Thoughts on the SR-20

jjflys

jjflys

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Oct 2, 2010
Messages
142
Location
Denver, CO
Display Name
Display name:
jjflys
I had a chance to fly a Cirrus for the first time recently. I got my PPL back in May and until now have flown only Cessna's (172N, 172SP, and 182RG) so far in my short flying career so this was definitely a change. Here are my thoughts after the flight:

The side yoke/flight controls: Could just be me getting use to the side yoke, but the Cirrus was a lot more difficult to hand fly than any of the previous planes I've flown. I'm sure I could get used to it with time, but a cross country in this bird if there was any turbulence at all could take a workout. (this example did not have an autopilot) I also would trade having to install a control lock while securing to the apparent lack of varied feeling in the flight controls, especially with slow flight. I'm also a bigger fan of a steerable nose wheel vs. differential braking.

The cabin: Absolutely, 100%, hands down better than any Cessna I have flown, including the SP. More room, better build quality, etc etc. A big selling point for passengers.

The looks: Again, personal preference here but 100% better than the Cessna's. Even though it's plastic ;) it just looks more modern and aggressive.

Overall: We topped out cruise at 8000ft, 2500 RPM and 9.5GPH indicating 125 kts. This is 5-10 knots slower than the 182RG I've flown, albeit with the higher fuel burn. I also liked the dual alternators as I have had one total electrical failure in a 172, and electrical problems in the 182 (returned after run-up). The avionics aren't as big of an issue for me since I have my iPad with Foreflight and a good set of eyes. For the value equation for now I am planning to stick with the 182RG (I rent for 155/hr wet) and eventually check out in a SR-20 for when I need to take passengers who would feel more comfortable in it.
 
I'm finishing up my 20 and 22 conversion training as we speak.

The side yoke/flight controls: I found the transition to be very natural to the side yoke. To be honest, I think I was comfortable after hitting 500 feet on the first takeoff. The trim is also not an issue for me with the controlled/short taps.

I was on the Perspective model and autopilot certainly is fantastic for the cross country legs.

Differential braking: So while manageable, I agree with you. I prefer the nosewheel steering compared the the Cirrus. I mean, yes, you can taxi, but sometimes you might need full left rudder to hold it straight as it doesnt straighten properly or lock in, or whatever it does and then on other occasions, you may need to keep full right rudder to go straight. With both of them, you have to keep tapping the brakes or bring up power. When you taxi with a bit more speed, it makes it a lot easier.


The cabin: Yes, cabin is great, side yoke gives good illusion of space too. Seat core is a pain for some people to not step on it. Although if you look at any plane as old as the Cirrus you are in, their cabins look and feel wonderful as well. The air conditioning in the Cirrus's I have been in is great for the misses (wife).

The looks: Looks great from my perspective. Throttle is fun/easy to use. Wife likes the look better as well.

I like them a lot. I would prefer a new Bonanza though ;-)
 
If you get it lined up correctly, the roll forward a few feet it should lock in place. It's a learning thing on ground maneuvers. You'll get the hang of it after awhile.

On the takeoff run, get the weight of the nose wheel with a slight pull and continue to accelerate with that last inch or so of throttle (I love being thrust back in the seat).
 
Like OzPilot, I'm finishing up my transition (into an SR-20 w/ Avidyne and 430's). I'm coming from a 172SP with G1000. I'm doing the transition since I found a place renting the SR-20 wet for what I was paying for the 172... a heck of a deal.

Also like OzPilot, the sidestick seemed odd at first but I quickly forgot about it on my first flight, and it feels like a very natural place to keep your hand. I don't like the electric trim so much...seems it's tough to trim it precisely. I also agree to some extent about the lack of feel in the controls, but I haven't found it to be an issue.

The differential braking is odd to get used to when coming from the Cessna, and it still isn't second nature to me. I'm getting better, though, and it's not nearly as frustrating as it was on my first taxi. It seems to need FULL right rudder when beginning takeoff roll, then locks in quickly.

