Finally, something on the Cirrus SR20 G6

labbadabba

labbadabba

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
2,391
Location
Lawrence, KS
Display Name
Display name:
labbadabba
I thought it odd with all the press for the SR22 G6 and its new wing lights and QWERTY keyboard that no one was talking about the much more significant upgrade to the "entry level" SR20.

AvWeb has a great feature on the IO-390 in the SR20. This is the first application to a certified aircraft. Really fascinating that an engine with consistent times can get up to a 2,400 hour TBO.

100 - 130lbs increase of useful load compared to older SR20's with a 150kt cruise at 11 GPH make this bird an economical cross country plane that will haul a small family or 3 adults pretty comfortably. 4 adults on shorter trips no problem. All at a base price comparable to a new Skyhawk...

 
Last edited:
because they were trying to sell the 22.

any word on pricing for this puppy?
 
Ryanb said:
Starting in the low $400's
Click to expand...

So with that, I think the SR20 is a closer competitor to the M20J, A33 Bonanza/Debonair, C182. Given its speed and load carrying, I think it outclasses the DA40 in almost every way (which pains me because I love the DA40).

This is nearly half the price of a SR22 for 80% of the capability of the SR22. Seems like a good deal to me. I don't think FIKI is an option but most everything else is...
 
My flight school got 2 of them. Still haven't got to check them out but they look cool.
 
deonb said:
$731'000 loaded
Click to expand...

Yes, but base price is $390,000. Add a composite prop and Tanis heater brings it up to a shade over $400,000. That's solidly in a C172 range. There are plenty of goodies in the base airplane. TAWS and XM are nice but ADSB is a heck of lot less expensive. AC is nice I suppose but for $27k, I'd be happy with a nice cold water and an open air vent at 8,000ft.

But you still get the upgraded G1000 + Perspective, GFC700, Bluetooth audio panel, chute, big interior, airbags.

I'd say that's a lot more plane than a 172. Heck in a lot of ways you get more here than with a 182...
 
A base price comparable to a C172 or DA40 with a motor with a 2400 TBO and the Cirrus caché. Hmm sounds like a good deal for a flight school looking to upgrade their fleet.
 
labbadabba said:
I'd say that's a lot more plane than a 172. Heck in a lot of ways you get more here than with a 182...
Click to expand...
Much more airplane. It wouldn't surprise me if pilotmill flight schools begin to fleet these in the coming years over the current Cessna line.
 
I bet there will be quite a waiting list for that bird. Why would you buy a new 172 if you can get the SR20 ??!
 
3 in the green said:
I wonder how a DA40 would do with this IO-390 engine...
Click to expand...

Dunno, I suspect tho, with the new beefier gear and the 35 extra horses that they could get a MTOW increase and make it a true 4-place airplane. I see 140kts pretty consistently on the older DA40-180. I know the newer DA-40s are faster yet. I suspect it would be a good performer. The IO-390 is on the Panthera testbed and it they were getting 180 KTAS.
 
labbadabba said:
Dunno, I suspect tho, with the new beefier gear and the 35 extra horses that they could get a MTOW increase and make it a true 4-place airplane. I see 140kts pretty consistently on the older DA40-180. I know the newer DA-40s are faster yet. I suspect it would be a good performer. The IO-390 is on the Panthera testbed and it they were getting 180 KTAS.
Click to expand...

Seems logical. In the time I also flew the DA40-180 I also saw ~140 ktas. I loved that thing.
 
labbadabba said:
100 - 130lbs increase of useful load compared to older SR20's with a 150kt cruise at 11 GPH make this bird an economical cross country plane that will haul a small family or 3 adults pretty comfortably. 4 adults on shorter trips no problem. All at a base price comparable to a new Skyhawk...
Click to expand...
Always felt the SR20 was underappreciated, or at least under publicized. For the price and what you get its an incredible plane, definitely a dark horse as far as expectations go

A lot of my San Diego time is in SR20s and they're the perfect plane for someone considering a 172 or 182 but looking for something a little "newer" and with more oomph. The used prices on these things seem very fair

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/1457631/2005-cirrus-sr20
if the mortgage was paid off more this would be high on my shortlist
 
3 in the green said:
I wonder how a DA40 would do with this IO-390 engine...
Click to expand...
I don't think it would be a drop-in replacement. The DA40 takes a parallel valve engine while the IO-390 is an angle valve engine, which is 2 inches wider.

