Cirrus Faster than Mooney, on Average

[PJClark]

On 6/21/2020 at 12:50 PM, philiplane said:

And here is the  SR22TN performance data. Definitely faster than an Ovation, with more useful load too. 

Not sure why Mooney couldn't add 200 lbs to their gross weights to make the planes competitive. It's not impossible. The 2014 SR22 G5 and up have 1100-1200 pound useful loads. I've got a new mission requirement for the next few years, and I would use a Bravo for it, if it had an 1150 pound useful load. 

I got to thinking about this table this afternoon.  The SR22TN can't do this at 16,000 on 17.8 gph.  And your 2006 Cirrus has Avidynes...which are fine, but no way to get Syn Viz, no touch screens.   And with those limitations it'd still cost at least $60k more than I have in my Rocket with 2019 paint, interior, and avionics. 

But I do only have 900 lb UL.

[philiplane]

13 hours ago, PJClark said:

I got to thinking about this table this afternoon.  The SR22TN can't do this at 16,000 on 17.8 gph.  And your 2006 Cirrus has Avidynes...which are fine, but no way to get Syn Viz, no touch screens.   And with those limitations it'd still cost at least $60k more than I have in my Rocket with 2019 paint, interior, and avionics. 

But I do only have 900 lb UL.

Can't do what? The SR22TN performance table shows 198 KTAS on 17.6 GPH at 18000, the previous table would show 195 KTAS on the same 17.6 GPH at 16,000 feet. On a standard day. On a warm day, it would be 200 KTAS. 

Oh, wait. You show 7C at 16,000. Which is +5C above standard. Which means the Cirrus will beat you by 1 knot under those same conditions, with 200 more pounds aboard, and the gear hanging out. You have to give credit to the designers for the efficiency of the Cirrus airframe. And even more credit to the geniuses at Tornado Alley Turbo for their handiwork. It's the first turbo system ever to achieve the speeds it can while keeping the CHT's not only manageable, but cool. I can set up 85 percent power and not have CHT exceed 360 degrees. No other system can do that.  

And yes you can get syn vis on an 06 Cirrus, via the Avidyne R9 upgrade. I flew one for three years. 

And the reason for the higher price on the Cirrus is obvious...more standard equipment, air conditioning, and ultimately, higher demand. 

My guess is that the Bonanza will be the next legacy airplane to be discontinued due to low demand. They are on the same path as Mooney. Not giving buyers what they want. How can you keep the lights on at a factory selling 13 planes per year? Mooney didn't have the ability, and Beech is subsidizing the Bonanza/Baron line with King Air sales. At some point the bean counters will say enough is enough. Meanwhile, Cirrus is selling 300 planes a year, adding new features as they go. You can bet that the Garmin Autoland will find its way into the SR22 soon. 

Edited June 23, 2020 by philiplane

[wcb]

7 minutes ago, philiplane said:

The SR22TN performance table shows 198 KTAS on 17.6 GPH at 18000, the previous table would show 195 KTAS on the same 17.6 GPH at 16,000 feet. 

And yes you can get syn vis on an 06 Cirrus, via the Avidyne R9 upgrade. I flew one for three years. 

No doubt a TN is going to be as good or better than NON TN (of course the above post is a 305 rocket vs a TN)when flying high.  This is why my analysis compared a SR22 (non TN) and an Ovation. 183 kts vs 197 kts could simply be the difference in the gear.  No doubt they are both special planes!  From an apples to apples comparison it is as simple as looking at the trade offs (Speed, Chute, Cost)!

[PJClark]

All true...at 85% power. I'm loafing at 65% power.  The fuel specifics of the IO-550 are certainly better than the TSIO-520.  If I pushed it up to 76% power and 21 gph I'd get around 210 KTAS though.

I hear you.  Cirrus is making what people will buy if they're spending $800k+, to start production back up Mooney has to do something different

Can you still buy the R9 upgrade? Isn't that a 100k thing? 

[philiplane]

42 minutes ago, wcb said:

No doubt a TN is going to be as good or better than NON TN (of course the above post is a 305 rocket vs a TN)when flying high.  This is why my analysis compared a SR22 (non TN) and an Ovation. 183 kts vs 197 kts could simply be the difference in the gear.  No doubt they are both special planes!  From an apples to apples comparison it is as simple as looking at the trade offs (Speed, Chute, Cost)!

The real max cruise numbers on an Ovation 3 are 192 knots on 19 GPH at 8500 feet. At 10,500 they are 189 knots on 17 GPH (70%) power. Remember this is the 310 HP version, not the 280 HP standard version. And it is at 2700 RPM.