A few days ago I did a 3-leg flight around New England. The SR-20 seems to be a much more fun X-C plane than the 172, and considerably quicker. Since I'm renting wet (at the same price as a 172), I was running at 75% power most of the time. I was cruising at 145-150kts most of the time, and at one point hit 202kts groundspeed (albeit in a shallow powered descent with a good tailwind). Bottom line is it's quicker to climb, quicker in the cruise, and more pleasurable to fly than the 172 (my opinion).
 
I have a question for sideyokers.

I heard that if you take off out of trim and need two hands on the yoke you can have a serious situation on your hands trying to keep the nose down with one hand and trim with another?

Any thoughts from guys who fly them?
 
Geico266 said:
I heard that if you take off out of trim and need two hands on the yoke you can have a serious situation on your hands trying to keep the nose down with one hand and trim with another?
Click to expand...

On the SR-20, the electric trim is on the side stick, accessible with your thumb. It has a 4-way hat switch that also serves as A/P Disconnect. No need to use other hand for trim. In theory if somehow it took so much power to overcome out-of-trim forces, you certainly could actuate trim with both hands on the sidestick.
 
Geico266 said:
I have a question for sideyokers.

I heard that if you take off out of trim and need two hands on the yoke you can have a serious situation on your hands trying to keep the nose down with one hand and trim with another?

Any thoughts from guys who fly them?
Click to expand...

Probably not. Cirrus elevator trim is pretty fast so if you hold nose down trim for a few seconds you should be in good shape. The hat switch sits just below your thumb as you grip the side yoke on the Cirrus
 
Thanks guys, you know how rumors are. Your descriptions make sense. Hopefully, I'll get to fly a Cirrus.
 
jjflys said:
We topped out cruise at 8000ft, 2500 RPM and 9.5GPH indicating 125 kts.
Click to expand...

That's all?
My Cherokee does 125kt at 9.5gph (admittedly with $10k of speed mods from the previous owner)
Not being snotty, just those numbers really surprise me. I thought the -20 was much slicker than that.

EDIT: Disregard, user error. I didn't catch the IAS at 8k feet.
 
Last edited:
PilotAlan said:
That's all?
My Cherokee does 125kt at 9.5gph (admittedly with $10k of speed mods from the previous owner)

Not being snotty, just those numbers really surprise me. I thought the -20 was much slicker than that.
Click to expand...
Your cherokee 180 does 125 KNOTS INDICATED at 8000 ft?
 
jesse said:
Your cherokee 180 does 125 KNOTS INDICATED at 8000 ft?
Click to expand...
Oops, I didn't see that IAS part, was thinking TAS. Thanks for the catch, Jesse.

OK, that makes a LOT more sense. jjflys, what did that true out to?
 
We were truing out at about 144 knots, and I get 150-155 knots in the 182RG all day long. In the 82 I'm using ~12.5gph doing that but I don't care since I'm running rental power. :D

Regarding the side yoke, it was easy to get used to from a control standpoint, but it was more of the lack of feel and thus apparent difficulty to trim. I probably just need more practice. :)

If I had to rank order what I have flown so far in terms of speed, value, etc it would be 182RG, SR-20, 172N (180 hp), and then the 172SP. I'd love to fly a Piper, Mooney, and Bo someday to add them to the list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
PilotAlan said:
That's all?
My Cherokee does 125kt at 9.5gph (admittedly with $10k of speed mods from the previous owner)
Click to expand...

My Tiger does 135 KTAS at 10 GPH with no speed mods. I LOVE the differential braking. It only took a few minutes to get used to, and I like the ability to deflect the rudder in crosswinds and not having to worry about a cocked nosewheel. There is no reason to have the weight and maintenance of a steerable nosewheel.

I think the Cirri are nice planes, but you can get somewhat similar performance in planes a lot less expensive. They land very flat which is not at all what I am used to.
 
I have to say my biggest complaint in the Cirrus after a few hundred hours of instructing students in it is the castering nosewheel. Differential breaking in the Grumman is pretty good but the Cirrus takes a lot more effort than it should. It requires a lot more power to begin taxiing and if you tap too much on the brakes you end up not moving very far. When that happens you have to release the brakes and allow the plane to roll forward (even if its in a direction you don't want to go because the nosewheel is pointed that way), then apply full rudder, and then tap the brake in the direction you desire. It takes a while to get used to for sure, and it is certainly manageable, but not ideal in my opinion.