ALSO, while Diamond could possibly leverage the MGTW/MGLW increases from the DA40NG it would still have to deal with the MZFW limit.
 
Tantalum said:
Always felt the SR20 was underappreciated, or at least under publicized. For the price and what you get its an incredible plane, definitely a dark horse as far as expectations go

A lot of my San Diego time is in SR20s and they're the perfect plane for someone considering a 172 or 182 but looking for something a little "newer" and with more oomph. The used prices on these things seem very fair

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/1457631/2005-cirrus-sr20
if the mortgage was paid off more this would be high on my shortlist
Click to expand...

Seems like a good deal.
 
I was looking at that one too... I'm not quite there yet, but maybe in a couple years! I don't need glass to be honest... I do have some time with the Avidyne panels and it's "cool" and the synthetic terrain is great but something about it just didn't feel natural to me, and maybe this was just me but night flying the glass just seemed too bright and affected my night vision somewhat when glancing in and out of the cockpit on approach. So steam gauges are fine. The only place glass really helps me is with navigation, but to that end Foreflight with Flighstream has changed my life...
 
Tantalum said:
I was looking at that one too... I'm not quite there yet, but maybe in a couple years! I don't need glass to be honest... I do have some time with the Avidyne panels and it's "cool" and the synthetic terrain is great but something about it just didn't feel natural to me, and maybe this was just me but night flying the glass just seemed too bright and affected my night vision somewhat when glancing in and out of the cockpit on approach. So steam gauges are fine. The only place glass really helps me is with navigation, but to that end Foreflight with Flighstream has changed my life...
Click to expand...

I think the plane I listed had 2 430's. at least you have some type of mapping to go off of if the FF on the Ipad goes down.
 
labbadabba said:
3 in the green said:
I wonder how a DA40 would do with this IO-390 engine...
Click to expand...
Dunno, I suspect tho, with the new beefier gear and the 35 extra horses that they could get a MTOW increase and make it a true 4-place airplane. I see 140kts pretty consistently on the older DA40-180. I know the newer DA-40s are faster yet. I suspect it would be a good performer. The IO-390 is on the Panthera testbed and it they were getting 180 KTAS.
Click to expand...

I suspect that your guys' dreams of a IO-390 powered DA40 are dead. Diamond would probably rather you step into a 230hp DA50 that they just introduced a couple days ago.

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Diamond-Launches-High-Performance-Singles-228802-1.html

http://www.avweb.com/blogs/insider/Diamond-Goes-Big-228804-1.html

 
The retract with the 360 hp oil burner will be even badder...:eek:
 
The problem with the SR20 is the power. 200HP on the same hotel fiberglass bathtub as the 22 is a lot of underpower. They climb horribly at their cabin volumetric use weight. But it works for a 2 person mission or flight instruction, which is where the airplane ended up resting.

The problem with right sizing the engine to 235-250HP? It poaches on the SR-22 market, even though it adds nothing to the cost of manufacture, so they're not gonna touch it. I think these newer Diamond offerings are a hell of a lot better power sized, let's hope the ergonomics are not as horrible as the vintage Diamonds were.
 
hindsight2020 said:
200HP on the same hotel fiberglass bathtub as the 22 is a lot of underpower. They climb horribly at their cabin volumetric use weight. But it works for a 2 person mission or flight instruction, which is where the airplane ended up resting.
Click to expand...
I noticed this too in the 20. Having come from 160 and 180 hp conventional metal planes I was expecting some noticeable performance gains in the 20.. the cruise speed is nice and sure beats a Warrior or 172 also in the comfort department, but I did notice that when it was loaded up to max weight it really didn't climb all that well. It almost seemed like the 172/180 conversion had more initial climb oomph than the 20 when fully loaded

hindsight2020 said:
The problem with right sizing the engine to 235-250HP? It poaches on the SR-22 market
Click to expand...
Yes, and by keeping the hp at 199 it does work out very well for instruction since (while minimal) it negates the need for a high performance endorsement

I feel like most missions though are flown with 1 or 2 people, so the SR20 is still a great price for a very capable machine... and frankly most 4 place piston singles that are in the "affordable" or "not out of the realm of possibility for most people" price class are going to have lousy performance with 4 adults in it.. so at least the SR20 gives you car-like ergonomics and the BRS
 
Hot and heavy, the 20 isn't the best climber. I've had 4 people on a hot day in a 22 and still saw great climb rates.
 
jordane93 said:
Hot and heavy, the 20 isn't the best climber. I've had 4 people on a hot day in a 22 and still saw great climb rates.
Click to expand...

