Cirrus SR20/22 vs Piper Arrow

S

shyampatel94

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Aug 12, 2013
Messages
116
Display Name
Display name:
Shyam Patel
What is the difference in operating costs, maintenance cost, fuel cost? Which is cheaper to operate? Pros and Cons for both?
 
Shyam, you have asked a lot of question about several different planes. If you tell us your skill level and mission perhaps we can give you a bit more specific direction.

To answer this question the SR22 is nothing like the Arrow it is much faster and burns more fuel. The SR 20 a fixed gear plane is about 140 kts vs. the 135kts for the Arrow which is a retract. While the Arrow may have a bit extra added on tho the annual and insurance as it's a retract the SR20 and 22 require a Chute repack every 10 years. The current cost of the repack is about 10K, which is likely more than you will pay for both the insurance and gear swing on the Arrow.

They are both good aircraft.
 
Niether of them are multi-engine aircraft, which is to say, their maintenance and operating cost differentials are frankly immaterial. Rounding errors in fact. The only metric that matters is acquisition cost. Advantage Arrow.

Theres of course the chute repack cost at 10 yr intervals. More expensive on older 20s due to more invasive procedure to access the chute.

Personally I find the juxtaposition of an sr 22 with a NA arrow useless. Buy what you want with what you can. For me the Arrow represents great value. I can scoot around 680# of full fuel useful load at 135 KTAS at 9gph. The advent of the part 23 re-write will allow me to retrofit modern avionics that rival the sr 22 at more than a 70% discount.
 
AdamZ said:
Shyam, you have asked a lot of question about several different planes. If you tell us your skill level and mission perhaps we can give you a bit more specific direction.

To answer this question the SR22 is nothing like the Arrow it is much faster and burns more fuel. The SR 20 a fixed gear plane is about 140 kts vs. the 135kts for the Arrow which is a retract. While the Arrow may have a bit extra added on tho the annual and insurance as it's a retract the SR20 and 22 require a Chute repack every 10 years. The current cost of the repack is about 10K, which is likely more than you will pay for both the insurance and gear swing on the Arrow.

They are both good aircraft.
Click to expand...

5kts is "much faster" ??

Used to fly a PA28RT Arrow IV, she indicated out right at 140, few minor speed mods.

I go Arrow before I went cirrus, more plane for the money, but I'd get a PA24 before an arrow.
 
I've got time in both types.

On average, I would expect maintenance cost to be about the same, but with any particular examples, I'm sure costs will vary widely. It's important not to buy a lemon ...let me know if you figure out how!

The Cirrus will cost more to purchase, sales tax will be more, state license will be more if you're in a place like Minnesota where it's based on the value of the plane. Fuel will probably be less on the Cirrus, it's a good 20 knots faster and they're both 200 HP (if memory serves me right). Advantage for the Cirrus is that they pretty much all flew lean of peak out of the factory (well balanced intake and exhaust), so you can give up some speed for much better MPG.

Besides cost, a big difference between the planes is that the Cirrus feels modern, and the Piper feels, well, "classic" in comparison. The other biggie is the parachute; using the parachute, my non-pilot wife can, with near certainty safely land a Cirrus in a forest, with a 100' overcast & 1/4 mile visibility, at night. There's something to be said for that too.
 
ChitDisturber said:
5kts is "much faster" ??

Used to fly a PA28RT Arrow IV, she indicated out right at 140, few minor speed mods.

I go Arrow before I went cirrus, more plane for the money, but I'd get a PA24 before an arrow.
Click to expand...

Indicated? OOC, at what altitude and power setting...

Do you mean TAS?
 
Flying Lizard said:
Besides cost, a big difference between the planes is that the Cirrus feels modern, and the Piper feels, well, "classic" in comparison. The other biggie is the parachute; using the parachute, my non-pilot wife can, with near certainty safely land a Cirrus in a forest, with a 100' overcast & 1/4 mile visibility, at night. There's something to be said for that too.
Click to expand...

