A couple of questions for Cirrus folks:
My partner wants to update to some newer technology and a newer air frame and he is looking into Cirrus. My main mission will be 500 to 600 miles. Partner is looking at a 2015 G5 SR22 that is non turbo and non FIKI. It shows a usable load of 1400 Lbs. My question is am I better off in a 2014 G5 SR22T for around the same money or not?
The useful load is very nice and 300 pounds better than the turbo , I am based in NC on the coast and my mission will be Florida and the Bahamas mostly so non FIKI is not a complete deal breaker. There will be a little less speed and no up high operation over weather. Also,does a FIKI SR22T have better resale value than a non turbo non fiki?
Thanks for your insight.

I manage a fiki g5 sr22t. I’d stay away from the turbos in NC, it’s not a great engine package to begin with. The turbos add quite a bit of expense and weight. We are flying ours ~400-500 hrs a year. The useful load will be worth more than the ability to fly in the low flight levels which the N/A does fine. Your not getting over weather in the turbo especially Florida and Bahamas types. The fiki is nice, it works well, if your flying in the winter it’s a trip saver. The plane does not handle ice accumulation well.

When we went from a G1 to a G2 our mechanic told us to buy a naturally aspirated and stay away from the turbos. His point, we didn't need the turbo around North Carolina and there is considerable added expense associated with maintenance. I had a tough time finding a decent deal on an NA but found great deals on Turbo planes. Two years ago the turbos were cheaper than NA planes.

The turbo FIKI is just a much more capable plane. Maintenance will be more, and you do lose a little useful load. But if you don’t mind wearing oxygen, and you really want utility, the turbo FIKI is going to let you fly on days that the normally aspirated should stay on the ground. You can get plenty of utility out of a non-fiki normally aspirated aircraft. Just less mission capability. You may not want to fly, anyway, on days where the difference matters. Carrying passengers, though, not a fan of flying high with passengers in a non pressurized bird. Hard enough to ensure the pilot is doing well without the added stress of dealing with pax oxygen.

I live in Oklahoma which is at least as flat...

My friend has had two NA Cirrus both with inadvertent ice protection and had to top both engines. I think Nate Tinkle had a good experience with his.

I owned a 2013 G5 turbo with FIKI and if I were buying another Cirrus I'd do the same thing. Yes, there is a reduction in useful (though it never mattered to me) and there is additional maintenance expense with turbos. But, I found both my A36TN and my Cirrus to have more utility with wind and weather than my NA F33A. Also, the turbo is faster than the NA.

Finally, the FIKI system is a complete waste of money and useful load. Until you need it. Then it is unbelievably effective. I think the turbo and FIKI make the airplane more usable and dispatch able under more conditions and was therefore more valuable to me.

Sorry Mike but I find little in your observations that are correct. Yes, the TAT turbo SR22's incurred higher mx costs and are known to need regular work on the exhaust. With the Continental factory turbo (SR22T's), it's a much simpler turbo system that has proven to be much more reliable than the TAT. I've been flying the last (4) years on SR22T's, a 2012 G3 SR22T and now a 2013 G5 SR22T. I fly 250-350 hrs per year and in the last (4) years haven't spent one nickel on exhaust or turbo related issues. It's a great system.

Regarding icing, the FIKI equipped SR22's handle icing exceptionally well. I've been in moderate icing conditions on numerous occasions and the system has performed remarkably well every time.

To the OP, the biggest advantages of the turbo is on longer flights (over 2 hrs or so) where you get both a speed bump the higher you go as well as much higher tailwinds when going east. In my turbo, it's not uncommon for me to see 230-260 kts ground speed since it's doing 190kts TAS and catching 30-60kts tailwinds at 17-19K ft.

As an example, if I were to fly from OH to the east coast today (~450nm), I'd see a 30-35 kt tailwind and a GS of about 225 taking me 2 hrs. In an NA that flight would take at least 2.5 hrs. On a longer flight that time difference would be more like 45-60 min. Is that added GS worth it to you or not?

The other big advantage of turbo is the much higher climb rate that provides another 'out' in poor weather or through icing layers. Even in the southern states, you can find icing conditions almost year-round when you're in the mid to high teens. The NA begins climbing slower starting at about 6-7K ft. If you're trying to climb on top to get out of icing in a layer that extends to 9-10K ft, you're running out of climb performance in the upper portions of the clouds (where icing is the worst) right when you need the fastest climb performance. The Turbo sees 1,000+ fpm all the way to cruise altitude making climb through icing layers a piece of cake. I would NOT want any NA bird in icing conditions as you may not have an 'out' on top.