The SR20 is positioned as a trainer and a Cessna Skyhawk competitor. The SR20 is base priced at $389k. The Skyhawk about the same. The SR20 is rated to climb 750+ fpm the Skyhawk 730 fpm. Both seat 4. The ceiling for the SR20 is 17,500 the Skyhawk 14k. Cruise speed for the SR20 is 155ktas the Skyhawk 124ktas. The Skyhawk has a really low stall speed at 48kts, the SR20 higher at 60kts. But the SR20 has a CAPS chute of course.
 
citizen5000 said:
The SR20 is positioned as a trainer and a Cessna Skyhawk competitor. The SR20 is base priced at $389k. The Skyhawk about the same. The SR20 is rated to climb 750+ fpm the Skyhawk 730 fpm. Both seat 4. The ceiling for the SR20 is 17,500 the Skyhawk 14k. Cruise speed for the SR20 is 155ktas the Skyhawk 124ktas. The Skyhawk has a really low stall speed at 48kts, the SR20 higher at 60kts. But the SR20 has a CAPS chute of course.
Click to expand...

Cirrus HAD to do something with the SR-20. It is their original product, but the company and their customers have largely outgrown it.

Last year of the 317 airplanes Cirrus sold, only 35 (11%) were SR-20s, and those were undoubtedly the lowest margin airplanes they moved.
Cessna sold 100 Skyhawks in 2016, and Piper sold 54 Warriors/Archers/Arrows combined.
 
hindsight2020 said:
I think these newer Diamond offerings are a hell of a lot better power sized, let's hope the ergonomics are not as horrible as the vintage Diamonds were.
Click to expand...

Christian Dries (head of Diamond) basically said the DA50 exists because Americans are too fat for the DA40. ;)
 
hindsight2020 said:
The problem with the SR20 is the power. 200HP on the same hotel fiberglass bathtub as the 22 is a lot of underpower. They climb horribly at their cabin volumetric use weight. But it works for a 2 person mission or flight instruction, which is where the airplane ended up resting.
Click to expand...

Which is why the new powerplant is such a big deal in the SR20...
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Very different mission than a 182.
Click to expand...

Not in every case. Some folks like the 182 just because it will haul a load at a reasonable speed and they may have little use for the 182's short/soft field capability.
 
labbadabba said:
Which is why the new powerplant is such a big deal in the SR20...
Click to expand...
Maybe. I recognize the power certification of the lyco 390 is in the same vein as the differences between the conti 520 and 550 ie "minus 0" power rating compared to the predecessors not requiring it meet the advertised rating as a minimum. So compared to a conti 360 or even lyco 360, the 390 could in theory be an improvement closer to 15hp.

I dont think the difference warrants the extra expense but i do prefer lyco over conti so i would be swayed by that.
 
hindsight2020 said:
Maybe. I recognize the power certification of the lyco 390 is in the same vein as the differences between the conti 520 and 550 ie "minus 0" power rating compared to the predecessors not requiring it meet the advertised rating as a minimum. So compared to a conti 360 or even lyco 360, the 390 could in theory be an improvement closer to 15hp.

I dont think the difference warrants the extra expense but i do prefer lyco over conti so i would be swayed by that.
Click to expand...

Correct it's rated at 215hp. Looking at the book climb numbers (grain of salt) they look significantly improved. The MTOW increase would also indicate better climb performance as well.
 
Remember also that while performance may seem a little anemic compared to the 22, when you put this plane up against the Skyhawk and Piper Archer products, which are its primary competition, then it definitely out performs them
 
Tantalum said:
Remember also that while performance may seem a little anemic compared to the 22, when you put this plane up against the Skyhawk and Piper Archer products, which are its primary competition, then it definitely out performs them
Click to expand...

An Archer with 4 adults on a warm day isn't much of a performer either.

If you look on the Piper website, retail on an Archer is $365k, but that is without autopilot (36k), ADSB (2.5k) or seatbelt airbags (6.5k).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top