But the diff in purchase price will buy you a TON of AVGAS lol

If you really heed to eek out 20kts, get a PA24-250 with a few speed mods, much less money, faster and handles better.

As for your wife, it's just a parachute man, carefull with that false sense of saftey

Just ask this guy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gf8DYXUOai8&feature=youtube_gdata_player


And it was 140 indicated (I hate it when people use TAS for this type of thing), don't remember the power setting as it was a while ago, but the altitude was probably 6-7k with where I was flying then.
 
hindsight2020 said:
Niether of them are multi-engine aircraft, which is to say, their maintenance and operating cost differentials are frankly immaterial. Rounding errors in fact.
Click to expand...

So you're telling me a 150 and a Pilatus have maintenance and operating costs differentials that are rounding errors?

I'd expect lowest overall costs to be with the Arrow (assuming a naturally aspirated Arrow - turbo Arrows will be higher a bit). Highest with the SR22. But the Arrow will be the slowest, SR22 the fastest. Block time trip differences won't be very significant unless your normal trip is long enough to require a fuel stop in one where another plane could make it non-stop.

Assuming the planes fit my mission: If I had unlimited cash, I'd buy the SR22. If I was, well, me, I'd probably buy the Arrow.
 
I was surprised to hear someone say the annual cost on a Cirrus is near the same as an Arrow.
There is a person that has a business managing Mx costs for owners and his prime customers are Cirrus owners.

What are the annuals running for you Cirrus owners out there?

Great aircraft but definitely out of my price range.
 
tmyers said:
I was surprised to hear someone say the annual cost on a Cirrus is near the same as an Arrow.
There is a person that has a business managing Mx costs for owners and his prime customers are Cirrus owners.

What are the annuals running for you Cirrus owners out there?

Great aircraft but definitely out of my price range.
Click to expand...

Tim,

Other than the gear swing, what difference would you expect?
 
Just more complicated systems is all. I may be throwing scat against the wall but I had heard they were expensive to annual. :dunno:
 
I am not terribly impressed with the sr20. Why not go for a p28-235/6? The useful load is tons better than either airplane you mentioned and about the same speed. Or a 182, but I'm guessing you don't like high wings?
 
There's only one SR22 on the field here; last annual was $8,000. No idea if that's typical, but if it is it's something to keep in mind.
 
tmyers said:
I was surprised to hear someone say the annual cost on a Cirrus is near the same as an Arrow.
There is a person that has a business managing Mx costs for owners and his prime customers are Cirrus owners.

What are the annuals running for you Cirrus owners out there?

Great aircraft but definitely out of my price range.
Click to expand...

Could that be because folks that spend the acquisition cost for a Cirrus are more likely to hire a maintenance management company than those buying cheaper to acquire aircraft?
 
dans2992 said:
Could that be because folks that spend the acquisition cost for a Cirrus are more likely to hire a maintenance management company than those buying cheaper to acquire aircraft?
Click to expand...

You would assume the demographics would be a little different b/t the planes unless you're going in with partners. Quite a cost difference b/t an sr20 and arrow and an even larger step to an sr22.
 
AdamZ said:
To answer this question the SR22 is nothing like the Arrow it is much faster and burns more fuel.
Click to expand...

Well, to keep that in perspective...

It's possible that for any given trip length, the SR22 might actually burn less fuel.

I have previously owned a Grumman Tiger and an SR22.

On a given trip from S FL to N GA, the Tiger would take about 5 hours @ about 10gph and 132k and burn about 50 gals. Since it held 50 gals, with very rare exceptions it made a fuel stop mandatory.

Same trip in the SR22 would take about 3.5 hours @ about 13.5gph and 170k and burn about 47 gals. Since it held 81 gals (IIRC), no fuel stop was necessary.

All this is credit to the efficiency of the SR22, since the Tiger is no slouch in that department either.

