What do you folks think of the new Cessna TTx

A buddy has Columbia 400, '06, just before it became Cessna. Slick machine, definitely a traveler. I sat in the new TTx at the AOPA fly-in at CMA. The G2000 system is amazing. I'm a G1000 user and I was blown away by the added capability. I found it to be far more comfortable than the Acclaim-Ultra, although getting in on the driver's side on the Mooney was really cool. Cirrus had the best cabin though, but it feels less sporty - but is more comfortable and easier to get in and out of. The quality of the TTx seemed the highest. Although they were all really good...and should be, for the price. The G2000 is ridiculous though.
 
I prefer verniers for fine control, but I will say that on something like a DA40 it is nice to be able to have your hand wide to cover all 3 levers at once on a go-around as a good muscle-memory item, just in case you got distracted and didn't have the prop/mixture forward on the before-landing phase of the flight. That's not supposed to happen but it definitely has in regards to the prop control as I don't like going full forward on the prop until short final, and going around with the prop pulled half-back in a DA40 is uh... sub-optimal :)

gsengle said:
No one said otherwise. But the vernier is very useful for fine tuning, and it's a feature a throttle quadrant doesn't have. You can still shove the control forward however even with a vernier....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
 
ocflyer said:
I prefer verniers for fine control, but I will say that on something like a DA40 it is nice to be able to have your hand wide to cover all 3 levers at once on a go-around as a good muscle-memory item, just in case you got distracted and didn't have the prop/mixture forward on the before-landing phase of the flight. That's not supposed to happen but it definitely has in regards to the prop control as I don't like going full forward on the prop until short final, and going around with the prop pulled half-back in a DA40 is uh... sub-optimal :)
Click to expand...

Actually I put my hand over all three verniers the same way on takeoff and landing come to think of it, they are that close together...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
No one said otherwise. But the vernier is very useful for fine tuning, and it's a feature a throttle quadrant doesn't have. You can still shove the control forward however even with a vernier....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Still. Pass. When I was looking at the TTx that was just a turn off for me personally. I have zero issues with dialing in my throttle and mixture the way I want and need.
 
3 in the green said:
A buddy has Columbia 400, '06, just before it became Cessna. Slick machine, definitely a traveler. I sat in the new TTx at the AOPA fly-in at CMA. The G2000 system is amazing. I'm a G1000 user and I was blown away by the added capability. I found it to be far more comfortable than the Acclaim-Ultra, although getting in on the driver's side on the Mooney was really cool. Cirrus had the best cabin though, but it feels less sporty - but is more comfortable and easier to get in and out of. The quality of the TTx seemed the highest. Although they were all really good...and should be, for the price. The G2000 is ridiculous though.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100% with this. Though the Acclaim I sat in had the one door "feature" :rolleyes: and even though I'm tall I didn't think the Mooney was comfortable at all. The TTx and the SR22T were the only real contenders. The G2000 system is bad ass, and that's a HUGE plus for the TTx. I haven't played with the Perspective+ / NXi but the smoothness and speed and features are appealing. But not enough to make me upgrade to the G6. I don't think there's enough else there to justify it for me personally.

The TTx felt good. It really did. But the 3rd seat in the back, higher useful, and chute won out. And I prefer how the throttle / mixture is laid out with the Cirrus. Soooo comfy.

If the SR22T didn't exist I'd be flying a TTx.
 
I've always wanted to fly one. There's one on the field but never had a chance to talk to the guy. I concur with MetalCloud - if Cirrus wasn't around I think that's what I'd fly. Or maybe a Diamond :) Those are pretty sweet too.
 
denverpilot said:
Honestly the center t-handles remind me of my Jeep Cherokee from 17 years ago.

c35ded79d550c6332790e720189db6d3.jpg
Click to expand...

I love those cherokees. Kinda looking for one
 
MetalCloud said:
"Cirrus" tends to have that effect on people. Both the lovers and the haters.
Click to expand...

Well, it *is* such fine Corinthian leather after all...

9c0366f01b885b0f2b3b227d28d7ae5b.gif


dell30rb said:
I love those cherokees. Kinda looking for one
Click to expand...

If I hadn't given it away to a family member, I'd probably still be driving it. It would have needed a new rear main seal by now for sure though. Last I heard, it had a NYC yellow cab embedded in it all the way to the back seats, and then it was kinda straightened out by "a guy" and ran long enough to get it to Houston somewhere, where it was disposed of somehow.

