Which is better? The SR22 or SR22T!? You decide!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 มิ.ย. 2021
- This is a question that we into all the time! Here are our top 3 reasons for a normally aspirated or a turbo charged airplane! The answers may surprise you!
There are so many benefits to each one and you’ll adopt the mentality of which ever one you are flying! It’ll settle in!
Which one would you choose? Leave a comment below!
I have flown both and love both. But all of my flying is on the east coast and the NA is more than adequate aircraft. The fuel consumption on the NA is considerably lower on takeoff and performance of the NA below 10,000 ft is better. Unless you are flying above 10K ft often, IMHO, the NA is all the airplane you need.
Great to meet you at FCM yesterday. And conveniently you chased us out of the Chicago Airspace this morning, also both stopping in Louisville area, we are at JVY.
Great things to consider! I’d go with a turbo in sage! 🥇
Great job Al, Taylor and Lindsey. My choice would be a Turbo. You can fly a Turbo like an NA, just back off the power, but you can’t fly an NA like a Turbo.
John.
Love this video
Almost on a weekly basis on the COPA Facebook page there’s someone asking this question so now I can just give them the link to this video. Thanks much.
Give them the link to learn what? Three was no real info or substance here. Just 3 common sense points about both, and no outcome. More like a marketing piece really. Which is best? "They're both WONDERFUL!". There are other vids out there that will give a ton of actual information on the pros and cons of the turbo versus the NA. Essentially if you live in Colorado, get the Turbo. Elsewhere, thre's no point - unless you want to fly with an oxgen mask or canula on, almost permanently.
I didn’t know that the SR22T is more quiet than the NA but it makes sense. Great points you made! NA burns less fuel (flying LOP) and is less costly operationally but I totally agree with your points on the Turbo.
My NA has a composite prop so part of his argument can be used for both. 😁
I think i’ll go with the Turbo :)
Both the SR22 and SR22T can be equipped with FIKI de-icing. Both can also be equipped with all 3 and 4 blade prop options. The SR22 has 80lbs more useful load, but the SR22T is 30 kts faster. And only the SR22T can climb to FL25. The SR22T is the safer option in the mountains.
I would buy the turbo ! Also, AC Is a plus for those hot days in florida.
The turbo rocks!!! AC is a must!!
@@al.waterloo question can you still do high performance sign offs on the Cirrus if the pilot preferred you sir?
Consider takeoff distance at density altitude. Denver's density altitude is about 8000 ft today. POH takeoff roll for the SR22 at 8000 ft density altitude is about 700 ft longer than the SR22T.
Lets not forget acquisition and maintenance costs....the NA wins hands down in both categories
Al, which would you rather take on a trans-Atlantic flight (Canada →︎ Greenland →︎ Iceland →︎ Scotland) - the NA for its superior range or the Turbo for its quieter engine/reduced fatigue & its ability to have broader altitude choices to avoid icing & the strongest headwinds on the return flight?
you forgot 1 important thing that would stop you from getting a turbo over normal. the $$ diff
Philip says three awesome pilot's there. I would love to say the turbo. They will be all awesome at the end of the day. Alan what's your favourite. It will be hard to pick one.philip would love to be out there with you specially having no mountains it sounds like a pilots dream that specially if you are a beginner. Take care buddy and keep happy philip.
When you talk about 'Philip' are you talking about yourself, or a different Philip?
What you need to seriously talk about non turbo v.s. turbo is the operational cost and maintenance of a turbo. That's the final decision making.
There definitely are so many thoughts going into this.
Easy, the SR20 with the IO360 😉, where 130kts @ 8.5 gph is still normal operation 😂
I honestly think for the average person who has your mission, the NA makes way more sense. You really don't get your money's worth below 12k in the turbo, especially not for short hops.
What are you calling a short hop?
@@Matt.Jernigan 100nm or less. 50nm for less for sure
@@zacharynorman397 Just out of curiosity which would you recommend for 300nm trip 1 or 2 times a month? Alabama heat
@@Matt.Jernigan will you be flying in or around the Appalachian's much? If cost isn't a concern, the turbo may do you well. For that distance, going up to 15k plus will make sense. And if you do mountain flying in the summer, the turbo is really nice
@@zacharynorman397 No mountain flying planned
Al - any summary of model capabilities going back to G1?
Don't get a G1 with steam guages!
Al, more for curiosity than me in a flying SRs position right now. I do love learning about the SRs from your videos, and watching other content on them, but could you do a short video on why the SRs don't have retractable undercarriage? T.I.A. Craig.
The aerodynamic design of the wheel pants makes the retractable moderately faster. The insurance is lower with a fixed gear and it is safer.
That 100kt tail wind is awesome up high. (Just don’t turn around)
Turbo all the way!!!
SR22-JetA1 would be nice.
Yep. Continental CDI-300 (as fitted to the DA-50) is where Cirrus needed to with the SR. The '550 is still a 1950s generation engine! Cirrus have such innovation and modernity in all other aspects of the SR, but it's still stuck with a gas-guzzling, lead-burning 1950s engine.
Is it fiki or tks?
Turbos 100% of the time. You can always back the power off and flight slow. You will have some situation where you’ll need to be above the weather or above the turbulence and that mountain and you’ll wish you had a turbo.
for Brazil, NA. Turbo is almost not necesary.
Hi Al !! Any word on G7 release date? 4yrs selling G6 since January 2017 with same features but higher price YoY .. I’d like to buy new one G7 from you not my regional sales person (dishonest) i think you’re more legit and sincere thx for your honest answer in advance !
2 years after your post, and the G7 has just come out!
Being in Seattle I fly the turbo which is good for the mountains. Like the extra power.
You know what you should get? A wind sock for your mic.
Diamond DA50 rg or DA62
It's amazing how its no more than $100k of difference between the RG and 62. It's all on the engine(s). RG has TBR, engine replacement, whereas 62 is TBO. Diamond 62 pros: Crash-tested carbon fiber fuselage for crash landings, multi engine (Garmin rudder bias I hope?), FADEC, single throttle, Jet-A. cons: double the maintenance costs, no parachute, 48 ft. wingspan which does not fit most hangars.
@@abel4776 Yea, I agree with your points although I suspect having 2 engines vs a parachute may be a wash - dunno as I'm not sure of the stats. The DA-62 sure seems to have a very good safety record at this point. I think the DA-62 is about $400k more than a turbo-charged Cirrus which is a serious amount of $$ and the Cirrus can climb an extra 5000' which may be important to some folks depending on mission. The DA-50 looks cool but it's position in the marketplace is a bit confusing. Sure, a single engine does cut down the costs but the difference in price (I saw more like $60k less than a DA-62) and still a very big wingspan and 500KM less range - not sure that's what the market is looking for, but I guess we'll see.
You’re getting very hackneyed with "awesome". Try using another adjective, like "magnificent", "incredible", or even "outstanding".
ahhhhsimm
Every video on the channel is like that. "Awesome!", "Beautiful!". It's quite tiring.
I like turbo's but my A&P tells me to stay away from the Cirrus SR22T.
Anything specific about them? I thought they used the engines off the shelf
I wouldn't own either. I have the tbm but for the little guys I'd buy a Mooney or a little twin
Sure you do 😄
The person who edit and did your sound should be fired, we could not hear the young lady's number 2.