Pulling back the power to the normal cruise and you'll find the Ovation is a 185 knot plane, only 10 knots faster than the normally aspirated Cirrus SR22. Ten knots equals a fiftenn minute difference on a max range 800 NM trip. Fifteen minutes.

Now let's crank up the Mooney to max cruise, and we'll get there 24 minutes faster, but on 4-5 more gallons of gas. And be putting cylinders on the engine in about 400 hours.

Been around both planes long enough to know that these are the real word numbers.

The other Mooney problem, solved only with the latest U/V models, is the door. The door on all previous Mooneys is tiny in comparison to the Cirrus door, and to the M20U/V. Watching four big guys get in a Cirrus is no show at all, but take the same four and try to get them into a Mooney, well, you'd better have popcorn and a comfortable chair. 

Edited June 23, 2020 by philiplane

[PJClark]

1 hour ago, philiplane said:

Oh, wait. You show 7C at 16,000. Which is +5C above standard

7F, not 7C. But we quibble.

[wcb]

1 hour ago, philiplane said:

The real max cruise numbers on an Ovation 3 are 192 knots on 19 GPH at 8500 feet. At 10,500 they are 189 knots on 17 GPH (70%) power. Remember this is the 310 HP version, not the 280 HP standard version. And it is at 2700 RPM.

Pulling back the power to the normal cruise and you'll find the Ovation is a 185 knot plane, only 10 knots faster than the normally aspirated Cirrus SR22. Ten knots equals a fiftenn minute difference on a max range 800 NM trip. Fifteen minutes.

Now let's crank up the Mooney to max cruise, and we'll get there 24 minutes faster, but on 4-5 more gallons of gas. And be putting cylinders on the engine in about 400 hours.

Been around both planes long enough to know that these are the real word numbers.

The other Mooney problem, solved only with the latest U/V models, is the door. The door on all previous Mooneys is tiny in comparison to the Cirrus door, and to the M20U/V. Watching four big guys get in a Cirrus is no show at all, but take the same four and try to get them into a Mooney, well, you'd better have popcorn and a comfortable chair. 

Just to clarify I do not doubt your numbers.  My numbers were simply max cruise for a base sr22 vs base 280hp Ovation off of (I think it was plane and pilot magazine and not specifically for the 310 hp in the controller add).   It is all trade offs as I said both are special birds and would take either over a 2006 (just pick the year with comparable hours and set up) of any other brand and you will find the best price is usually the Mooney.

 

Since I threw in 2006 Cirrus and Mooney.  (I know I know - the year is less important than the hours is why I tried to get comparable of rough age equipment and hours).

How about a 180hp Diamond da 40 for $249k no a/c or fiki as is the other two?  Or 2007 Diamond DA40XL for $219k?

How about a 2006 Bo and get two more seats G36 for $495?  (there were no F33's to compare)

How about a 2007 Cessna 182T closest comparable at 229k and 319k (both with more hours no fiki no a/c)?

How about a 2006 Cessna 400 (REALLY GOOD COMPARISON except no fiki) for $275k? 

No real good comparable Piper on the market?

 

So out of those listed the Mooney at $249k, Cessna 400 at $275k,  Cirrus SR22 at $289k, Bo at $495k.  Diamond, Piper and C182 just don't make the cut for a later model comparison.

Just a quick look for fun!

 

 

[Seth]

2 hours ago, philiplane said:

Can't do what? The SR22TN performance table shows 198 KTAS on 17.6 GPH at 18000, the previous table would show 195 KTAS on the same 17.6 GPH at 16,000 feet. On a standard day. On a warm day, it would be 200 KTAS. 

Oh, wait. You show 7C at 16,000. Which is +5C above standard. Which means the Cirrus will beat you by 1 knot under those same conditions, with 200 more pounds aboard, and the gear hanging out. You have to give credit to the designers for the efficiency of the Cirrus airframe. And even more credit to the geniuses at Tornado Alley Turbo for their handiwork. It's the first turbo system ever to achieve the speeds it can while keeping the CHT's not only manageable, but cool. I can set up 85 percent power and not have CHT exceed 360 degrees. No other system can do that.  

And yes you can get syn vis on an 06 Cirrus, via the Avidyne R9 upgrade. I flew one for three years. 

And the reason for the higher price on the Cirrus is obvious...more standard equipment, air conditioning, and ultimately, higher demand. 

