Cirrus SR22 Purchase advice needed.

Jeff wrote
the SR22 is fast compared to other planes with smaller engines, but compare it
to a plane with the same 310 HP engine, I dont think you will see much speed
difference.

what other planes out there have a 310 HP engine?

The 300 hp IO-550 is an option on at least the S-model Bonanza (and
probably many others). A friend of mine has one and I've flown it -
it's a great airplane, and it will comfortably cruise at 180 kts on
16-17 gph.

Michael

Michael wrote:

: The 300 hp IO-550 is an option on at least the S-model Bonanza (and
: probably many others). A friend of mine has one and I've flown it -
: it's a great airplane, and it will comfortably cruise at 180 kts on
: 16-17 gph.

: Michael

The 300HP IO-550, derated to 280HP, is in the Mooney Ovation2. The Ovation2
cruises in the 175 to 190 KT range on 15-16 GPH. You can get a very nice one
from the 2000 or 2001 model year for about $300K, if you look around.
--
Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)

Won't carry 4 people (with useful fuel) though. The new
Mooneys are wonderful planes but if you even occasionally
need to carry four people then they don't work out. Shame,
because the recent Bravo is a really lovely plane to
fly.

The SR22 will carry 4 people and a good fuel load. Just
be careful to avoid (a) clouds (unless IFR) (b) mountains
(c) the temptation to say, gee, wonder what happens if I
pull this big red handle (d) confusing it with the SR20,
which won't.

John

"Aaron Coolidge" wrote in message
...
Michael wrote:

: The 300 hp IO-550 is an option on at least the S-model Bonanza (and
: probably many others). A friend of mine has one and I've flown it -
: it's a great airplane, and it will comfortably cruise at 180 kts on
: 16-17 gph.

: Michael

The 300HP IO-550, derated to 280HP, is in the Mooney Ovation2. The
Ovation2
cruises in the 175 to 190 KT range on 15-16 GPH. You can get a very nice
one
from the 2000 or 2001 model year for about $300K, if you look around.
--
Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)

John Harper wrote:
: Won't carry 4 people (with useful fuel) though. The new
: Mooneys are wonderful planes but if you even occasionally
: need to carry four people then they don't work out. Shame,
: because the recent Bravo is a really lovely plane to
: fly.

I beg to differ, here. With 60 Gal of fuel, you have 700 Lbs of useful
load left. 60 gal gets you ~500 nm with a 1 hour reserve. (This is in the
Ovation2 that I borrowed a couple months ago. Your mileage may vary.)

If you fill it up to 90 gal of fuel, yes, it's a 2 place + luggage plane.
You have 5 hours of range (~850 nm), with a 1 hour reserve.

According to the Cirrus web site, useful load of an SR22 is 1150 lbs (about
the same as the Ovation2). Fuel capacity is 81 gal. 1150 - (81 * 6) = 664
lbs useful load with full fuel. This gives ~670 nm range with a 1 hour
reserve, assuming 17 GPH. (I don't know how Cirrus gets a 1000 nm range,
that would imply 14.5 GPH to dry tanks, which would imply about 60% power.)

I would say that the two airplanes are very comparable in terms of power,
speed, range, price, payload flexability, etc.
--
Aaron Coolidge

I was really thinking of the Bravo, which is a bit heavier
than the Ovation (obviously). "Guideline" useful load
for the Bravo seems to be around 950-1000 but I've
seen them on ASO etc in the 850-900 range by the
time they get TKS and fancy avionics. So with 60 gals
that gets you to around 500 lbs, not even 3 normal people with
some baggage.

John

"Aaron Coolidge" wrote in message
...
John Harper wrote:
: Won't carry 4 people (with useful fuel) though. The new
: Mooneys are wonderful planes but if you even occasionally
: need to carry four people then they don't work out. Shame,
: because the recent Bravo is a really lovely plane to
: fly.

I beg to differ, here. With 60 Gal of fuel, you have 700 Lbs of useful
load left. 60 gal gets you ~500 nm with a 1 hour reserve. (This is in the
Ovation2 that I borrowed a couple months ago. Your mileage may vary.)

If you fill it up to 90 gal of fuel, yes, it's a 2 place + luggage plane.
You have 5 hours of range (~850 nm), with a 1 hour reserve.

According to the Cirrus web site, useful load of an SR22 is 1150 lbs
(about
the same as the Ovation2). Fuel capacity is 81 gal. 1150 - (81 * 6) = 664
lbs useful load with full fuel. This gives ~670 nm range with a 1 hour
reserve, assuming 17 GPH. (I don't know how Cirrus gets a 1000 nm range,
that would imply 14.5 GPH to dry tanks, which would imply about 60%
power.)

I would say that the two airplanes are very comparable in terms of power,
speed, range, price, payload flexability, etc.
--
Aaron Coolidge

I bet the G1000 helps out the new Mooney's with weight. Anyone compared to
see how much less it weighs than a full stack?


"John Harper" wrote in message
news:1083090163.753660@sj-nntpcache-3...
I was really thinking of the Bravo, which is a bit heavier
than the Ovation (obviously). "Guideline" useful load
for the Bravo seems to be around 950-1000 but I've
seen them on ASO etc in the 850-900 range by the
time they get TKS and fancy avionics. So with 60 gals
that gets you to around 500 lbs, not even 3 normal people with
some baggage.

John

"Aaron Coolidge" wrote in message
...
John Harper wrote:
: Won't carry 4 people (with useful fuel) though. The new
: Mooneys are wonderful planes but if you even occasionally
: need to carry four people then they don't work out. Shame,
: because the recent Bravo is a really lovely plane to
: fly.

I beg to differ, here. With 60 Gal of fuel, you have 700 Lbs of useful
load left. 60 gal gets you ~500 nm with a 1 hour reserve. (This is in
the
Ovation2 that I borrowed a couple months ago. Your mileage may vary.)

If you fill it up to 90 gal of fuel, yes, it's a 2 place + luggage
plane.
You have 5 hours of range (~850 nm), with a 1 hour reserve.

According to the Cirrus web site, useful load of an SR22 is 1150 lbs
(about
the same as the Ovation2). Fuel capacity is 81 gal. 1150 - (81 * 6) =
664
lbs useful load with full fuel. This gives ~670 nm range with a 1 hour
reserve, assuming 17 GPH. (I don't know how Cirrus gets a 1000 nm range,
that would imply 14.5 GPH to dry tanks, which would imply about 60%
power.)

I would say that the two airplanes are very comparable in terms of
power,
speed, range, price, payload flexability, etc.
--
Aaron Coolidge

"Aaron Coolidge" wrote in message
...

I would say that the two airplanes are very comparable in terms of power,
speed, range, price, payload flexability, etc.

A huge difference is that the Mooney can be equipped to be known-ice
certified.

For anyone spending $300K on a serious IFR airplane, it is hard for me to
imagine how/why this is not a dealbreaker for Cirrus.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:20:02 GMT, "Richard Kaplan"
wrote:



"Aaron Coolidge" wrote in message
...

I would say that the two airplanes are very comparable in terms of power,
speed, range, price, payload flexability, etc.

A huge difference is that the Mooney can be equipped to be known-ice
certified.

I was just looking at an SR-22 complete with a weeping wing de-ice
system. You mean they put all that on it and it still can't go near
ice?

With fixed landing gear it is about 20 knots faster than my highly
modified Debonair (bout the same as an F-33, just not as nice inside)

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

For anyone spending $300K on a serious IFR airplane, it is hard for me to
imagine how/why this is not a dealbreaker for Cirrus.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com