Primary students usually don't have much of a problem because that's all they've experienced. But commercial students who have flown airplanes with nosewheel steering before have a challenging first few taxi events.
 
Anthony said:
My Tiger does 135 KTAS at 10 GPH with no speed mods. I LOVE the differential braking. It only took a few minutes to get used to, and I like the ability to deflect the rudder in crosswinds and not having to worry about a cocked nosewheel. There is no reason to have the weight and maintenance of a steerable nosewheel.
Click to expand...
Anthony's experience is typical of the many folks I've checked out in Grummans.
I think the Cirri are nice planes, but you can get somewhat similar performance in planes a lot less expensive. They land very flat which is not at all what I am used to.
Click to expand...
The issue with the earlier Cirri was the lower stance of the original landing gear made it very easy to "skag" the tail on touchdown with a good tail-low, mains-first attitude at minimum speed. The higher stance of the later design largely eliminates that problem, but many Cirrus pilots still touch down too flat and fast out of habit. In addition, when you go to the SR22T, it gets pretty nose-heavy, and with only two aboard up front, it's hard to hold the nose off -- you run out of elevator authority a bit sooner than I like.

Another feature (or lack thereof) I don't like is that the rudder trim is only ground-adjustable. Especially with the big engine of the SR22, it's an annoyance to have to hold rudder pressure in the climb with the autopilot engaged. For that price, you'd think cockpit-adjustable rudder trim would be at least optional, no less standard.

That said, the total package is awfully nice.
 
Ron Levy said:
[snip]

Another feature (or lack thereof) I don't like is that the rudder trim is only ground-adjustable. Especially with the big engine of the SR22, it's an annoyance to have to hold rudder pressure in the climb with the autopilot engaged. For that price, you'd think cockpit-adjustable rudder trim would be at least optional, no less standard.[snip]
Click to expand...

In the one I flew earlier this year (admittedly a brand new one) the auto-pilot handled that. If I recall correctly it had a mode where that's all it did-I was hand flying the climb out and it kept the climb coordinated. If not, I agree, it would be a lot to counter for a long climb.

John
 
jsstevens said:
In the one I flew earlier this year (admittedly a brand new one) the auto-pilot handled that. If I recall correctly it had a mode where that's all it did-I was hand flying the climb out and it kept the climb coordinated. If not, I agree, it would be a lot to counter for a long climb.
Click to expand...
A yaw damper is an option on the later models, and it does fix the problem when the autopilot is engaged.
 
Ron Levy said:
A yaw damper is an option on the later models, and it does fix the problem when the autopilot is engaged.
Click to expand...

Can you even turn the autopilot off on a Cirrus? I didn't think anyone flew them, thought they just rode in them....
 
I love the castoring nose wheel. Of course I only have about 1.2 in an SR20 but I learned on AA1Cs and flew Tigers for many years. At first it was odd as a new student I couldn't figure out how to steer after a lesson I got the hang of it and I think the diff breaking makes them ( Grummans ) super easy to steer.
 
I don't mind the castering nose wheel as I had it on my plane before I converted it to tail wheel. You really can turn on a dime. However, without the steerable nose wheel, you are relying solely on differential breaking to keep the plane centered after you have landed, and with a stiff crosswind, I've seen a cirrus going down the runway with one wheel locking up most of the way.

I believe the crosswind limitations are not as high as steerable nose wheel plane.
 
jkgoblue said:
I don't mind the castering nose wheel as I had it on my plane before I converted it to tail wheel. You really can turn on a dime. However, without the steerable nose wheel, you are relying solely on differential breaking to keep the plane centered after you have landed, and with a stiff crosswind, I've seen a cirrus going down the runway with one wheel locking up most of the way.
Click to expand...
That suggest poor pilot skill, not a castering nosewheel issue, since you still have flight controls, and you don't need to mash the brake hard enough to lock it up.
 
jesse said:
Can you even turn the autopilot off on a Cirrus? I didn't think anyone flew them, thought they just rode in them....
Click to expand...

I know you're joking. The autopilot is selectable by the human pilot. It is not engaged until the human presses the button (and then the inflatable guy pops out).
 