My guess is that the Bonanza will be the next legacy airplane to be discontinued due to low demand. They are on the same path as Mooney. Not giving buyers what they want. How can you keep the lights on at a factory selling 13 planes per year? Mooney didn't have the ability, and Beech is subsidizing the Bonanza/Baron line with King Air sales. At some point the bean counters will say enough is enough. Meanwhile, Cirrus is selling 300 planes a year, adding new features as they go. You can bet that the Garmin Autoland will find its way into the SR22 soon. 

Bonanza sales are indeed way down. But it is a six seat aircraft and those sales are going to the Piper PA46 line in my opinion. It will be the next to go away.

Frankly, the C90GTx may be the next to go. Very few sold. It's the same production line as the 250, just a smaller and different rear end, so to pop one in now and then vs all the other king airs being produced does not harm costs too much. However my guess is once the Denali enters the fold, the C90GTx will be retired and the Denali will be the smaller turboprop offered. Denali, King Air 250, King Air 350.  Very low numbers of the C90 produced last year.

-Seth

[Shadrach]

On 6/20/2020 at 11:13 AM, philiplane said:

The 155 knot SR20 will compare with every four cylinder Mooney, and the 175 knot SR22...

Do you have much time in SR20s? They are not 155kt airplanes in my experience. They are not load haulers in my experience. What they are is an example of the power of branding. They do have nice interiors. They are nice looking if you think Cirrus are good looking (I do).  My stock, 50 year old F model will out climb, outrun and out carry an SR20. It also has better runway performance and with more range. The SR20 does not outshine a 200hp Mooney (admittedly UL will vary from plane to plane) in performance but then it does not need not because it’s a well arranged turn key package. Funny how Mooney won’t build a 200 hp airplane because The cost would be too close to the high power version yet CIRRUS can sell SR20s all day long.

[philiplane]

22 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Do you have much time in SR20s? They are not 155kt airplanes in my experience. They are not load haulers in my experience. What they are is an example of the power of branding. They do have nice interiors. They are nice looking if you think Cirrus are good looking (I do).  My stock, 50 year old F model will out climb, outrun and out carry an SR20. It also has better runway performance and with more range. The SR20 does not outshine a 200hp Mooney (admittedly UL will vary from plane to plane) in performance but then it does not need not because it’s a well arranged turn key package. Funny how Mooney won’t build a 200 hp airplane because The cost would be too close to the high power version yet CIRRUS can sell SR20s all day long.

Yes. G1, G2, and G3 versions. The G3 is the fastest of the bunch by 3-5 knots because of the improved G3 wing and better gear fairings. Even so, at 6000 feet the G2 does from 140 knots on 10 GPH to 159 knots on 13 GPH. I usually saw 152 knots on 12 GPH with three people and bags, or 155 with two aboard. 

[MIm20c]

6 minutes ago, philiplane said:

I usually saw 152 knots on 12 GPH with three people and bags, or 155 with two aboard. 

So basically 4% faster burning 20% more fuel than my C and 20 kts slower than an ovation burning the same amount?
 

Bottom line...Cirrus pilots fly at rental power settings, Mooney pilots fly at CB power settings. 

[philiplane]

10 hours ago, MIm20c said:

So basically 4% faster burning 20% more fuel than my C and 20 kts slower than an ovation burning the same amount?
 

Bottom line...Cirrus pilots fly at rental power settings, Mooney pilots fly at CB power settings. 

Don't forget the Cirrus has a real backseat. And, no Ovation makes 172 knots on 12 GPH with three aboard and bags. 

The normally aspirated SR22 would be a better Ovation comparison than the SR20. It will achieve 173 knots on 13 GPH at 16000 feet. At a more common 11,000 feet, it does the same on 14.5 GPH. At 8000 feet it requires 15 GPH. The plane has remarkable efficiency in the 8000-17000 foot range, like the Ovation, only with more room and useful load.

Edited June 24, 2020 by philiplane

[Niko182]

11 minutes ago, philiplane said:

Don't forget the Cirrus has a real backseat. And, no Ovation makes 172 knots on 12 GPH with three aboard and bags. 

Im not arguing planes. Yesterday i went to phoenix and back from SNA. 8500 with 90 gallons in the tank 2 people, and bags 12.5 GPH doing 175 to 176knots. I have a very light ovation though.

On the way to phoenix i was significantly lighter and getting 12.5 GPH doing 178knots at 9500. 

I dont have tks or AC, but have an unusual useful load for the ovations. Also according to GPS, the IAS reads about 1 or 2 knots slow according to GPS testing.

Im not arguing to see if the cirrus is faster or slower than the mooney. All im saying is my Ovation will do 172 knots on 12GPH with 3 aboard and bags. Throw in a 4th too. I have the useful load.