Lastly, in an NA bird your practical altitude choices range from 3K-10K ft. In a turbo your choices are 3K-25K (personally I don't fly higher than 18-19K ft, except for short excursions to the low 20's to top wx). When you're looking for nice smooth air, you may not be able to find it under 10K ft where you will almost always be able to find smooth air in the turbo.

If I had mostly regional flights that were less than 2 hours and lived in a very flat part of the country, the NA is a good choice. If you have lots of flights longer than that, I'd recommend the turbo and you don't want turbo without FIKI.

Again, I do believe this is a true statement for the TAT turbo birds but not so for Continental turbo (SR22T's).

Richard,

I own a G6 non-turbo, non-fiki. I lived in NC when I ordered it and I know live in southern VA.

Like you, my plane tends to fly to water and south!

I didn’t believe I needed a turbo in the southeast. There is no doubt a turbo fiki is a more capable plane. However, mine performs VERY nicely up to 15000 and I regularly fly there - especially in the summer. I did get onboard oxygen which I use above 10k.

When I ordered the plane, my salesperson (understandably) chastised me for not getting fiki. When I picked up the plane, three mechanics were taking care of a couple of minor squaks when they approached me and said, “you know we were talking about your plane and we agreed as A&P’s if we were ordering a plane, we would spec it just like yours!’ Affirmation baby!

For your mission you won’t go wrong either way.

Thank you everyone for all the good information! It is an amazing group that we have here on BT. Andrew, I was curious how she flew in the 13-15k levels? What climb rate can you keep?

Thanks

Florida and Bahamas trips...probably only rarely have to cancel a trip due to not having FIKI. Useful load on a NA non FIKI G5 is around 1250. 1190 on my FIKI NA G5. My Columbia 350 would climb sub 500fpm once over 13,000ft...two year old memory. NA bird is VERY efficient in mid teens.
I always felt safer up high flying to Bahamas. Went to Turks at 15,000.

Andrew, Your Avitar looks a bit like a Columbia 300 ,
I haven’t changed my Columbia Avitar either....

If only Cessna woulda stepped up and equipped it with a chute then many more pilots would Know how good an airframe we had.

I have to say, once you get used to having a turbo, it is really hard to go back to NA. The Columbia 400 just excels in the teens and above. Flying in the high teens and lower FL's means the airspace is pretty much all yours and the true airspeed is great.

I had a Seneca II prior (FIKI, turbocharged light twin) and that would be my choice for over water and for hauling heavy loads. I don't think I ever had a useful load issue in that plane. They're reasonably efficient if you fly them high. Still in production too.

The turbo airplanes really need to have someone intimately knowledgeable about how to set them up properly. The fuel flows are important to keep the TIT in line and provide longevity. I spent 2 days with a Cirrus turbo guru in Wisconsin after picking up an SR22TN form Las Vegas with a poorly configured engine. Big difference in how the engine ran. I prefer the TN to Turbocharged, but they both require setup beyond the factory specs. If you don’t have an A&P that will work with you, and slightly outside the factory parameters, you will eat cylinders every 4-600 hours. Properly setup, the full power FF is 39GPH and cruise TIT less than 1580F.

Speed is impressive 206KTAS@17000, 187@10000.

If it were me, I’d pick the NA, non FIKI, but not having FIKI is a resale limiter and you may want it even in NC in the winter.

Richard,

As you know it depends on temp, etc but typically I can eek out close to 500 ‘til 13 then between 350-400 by 15.

Brad,

You are spot on. I love my Cirrus but I still miss my Columbia!

Larry,

No doubt that is the case. While I hope/plan to keep my current bird for a while, I do believe there is a clear case to uPgrade to a turbo. My trips are most limited by time (away from work). If I had the ability to plan for longer legs than my typical 2 hours or less a turbo would be appealing. Then I would need FIKI...but then pressurization would be nice, and the performance of a turbine would be awesome...then I usually wake up.

I own neither but fly both an SR22 and SR22T FIKI. Last year I picked the NA option for 85 hours and the Turbo for 23 hours.

We have a G5 SR22T w/Fiki.

I guess I’m torn like you are. The additional useful load would be nice. However, fiki and turbo are great especially when living in Ohio. We operate for business mostly and it’s really nice to be able to go when we need to. Climb rates are wonderful all the way.... Fiki works wonders if you turn it on early enough.

Living south and if flying for fun.....I’d probably rather have the useful load for 2 couples and all the bags I wanted. If I had to stay in the islands or south Florida for a few extra days that be fine too...

I don’t think you’ll go wrong either way, great airplanes. Just understand you will lose a few days a year without all the options. Also - we have had zero turbo related additional costs in two years of flying it hard.