In my experience, however, the Cirrus would be much more expensive to maintain than the Arrow. And insurance costs are likely to be higher as well.

Due to those costs, I sold my Cirrus and bought a Light Sport Sky Arrow, which I'm loving.

First post, BTW. Hello all!
 
The sr22 and the arrow are not even in the same league,the sr 22 has a much higher fuel burn,and the acquisition cost is not nearly comparable. I personally like the arrow having owned one,and unless I hit the lottery will never be able to afford an Sr 22.
 
Are we talking about airplanes with similar ages? Most Arrows in service are much older than most SR22's in service, and will correspondingly need more maintenance as more things break and wear out from age.
 
AdamZ said:
Shyam, you have asked a lot of question about several different planes. If you tell us your skill level and mission perhaps we can give you a bit more specific direction.
Click to expand...

I take Shyam's posts that he is an energetic new comer to our midst and is going through the "kid in the candy shop" phase. So much to see and select from, not yet sure if he's a gummi bear or hard candy guy, and doesn't know if he is going to study to be a chocolatier or a pastry chef. IIRC correctly, he has only recently started college studies and flight training.

For now, he's the new student who snakes down the runway because he is still figuring out the right rudder pedal.

(and even Henning and some other notables here were like this at one time
poking-with-stick-smiley-emoticon.gif
)
 
AggieMike88 said:
(and even Henning and some other notables here were like this at one time
poking-with-stick-smiley-emoticon.gif
)
Click to expand...

Henning never! At five he built his own glider out of bed sheets and tent poles. Self launched off his parents roof and sprayed the lawn for dollar weed using a modified backpack sprayer.
 
ChitDisturber said:
5kts is "much faster" ??

Used to fly a PA28RT Arrow IV, she indicated out right at 140, few minor speed mods.

I go Arrow before I went cirrus, more plane for the money, but I'd get a PA24 before an arrow.
Click to expand...

The SR22 is much faster. The 5kts difference is between the Arrow and the SR20. The Arrow that used to be on the rental line ( no speed mods unless you count washing it)where I flew I would see 135-138 kts and the SR20 I saw around 140 to 145. The SR22 however was indeed much faster
 
ChitDisturber said:
5kts is "much faster" ??

Used to fly a PA28RT Arrow IV, she indicated out right at 140, few minor speed mods.

I go Arrow before I went cirrus, more plane for the money, but I'd get a PA24 before an arrow.
Click to expand...

FastEddieB said:
Well, to keep that in perspective...

It's possible that for any given trip length, the SR22 might actually burn less fuel.

I have previously owned a Grumman Tiger and an SR22.

On a given trip from S FL to N GA, the Tiger would take about 5 hours @ about 10gph and 132k and burn about 50 gals. Since it held 50 gals, with very rare exceptions it made a fuel stop mandatory.

Same trip in the SR22 would take about 3.5 hours @ about 13.5gph and 170k and burn about 47 gals. Since it held 81 gals (IIRC), no fuel stop was necessary.

All this is credit to the efficiency of the SR22, since the Tiger is no slouch in that department either.

In my experience, however, the Cirrus would be much more expensive to maintain than the Arrow. And insurance costs are likely to be higher as well.

Due to those costs, I sold my Cirrus and bought a Light Sport Sky Arrow, which I'm loving.

First post, BTW. Hello all!
Click to expand...

First welcome to Pilots of America! Nice to have you here!

Second, you bring up some very valid points, but I think they apply to XC travel. If your the type of weekend flyer who flies for $100 hamburgers and to bore holes in the sky an hour of flying is an hour of flying.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
So you're telling me a 150 and a Pilatus have maintenance and operating costs differentials that are rounding errors?
Click to expand...