[carusoam]

If the Ci were an animal in the wild....

What would it be most associated with...

With all those fancy smooth curves...

Looks like the early designs engineers in the Cirrus camp may have been marine biologists inspired by these guys...

-a-

 

[wcb]

Here is an article from Aviation Consumer.

https://www.aviationconsumer.com/industry-news/editorial/mooney-acclaim-ultra-tops-in-raw-speed/

 

Chart

 

 

I think this means everyone needs to stop messing around will all inferior single engine planes and buy an ACCLAIM!!!!

[aviatoreb]

36 minutes ago, wcb said:

Here is an article from Aviation Consumer.

https://www.aviationconsumer.com/industry-news/editorial/mooney-acclaim-ultra-tops-in-raw-speed/

 

Chart

 

 

I think this means everyone needs to stop messing around will all inferior single engine planes and buy an ACCLAIM!!!!

Very interesting.  From what I have read that seems a low estimate for the ovation by about 10kts?

Over on another thread someone posted this Mooney Missile that claims 201TAS cruise at 10,500 kts.

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/154936773/1982-mooney-m20j-201-missile

[ArtVandelay]

Here is an article from Aviation Consumer.

https://www.aviationconsumer.com/industry-news/editorial/mooney-acclaim-ultra-tops-in-raw-speed/

 

Chart

 

 

I think this means everyone needs to stop messing around will all inferior single engine planes and buy an ACCLAIM!!!!

So this tells me maybe the easiest way to go faster is to increase the service ceiling. I wonder how difficult pressurized cabin and pushing service ceiling to 40,000’?

[jlunseth]

How do you get an average speed of 78 in any Mooney?  That is landing speed, not any actual flying speed I am aware of. The controls are starting to feel a little mushy in my aircraft at that speed and the nose is pitched up pretty good. Probably I have to put in some power because I am falling behind the curve. That is a spot speed of some kind, in other words, a plane doing a maneuver or on final ready to land, not an average speed.

Edited June 24, 2020 by jlunseth

[MIm20c]

30 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

Very interesting.  From what I have read that seems a low estimate for the ovation by about 10kts?

Over on another thread someone posted this Mooney Missile that claims 201TAS cruise at 10,500 kts.

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/154936773/1982-mooney-m20j-201-missile

Chart shows 65% power. Interesting how far behind the sr22t is down low. 

[aviatoreb]

16 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

Chart shows 65% power. Interesting how far behind the sr22t is down low. 

Can a normally aspirated airplane engine make 65% power at 10,500 ft?  That 65% must in large part be for scoring the turbo's on the chart. 

[Niko182]

With higher rpms yes. 

[Hank]

1 hour ago, jlunseth said:

How do you get an average speed of 78 in any Mooney?  That is landing speed, not any actual flying speed I am aware of. The controls are starting to feel a little mushy in my aircraft at that speed and the nose is pitched up pretty good. Probably I have to put in some power because I am falling behind the curve. That is a spot speed of some kind, in other words, a plane doing a maneuver or on final ready to land, not an average speed.

It's groundspeed. I've had groundspeed of 68 knots while indicating 135 mph straight and level at 10,000 msl approaching KTYS from the southeast, at sunset. My wife's only comment:  "Glad we aren't in a Cessna, we'd be going backwards."

[AH-1 Cobra Pilot]

2 hours ago, wcb said:

Here is an article from Aviation Consumer.

https://www.aviationconsumer.com/industry-news/editorial/mooney-acclaim-ultra-tops-in-raw-speed/

 

Chart

 

 

I think this means everyone needs to stop messing around will all inferior single engine planes and buy an ACCLAIM!!!!

Even more impressive when you realize the Cirrus uses a 315hp engine and the Mooney's is only 280hp!  The Mooney is using 11% less fuel with these numbers.

[jlunseth]

42 minutes ago, Hank said:

It's groundspeed. I've had groundspeed of 68 knots while indicating 135 mph straight and level at 10,000 msl approaching KTYS from the southeast, at sunset. My wife's only comment:  "Glad we aren't in a Cessna, we'd be going backwards."

Yeah, I have never seen a groundspeed of 68 knots either, except when landing or maneuvering. Where do you find a 70 knot headwind unless you are, well let me just say it, dumb enough to go to FL210 in the dead of winter on an east to west leg. But my point is, the OP's speeds are spot speeds. So can you find a moment in time when 20 Mooneys and 20 Cirri are in the air, and the Mooneys are all landing and the Cirri are cruising? Sure, depends on when you spot-pick the data.