Cirrus SR20

Nostalgair

Nostalgair

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
79
Display Name
Display name:
Nostalgair
Hi All,

I flew a new Cirrus SR22T-G5 last week for a magazine review.

It was my first encounter with a Cirrus, but I'm keen to hear the thoughts of anyone who has flown the Cirrus SR20 as I'm yet to get my hands on one. :)

Cheers,

Owen
 
While the flying qualities are similar, the larger engine transforms the 22. The 20 is slippery and relatively fast but it lacks the ability to power your way through things. As you go up into the teens you feel the 20 is being pushed while the 22 is comfortable. Down lower, climbs are much more of a thought out process in the 20. In the 22 you'll say "Let's try 9500 and see if it is smoother." The 20 is a very nice plane. It is like a nice car that is fast enough but where you have to floor it and let the engine downshift two gears to get up the steep hill while the 22 is the car with the big V8 where there is always excess power.
 
can-o-worms.gif


They're great planes. Not nearly the same as an SR22, though.

But wait a few minutes and the anti-Cirrus brigade will be along to tell you that flying one lowers your IQ by 43 points and makes you say things like "any traffic in the area please advise".
 
Thanks for the feedback.

I'm keen to fly one now.

Cheers.
 
I flew a normally aspirated SR22 out of Winslow, AZ in the summer with 3 people. To me, the climb seemed a bit anemic.
 
jason said:
can-o-worms.gif


They're great planes. Not nearly the same as an SR22, though.

But wait a few minutes and the anti-Cirrus brigade will be along to tell you that flying one lowers your IQ by 43 points and makes you say things like "any traffic in the area please advise".
Click to expand...

Would that be the same as the RV crowd? :D

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
 
A local Cirrus fanboy had an SR20 and later bought an SR22T. Without a doubt, the 22 was a huge upgrade. The 20 was still a nice plane, though, and if your mission doesn't need the 22, the 20 is an attractive option.
 
The SR22 and SR20 have the same airframe, comfort, passenger experience, chute, and avionics.

Three distinctions are TKS, performance and cost.

TKS anti-ice is available only for the SR22, and it helps extend the flying season if you don't live in the tropics.

The SR20 is like a C172 for takeoff roll and climb. Think of stepping on the gas in an economy car. In the summer the SR20 is challenged by short fields and mountains. The takeoff performance of an SR22 is more like a sportscar, and it's available with a turbo for mountain flying.

The cost of ownership is higher for the SR22, mainly because of depreciation due to its higher list price. Fuel consumption is also higher due to the horsepower, 310 vs. 200.
 
Last edited:
Nothing wrong with how a 20 performs, but the extra 110hp of the 22 just makes the plane
 
Other than the issues related to power, they fly the same. Only question is whether you need the extra power of the 22, or are willing to pay for it when you don't need it just because you can.
 
150KTS TAS, 10 GPH (actually, it was around 9.4). I always cruised sub 12K with no issues. The climb rate that high is a lot slower than the 22. I would rather have a new 20 versus an older 22. But, that is just me. I like the advances on the newer planes.
 
Thanks everyone for the feedback.

Cheers,

Owen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top