Ron Levy said:
That suggest poor pilot skill, not a castering nosewheel issue, since you still have flight controls, and you don't need to mash the brake hard enough to lock it up.
Click to expand...

+1 Wow, that would get really interesting on an icy/snowy runway.
 
Alexb2000 said:
+1 Wow, that would get really interesting on an icy/snowy runway.
Click to expand...

Actually easier. I've taxied in a crab more than once.
Last time, our heading was 015 wile taxiing on the centerline of runway 35.
At least that kept the centerline on the pilot's side. Kind of weird to be looking out the side window.
 
Alexb2000 said:
I was referencing differential braking when landing vs. rudder to maintain centerline.
Click to expand...
And I was referring to trying to use nose wheel steering in the same situation. If it's too slick for differential braking to work, you're not going to be any better with a steerable nosewheel. At that point, it's going to be about flight controls and getting propwash over the rudder.
 
I though the side stick was a joy but I'm a lefty. Then I got into the right seat and it was not a lot of fun....
 
bbchien said:
I though the side stick was a joy but I'm a lefty. Then I got into the right seat and it was not a lot of fun....
Click to expand...
I thought it would be like that (but on opposite sides -- I'm a righty), but it wasn't. But I have a lot of experience in both yoke/center throttle aircraft and stick/left throttle aircraft, and in both seats of the yoke aircraft, and I've found that I don't even think about it once my hands are on the controls. The only real problem I've run into is when in the right seat of the Cirrus, having to copy something down. Unlike a center-stick or yoke aircraft, I can't easily use my left hand to hold the controls while I write with my right. Fortunately, when I'm in that seat, it's usually with a trainee in the left seat, and then keeping the plane upright while writing is the trainee's problem, not mine.
 
Last edited:
Don't most people fly with their left hand when they are sitting in the left seat even if the aircraft has a yoke rather than a sidestick? I'm not sure how it would be much different. I've never flown a Cirrus, though. The only time I have in an "airplane" with a sidestick is the hour or so I have in the left seat of an Airbus sim. I thought it felt pretty natural. The only weird part was that I couldn't figure out what to do with my right hand after bringing it off the thrust levers at V1. I ended up putting it in my lap..
 
Everskyward said:
Don't most people fly with their left hand when they are sitting in the left seat even if the aircraft has a yoke rather than a sidestick? I'm not sure how it would be much different. I've never flown a Cirrus, though. The only time I have in an "airplane" with a sidestick is the hour or so I have in the left seat of an Airbus sim. I thought it felt pretty natural. The only weird part was that I couldn't figure out what to do with my right hand after bringing it off the thrust levers at V1. I ended up putting it in my lap..
Click to expand...

You sip your coffee with that hand... :)
 
Everskyward said:
Don't most people fly with their left hand when they are sitting in the left seat even if the aircraft has a yoke rather than a sidestick?
Click to expand...
Based on maybe 5000 hours in the left seat of aircraft with a yoke in front of the pilot and throttles in the center, and a couple-three thousand more watching from the right seat as people do that in the left seat, I'd say yes. Exceptions include giving the left hand/arm a break, reaching up to punch the clock or fiddle with the TAS ring (on some airspeed indicators) in the upper left corner of the panel, grabbing the chart laid up in the left corner between the glareshield and windshield, etc. And, of course, lefties when they're writing.
 
While this started on the SR20, for anyone looking to purchase, take a hard look at the SR22. You'll find the price on the used market is often very close. I would sacrifice a couple of model years to move from the 20 to the 22. The difference in power transforms the plane. If you pull the throttle back and match airspeeds the two planes burn about the same. There is a huge difference when operating at altitude or when climbing out over terrain.

One thing with Cirrus aircraft is that they change a lot from year to year. If looking to purchase it is worthwhile to get to know the changes, often hidden, that have been made over the years. The aircraft were not produced on a model year basis so you have to learn at what serial number changes were implemented. As an example, on the SR20 it was a big deal when it was converted from vacuum/electric to dual electric for the instruments. The original Arnav MFD is no longer supported.