It had cloth seats though. ;)
 
citizen5000 said:
Ever been in a cabin class jet? Or maybe ridden in first class on a commercial plane? Real flying begins with leather seats and glass panels.
Click to expand...

Real flying begins with an Alaskan bush pilot, whose coffee cup doubles as a spittoon after he's done.

Although I do have a leather seat...
 
3 in the green said:
A buddy has Columbia 400, '06, just before it became Cessna. Slick machine, definitely a traveler. I sat in the new TTx at the AOPA fly-in at CMA. The G2000 system is amazing. I'm a G1000 user and I was blown away by the added capability. I found it to be far more comfortable than the Acclaim-Ultra, although getting in on the driver's side on the Mooney was really cool. Cirrus had the best cabin though, but it feels less sporty - but is more comfortable and easier to get in and out of. The quality of the TTx seemed the highest. Although they were all really good...and should be, for the price. The G2000 is ridiculous though.
Click to expand...
Do you ( or anyone) know what the price is for a brand new, standard equipped TTx, Cirrus and Ovation?
 
JOhnH said:
Do you ( or anyone) know what the price is for a brand new, standard equipped TTx, Cirrus and Ovation?
Click to expand...

The TTx ($970k) is about $100k more than the like equipped SR22T ($870k). The Ovation is a non turbo and not equivalent to the TTx or the SR22T. The Ovation is more like the SR22. The Acclaim is Mooney's high end turbo and is around $770k loaded.
 
citizen5000 said:
The TTx ($970k) is about $100k more than the like equipped SR22T ($870k).
Click to expand...

I spoke to the Cessna sales director for my region as Cessna doesn't post their price list online anymore, unlike Cirrus. Not sure where you got 970k as that is not even close.

Base price: 715k
Air conditioning: 30,765
Tks FIKI: 55,180
XM weather: 7955
Garmin TAS: 14955
Total: 823,855

In comparison, a SR22T GTS is 862,999 and AC is an additional 26,900.

https://cirrusaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/2017-SR22T-United-States-Pricelist.pdf

The ttx is definitely priced under a SR22T and if you are willing to accept a paint scheme and option configuration they have already built, they were discounting off list price, which Cirrus does not need to do as they are backlogged.
 
steve_il said:
I spoke to the Cessna sales director for my region as Cessna doesn't post their price list online anymore, unlike Cirrus. Not sure where you got 970k as that is not even close.

Base price: 715k
Air conditioning: 30,765
Tks FIKI: 55,180
XM weather: 7955
Garmin TAS: 14955
Total: 823,855

In comparison, a SR22T GTS is 862,999 and AC is an additional 26,900.

https://cirrusaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/2017-SR22T-United-States-Pricelist.pdf

The ttx is definitely priced under a SR22T and if you are willing to accept a paint scheme and option configuration they have already built, they were discounting off list price, which Cirrus does not need to do as they are backlogged.
Click to expand...

Sadly some here have a habit of continually making stuff up!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
steve_il said:
I spoke to the Cessna sales director for my region as Cessna doesn't post their price list online anymore, unlike Cirrus. Not sure where you got 970k as that is not even close.

Base price: 715k
Air conditioning: 30,765
Tks FIKI: 55,180
XM weather: 7955
Garmin TAS: 14955
Total: 823,855

In comparison, a SR22T GTS is 862,999 and AC is an additional 26,900.

https://cirrusaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/2017-SR22T-United-States-Pricelist.pdf

The ttx is definitely priced under a SR22T and if you are willing to accept a paint scheme and option configuration they have already built, they were discounting off list price, which Cirrus does not need to do as they are backlogged.
Click to expand...

I have heard of heavy discounts on the ttx. But it doesn't make up for the shortcomings vs 22 for me. If I were in market for 4 seater (not 5) and useful load wasn't a issue. I would prefer an acclaim over the ttx.
 
No matter whose price list you're looking at, it's still effing RIDICULOUS.
 
dennyleeb said:
I have heard of heavy discounts on the ttx. But it doesn't make up for the shortcomings vs 22 for me. If I were in market for 4 seater (not 5) and useful load wasn't a issue. I would prefer an acclaim over the ttx.
Click to expand...
Yokes are so last generation ;)
 
Interestingly.... flew a really long cross country today and heard 3 separate TTx planes. Most I've ever heard on frequency in one trip.
 