I'm going to assume you were being facetious. You know I meant pistons. It wasn't even a multi-engine jab. Man y'all are sensitive.:D
 
Alexb2000 said:
Henning never! At five he built his own glider out of bed sheets and tent poles. Self launched off his parents roof and sprayed the lawn for dollar weed using a modified backpack sprayer.
Click to expand...

Shoot Henning didn't even need a CFI to learn how to fly.
 
LJS1993 said:
Shoot Henning didn't even need a CFI to learn how to fly.
Click to expand...

First thing I (and my buddy) flew was an Eipper Quicksilver with a 25hp Chrysler, $2500 new (assembly required) learned out of the manual, no room on a single seat ultralight for a CFI. Lots of people taught themselves in ultralights, all the way back to the Wrights.
 
AdamZ said:
First welcome to Pilots of America! Nice to have you here!
Click to expand...

Thanks!

Second, you bring up some very valid points, but I think they apply to XC travel. If your the type of weekend flyer who flies for $100 hamburgers and to bore holes in the sky an hour of flying is an hour of flying.
Click to expand...

Point taken.

When I fly my Sky Arrow now, I figure it costs me about $20 an hour. That's for 5 gals of ethanol-free mogas at about $4 each.

And it usually concerns me little how far or fast I can go.

Lord knows, with insurance and hangar and maintenance, it actually costs far more than that on an hourly basis.

But we don't have to think about that, do we? :no:
 
Henning said:
First thing I (and my buddy) flew was an Eipper Quicksilver with a 25hp Chrysler, $2500 new (assembly required) learned out of the manual, no room on a single seat ultralight for a CFI. Lots of people taught themselves in ultralights, all the way back to the Wrights.
Click to expand...

So you transitioned quick to your first plane?
 
FastEddieB said:
Thanks!



Point taken.

When I fly my Sky Arrow now, I figure it costs me about $20 an hour. That's for 5 gals of ethanol-free mogas at about $4 each.

And it usually concerns me little how far or fast I can go.

Lord knows, with insurance and hangar and maintenance, it actually costs far more than that on an hourly basis.

But we don't have to think about that, do we? :no:
Click to expand...

Do you miss the XC travel? I know a local pilot who flies a sky arrow. Can't wait to get a ride. Fun looking bird.
 
AdamZ said:
Do you miss the XC travel?.
Click to expand...



I flew coast to coast a few times in planes with a cruse speed less then 110kts.


Now I should say I actually enjoy flying just to fly, thus when I fly for myself, I prefer to cruse along at 1-2k AGL at 100kts, then hauling azz at 5 figure altitudes.
 
Last edited:
LJS1993 said:
So you transitioned quick to your first plane?
Click to expand...

Almost 10 years later, but it's a completely different experience, an airplane is nowhere near as visceral. The old Quicksilver had no instrumentation, you sat out in the open in a swing seat that had cables to a rudder. You gauged your stall by listening/feeling the fabric flutter in the wings.
 
AdamZ said:
Do you miss the XC travel?
Click to expand...

Nope.

Because in the last year or so, we've made trips from N GA to Page, Arizona (for the CT Fly-in), Lock Haven, PA (for the Cub "Sentimental Journey") and, most recently, all the way to Peru!


Peru, Indiana, that is! :wink2:

Even at 95k and about 2 hour legs, one can still cover some ground - weather permitting, of course.

I'll try to post links to trip reports later.
 
Flying Lizard said:
There have currently been 37 successful Cirrus parachute landings, with 77 survivors, and you point to a single case where the plane caught fire on the way down as evidence of my "false sense of security"? Brilliant, sir. Thanks for waking me up!
Click to expand...

Actually where you need to "wake up" is thinking that thing is going to save you. There have been a ton of folks that went further then they should have, thinking "I can just pull the handle".

As someone who knows a few things about flying and a few things about parachutes, it ain't going to bail your butt out as much as you think it will.

I'd rather be in a solid backcountry plane when it hits the fan then a cirrus, but that's because I trust my skills and judgment more then a little handle YMMV
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top