27 Apr 2024, 22:14 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 03 May 2017, 10:01 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/14/13 Posts: 6079 Post Likes: +4659
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Quote: http://www.taturbo.com/sr22/tat_vs_tcm.pdf Item #9 has my interest - would love to see the density/mixture control for the Bonanza. it's a unicorn, zero movement on it for 5-7 years from what i've seen
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 04 May 2017, 17:11 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/16/12 Posts: 5 Post Likes: +4 Location: Tampa, FL
Aircraft: SR22
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Very interesting Steve. I should be flying a Cirrus, but my decision was made for me when they would not support the TN installation. I do not quite understand that whole document. Anymore insight or specifics? Hi Ryan, My only insight was that the newest G1000 software release available in the field (v24) specifically has support for the TAT system, as this software release can be installed in older G1000 SR22s, including ones that were delivered with the TAT system from the factory in the 2008-2010 timeframe. I assumed that if you can install v24 on a 2008-2010 TAT plane, that you can install v24 on any TAT plane. I emailed TAT and they confirmed they have not done any G5 installs. There must be something else going on that would prevent TAT from installing v24 of the software. Sorry for earlier misleading response. Below is TAT's response: Steve, Thanks for your interest in our TN package for an SR22. No, sorry. The software package does not have a configuration for the TN System. Disappointing on Cirrus’ part. Best regards, Tim Description: cid:image002.jpg@01C90F3B.5CA23070 Timothy C. Roehl - President Tornado Alley Turbo, Inc. troehl@gami.com toll-free: 877-359-8284 ph: 580-332-3510 x1008 fx: 580-436-6622 http://www.taturbo.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 04 May 2017, 21:30 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/02/09 Posts: 8457 Post Likes: +8442 Company: OAA Location: Oklahoma City - PWA/Calistoga KSTS
Aircraft: UMF3, UBF 2, P180 II
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Very interesting Steve. I should be flying a Cirrus, but my decision was made for me when they would not support the TN installation. I do not quite understand that whole document. Anymore insight or specifics? Hi Ryan, My only insight was that the newest G1000 software release available in the field (v24) specifically has support for the TAT system, as this software release can be installed in older G1000 SR22s, including ones that were delivered with the TAT system from the factory in the 2008-2010 timeframe. I assumed that if you can install v24 on a 2008-2010 TAT plane, that you can install v24 on any TAT plane. I emailed TAT and they confirmed they have not done any G5 installs. There must be something else going on that would prevent TAT from installing v24 of the software. Sorry for earlier misleading response. Below is TAT's response: Steve, Thanks for your interest in our TN package for an SR22. No, sorry. The software package does not have a configuration for the TN System. Disappointing on Cirrus’ part. Best regards, Tim Description: cid:image002.jpg@01C90F3B.5CA23070 Timothy C. Roehl - President Tornado Alley Turbo, Inc. troehl@gami.com toll-free: 877-359-8284 ph: 580-332-3510 x1008 fx: 580-436-6622 http://www.taturbo.com
So, no change since 2013.
_________________ Travel Air B4000, Waco UBF2,UMF3,YMF5, UPF7,YKS 6, Fairchild 24W, Cessna 120 Never enough!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 06 May 2017, 00:34 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/01/11 Posts: 6792 Post Likes: +4541 Location: In between the opioid and marijuana epidemics
Aircraft: 182, A36TC
|
|
Thank you Steve. Still amazes me avionics can have this much power. Going to need a Navajo to fit a family of four now. Cirrus does not make a seven seater. Oh wait they do but it flies low and slow according to all the experts!
_________________ Fly High,
Ryan Holt CFI
"Paranoia and PTSD are requirements not diseases"
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 19 Jun 2017, 23:52 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/19/12 Posts: 45 Post Likes: +29
Aircraft: TBM960, XCub, Zlin N
|
|
I fly a G5 SR22T and had a G3 SR22T prior. CHTs in cruise at 30.5" lop are typically 360-375 degrees at 8000-12000 ft (my usual cruising altitudes), and 390 in full power, full rich, climb. Up high, say 17,000 they are a little higher, maybe 15 degrees in cruise. At 8000 feet I usually true out at about 178, and at 10000 in the low 180s. Also, I have about 750 hours between the two planes and no issues at all with the engines. Hope that helps.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 20 Jun 2017, 13:32 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/12/08 Posts: 420 Post Likes: +237 Location: Charleston, SC
Aircraft: Big Jet-Little Prop
|
|
Geoffrey,
They are both very good and the above comments are all consistent with my experience. When counseling potential legacy SR buyers I often remind them of the continual and rapid evolution of the Cirrus platforms. They are, from very early SN to factory new today, very good airaft but they are evolving. Don't let the search for a "perfect" example deter you from considering an "excellent" one.