Evidently yokes, unswept tails and vernier controls are uncool. Everyone knows cool is more important than function! I mean what does it matter how it flies if you can't look cool! ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Evidently yokes, unswept tails and vernier controls are uncool. Everyone knows cool is more important than function! I mean what does it matter how it flies if you can't look cool! ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Don't forget retracts. And single doors. And any plane that rhymes with "ooney" :rolleyes:
 
gsengle said:
Evidently yokes, unswept tails and vernier controls are uncool. Everyone knows cool is more important than function! I mean what does it matter how it flies if you can't look cool! ;)
Click to expand...

That reminded me of the time I wanted more precise mixture control when doing a GAMI test in my Cirrus.

I came up with a F.E.V.G.A.M.I.T.A.D:

34478129770_fc181f0fdd_z.jpg


That's Fast Eddie Vernier GAMI Test Assistance Device!
 
Hey when you have a good argument and not just more eye rolling like a teenage girl, I'll hear it ;)

Retracts for speed, fixed gear for rugged bush planes... and hey I like Beech too. And Piper... and some Cessnas... and and and...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
ocflyer said:
I prefer verniers for fine control, but I will say that on something like a DA40 it is nice to be able to have your hand wide to cover all 3 levers at once on a go-around as a good muscle-memory item, just in case you got distracted and didn't have the prop/mixture forward on the before-landing phase of the flight. That's not supposed to happen but it definitely has in regards to the prop control as I don't like going full forward on the prop until short final, and going around with the prop pulled half-back in a DA40 is uh... sub-optimal :)
Click to expand...

I suspect that those that love vernier controls would love them less if they were in a twin.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I suspect that those that love vernier controls would love them less if they were in a twin.
Click to expand...

Nah they'd be good there too if they could figure out how to make em work.

But I was mainly saying they are perfect for high performance singles...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FastEddieB said:
That reminded me of the time I wanted more precise mixture control when doing a GAMI test in my Cirrus.

I came up with a F.E.V.G.A.M.I.T.A.D:

34478129770_fc181f0fdd_z.jpg


That's Fast Eddie Vernier GAMI Test Assistance Device!
Click to expand...

That is beyond awesome. It's a home made vernier assist device... #respect


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Nah they'd be good there too if they could figure out how to make em work.

But I was mainly saying they are perfect for high performance singles...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't mind vernier mixture and prop controls, but I HATE vernier throttles (e.g. Bonanzas and Debonairs.)
 
Even if you can push the button in and it disengages the vernier and you can just push?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Sac Arrow said:
I don't mind vernier mixture and prop controls, but I HATE vernier throttles (e.g. Bonanzas and Debonairs.)
Click to expand...

Missing a right hand, I feel the exact same way.

Most quadrants in most single engine airplanes where the extra leverage isn't needed to operate the cable, or panel space for other stuff, are just weird and seem like a styling fad thing trying make it feel like something they aren't.
 
steve_il said:
I spoke to the Cessna sales director for my region as Cessna doesn't post their price list online anymore, unlike Cirrus.
Click to expand...

Cirrus openly publishes their complete price list on their cororate website. Cessna does not. What are they hiding if they are cheaper? Did the sales guy give their corporate price list, you know, something in writing?

Here is Controller.com for NEW 2017 TTxs (you still add cost for options not present in the fully loaded SR22T). https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/list/?Mdltxt=TTX&Manu=CESSNA
 
Last edited:
gsengle said:
Hey when you have a good argument and not just more eye rolling like a teenage girl, I'll hear it ;)

Retracts for speed, fixed gear for rugged bush planes... and hey I like Beech too. And Piper... and some Cessnas... and and and...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Nice smirk in a condescending statement of my use of an eye roll.

And your statement on fixed gear purpose is the dumbest thing I've seen you write.
 
MetalCloud said:
Nice smirk in a condescending statement of my use of an eye roll.

And your statement on fixed gear purpose is the dumbest thing I've seen you write.
Click to expand...

Really this isn't high school. Can we be adults.

Please tell me how retracts don't enhance speed, how that's dumb... cuz um physics.

Or tell me how fixed gear isn't more rugged in a way that makes sense for off field operations?

Saying I'm dumb doesn't make it so. #fakenews


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Really this isn't high school. Can we be adults.