As far as flying, the plane itself is wonderful but the controls are quick compared to a Cessna 182 or 172. That means loads of fun flying on a VFR day but a tougher time hand flying IFR. I also find the controls a bit numb. Sight picture is awesome but different. If you are 5'9" and coming from a Cessna you aren't used to seeing the runway straight in front when in the flair. Contrary to what most new Cirrus pilots think, the plane has a normal flare and doesn't land flat. That can be seen if you watch video of a landing. However the sight picture will make a new Cirrus pilot think it is flatter than it is. Heck, I initially wanted to fly nose high when trying to go straight and level.

Most SR22 models were bought loaded or close to it so, on the used market, there is little penalty for getting a nicely equipped plane. Heck I have never seen one without an autopilot. Most have at least the STEC 55X. Stay away from the Century HSI models. That HSI is unreliable. If getting a 6 pack plane get one with the Sandel 3308 instead.
 
While I'm in a posting mood, I want to take a small diversion and talk about mindset. Remember all of that planning stuff and bad attitude stuff you got lectured on when getting your PPL? If you step up from a 172 to a Cirrus it suddenly matters. In the 172 I came screaming in at cruise power into the pattern. OK, screaming was a little above 100 kts. In the Cirrus I start planning my arrival about 20 NM out. It is a slick airframe and you need to plan your descent and speed decrease. Often you have to pull the nose up and bleed airspeed to get flaps in before descending or you will pick up too much speed.

The plane is fast, comfortable and has a lot of automation. That means it is easy to go a long way even when just knocking around. Weather planning becomes important for every flight. All you have to do is look at Cirrus accident history to see it littered with poorly planned cross country flights. If I'm ranting it is because I am tired of seeing easily preventable Cirrus accidents show up on the NTSB website. Get an instrument rating and stay current. Cirrus aircraft are trip planes meant for the IFR pilot. The plane gets a bad rep when it is really a great plane but being flown a lot and on challenging missions. Just look at the Flightaware data to see how many are in the system compared to other types.

Finally, when landing remember that you have a LOT more kinetic energy than in a 172. As long as things go well you won't notice it that much. When you mess up things go bad quickly. Think how you feel with a big, heavy car on ice. As long as you are going straight things are fine. When the car starts to slide you notice every pound of weight. Pilots, including yours truly, tend to land too hot. Use 78 kts and subtract 1 kt for every 100 lbs under gross as a target speed over the threshold.
 
Last edited:
peppy said:
Use 78 kts and subtract 1 kt for every 100 lbs under gross as a target speed over the threshold.
Click to expand...
With which SR are you using this speed? The SR22T is nose-heavier than the others, and you'll need about 82-83 knots on final or you'll run out of elevator and drop the nose in the flare.
 
Ron Levy said:
With which SR are you using this speed? The SR22T is nose-heavier than the others, and you'll need about 82-83 knots on final or you'll run out of elevator and drop the nose in the flare.
Click to expand...

This is on an NA SR22 (2006) without the composite prop. However, turbo owners say it is also fine for them except to hold more power since the composite prop acts like a speed brake. 2007 turbos without the tail weight are very nose heavy. The newer ones are supposed to be better but I guess with A/C there could be an issue. I don't fly a turbo so I can only go by what others have said.
 
I really miss my SR 20. It was a great XC machine. The only issue with the plane is it didn't have A/C. I flew 145-155 TAS all the time, anywhere from 8.4 - 11 GPH depending on altitude. While the SR 22 is a nice plane, its not worth the extra $$ in my opinion. The engine costs more, the insurance is double with a lot of companies requiring mandatory training, and it burns more gas. The maintenance is not significantly higher, so that's a wash...
 
peppy said:
This is on an NA SR22 (2006) without the composite prop. However, turbo owners say it is also fine for them except to hold more power since the composite prop acts like a speed brake. 2007 turbos without the tail weight are very nose heavy. The newer ones are supposed to be better but I guess with A/C there could be an issue. I don't fly a turbo so I can only go by what others have said.
Click to expand...
The one I was flying had air conditioning, too, and two up front with nobody in the back -- worst case. Just be careful about carrying numbers back and forth across various models/versions of the Cirrus family, because there are significant differences even if they all say "SR22" on the tail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top