The Evolution is missing a number of critical components.

Evolutions come into my airport on a regular basis. The are an intriguing airplane, just not at their price point. It feels like it should be a bit under a $ million, and it's clearly not.

Not sure I would spend $1.3m on a 4 seater homebuilt with no deicing.
A frend of mine had an Epic. He couldnt travel anywere outside of US or Canada.
He sold it and bought a TBM. He has been around the world a few time.

Get a used TBM. 6 seater, FIKI, proven, easy resale, worlwide support.

This is what I'm not understanding. How is the -135A more efficient? I would guess that the prop could make that so if it was built for 1900 rpm efficiency, but wouldn't the higher rpm engine be able to do more? I was under the impression that the -135A and the -35 had the same components other than the gear box. The salesman that I spoke to said that the -135A is new and the -135 is the same as the -35 but the -135A is different. But he was unsure of that statement himself.

When I priced it a few years ago, you can do it for under a million. But then you have a lot of labor into the plane, and also would be using a used PT6 which has about 1000 hours left on it. If I could have afforded the plane, I was going to look to replace the PT6 with another used one from converted KAs which were much cheaper then new.

Tim