Please tell me how retracts don't enhance speed, how that's dumb... cuz um physics.

Or tell me how fixed gear isn't more rugged in a way that makes sense for off field operations?

Saying I'm dumb doesn't make it so. #fakenews


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
It's just funny that the subject plane of this thread and its only real competitor is fixed gear. And they're plenty fast. Yet you claim it's for bush planes.

I didn't say you're dumb. I said your statement was dumb.

EDIT: "this isn't high school" he says as he calls someone's use of an emoticon tantamount to being a teenage girl
 
Last edited:
citizen5000 said:
The TTx ($970k) is about $100k more than the like equipped SR22T ($870k). The Ovation is a non turbo and not equivalent to the TTx or the SR22T. The Ovation is more like the SR22. The Acclaim is Mooney's high end turbo and is around $770k loaded.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you can't have both FIKI and A/C in a new Mooney...
 
I also flew in a Lanceair before it became Columbia. For those that don't know, Lanceair had a series of disasters that ended their foray into certificated aircraft. Garmin failed to deliver promised avionics, so a large number of airframes were sitting on the ramp when a freak hailstorm blew in and damaged the lot of them. They declared bankruptcy shortly thereafter.

The example I flew in as impressive. The thing could really move. That's what they're for, eating up miles at high speeds, and they do it very well. I wouldn't purchase one though. I really don't know how long Cessna will continue to make them only selling single digit numbers each year. Of course, the same could be said for Mooney...
 
MetalCloud said:
It's just funny that the subject plane of this thread and its only real competitor is fixed gear. And they're plenty fast. Yet you claim it's for bush planes.

I didn't say you're dumb. I said your statement was dumb.

EDIT: "this isn't high school" he says as he calls someone's use of an emoticon tantamount to being a teenage girl
Click to expand...

No, 'rolling eyes' was teenage girl lol. And yes even the TTx would be faster as a retract...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
For my "missions" I take the 172 if I'm alone or trying to build time, but keep current now in the Cirrus for bringing non flying folks where speed and comfort are big ticket items. I appreciate the Cirrus for what it does in that regards, makes my passengers feel safe and comfortable, and it's honestly a pretty cool plane to fly. I like how my right hand easily positions right by the fuel, flaps, throttle, mixture, GPS, etc. It's a smart layout. My left hand I have the control stick with its functions. From what I've sat in the interior layout is superior to other machines. Now, full disclosure, I haven't sat in a Mooney but just from knowing my non pilot pax they wouldn't be as comfortable in one. The Mooney has a lot of features that are cool and would appeal to me. They have a timeless "Porsche-esq" classic design and they're fast and sip fuel, and apparently built ridiculously well. So they have a lot going for it. I wish there was a club I could rent one from so I could see how my non pilot pax would fair in one

paflyer said:
No matter whose price list you're looking at, it's still effing RIDICULOUS.
Click to expand...
ircphoenix said:
Oh come on. A million bucks for a 4 seater airplane
Click to expand...
^but ultimately, I completely agree. This bounds on extortion. Don't get me wrong, these planes are CRAZY performance machines.. but they are still single engine 4 person (sorta) planes. Personally speaking if I had just won the lottery and had a cool $1.2M in cash (after paying out the taxes, my other liens, etc.) I would save half for maintenance and upkeep (so $600K) and spend the other $600K on one of these. Note, these will NOT be everyone's cup of tea, but hey it's my lotto millions so I get to spend them how I want! :D

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/1356425/1978-aerostar-702p
https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/18417445/2001-beechcraft-58-baron
https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/1453279/1984-cessna-421c

A turboprop or jet would be hard to squeeze out on that kind of budget, especially if I wanted it to be "nice." So no King Airs or TBMs... but these piston twins above are nice rides and each have something special going for it. In addition to being twins and retracts one of them is crazy fast, the other I've always seen as "king of GA twins" (the Baron), and the third just seems like it would have crazy utility. But the 421 is at the bottom of the list for a reason... :)

Having said that. If I had something like $2M to play with, I would still get one of the twins above but I would buy myself an SR22 for my burger runs. The SR22 would be much cheaper to operate than those twins above so wouldn't need as big of a cash reserve on it, and it would be a very fun plane for for the two person hops within 300NM.

But this has gone from somewhat potentially attainable at some point in my life to pure fantasy by that point LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top