Chris, CFI/I - CSIP
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 29 Jan 2021, 12:06 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/20/18 Posts: 7 Post Likes: +7
Aircraft: BE58, G36TN
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I've got a buddy that is most likely going to purchase an SR22 Turbo. He has told me that he doesn't want the TN version because of all of the engine problems. When the source of information was questioned, he said COPA, and several of the larger brokers.
I have heard in passing where cylinder replacement at 500hrs was common on the turbos, but never paid much attention to whether it was in reference to TN or Turbo.
I know we are all biased on this board to TAT (myself included), but I'd like to be able to get some more factual information about the differences between the two engine options.
Are there performance differences? In general, they are about the same in performance (within a few knots) - the bigger variable is the pilot and how we manage the engine. It is hard to compare POH values, because the SR22T uses CHT at 420 in cruise, but the SR22 TAT supplement targets CHT of 380. The two POH docs don't have fuel flows you can directly line up to get an apples to apples comparison. https://cirrusaircraft.com/service-support/G3 TAT Supplement: http://www.netefb.com/Documentation/Cir ... lement.pdfG3TPOH: http://servicecenters.cirrusdesign.com/ ... 72-003.pdfG5T POH: http://servicecenters.cirrusdesign.com/ ... 72-005.pdfUnfortunately, we can't easily compare them head to head because Cirrus never delivered them from the factory at the same time. Cirrus first made the TAT an option in 2006, but stopped sometime in early 2010. Then in 2010, they changed to the Continental Turbo from the factory and discontinued the TAT option. So that does mean there are more older TAT planes in the fleet which may skew the maintenance picture. TAT has a brief comparison on their site of the two engines as well: http://www.taturbo.com/sr22/tat_vs_tcm.pdfBudget will typically drive the decision more than the engine type. TAT planes are 2007-2010 and T planes are 2010-today. If I were advising your friend, this is the decision tree I would use: 1) Do I need to have extra 200 pounds of useful load (3600 pounds versus 3400 pounds)? If yes, 2013+ G5 planes are your only choice. 2) Do I need FIKI (flight into known ice)? If yes, 2009+ G3 and 2013+ G5 planes 3) Do I need Garmin G1000 avionics versus Avidyne? If yes, 2008+ G3 planes That will help you narrow it down. Both the TAT and T planes don't seem to make it to TBO without some cylinder work. How early that cylinder work happens directly depends on how hard the engine is run. Hope that helps. Good luck!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 29 Jan 2021, 12:34 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/30/17 Posts: 198 Post Likes: +159
|
|
I flew an 07 Avidyne 22 TN and loved it. MX is higher on any turbocharged engine vs. a normally aspirated engine. My Cirrus shop thought they both cost about the same over time; the TN requires a bit more ongoing MX while the T tends to go longer between MX needs but when the come up, they tend to cost more. So it evens out over a few years of operation, and both cost more than the normally aspirated Conti. But if you regularly fly in the teens, or will be hot and/or high a good percentage of the time, I recommend a TN or T (but that's just my personal view). The NA, TN or T will all do the job ...
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SR22TN vs SR22T Posted: 03 Apr 2021, 16:26 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/21/19 Posts: 21 Post Likes: +6
Aircraft: Cirrus SR22
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Sorry off topic, but out of curiosity what is the real world max cruise speed and altitude on a non-turbo'd SR22? Seems like most Cirrus guys are filing for about 175 at a level off of 6 or 8 thousand, which is where I used to fly my old NA S35 with a 550. I have a normally aspirated SR-22 and I generally see about 174kts at 10,500ft LOP
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|