![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 00:07:03 -0500, "Guy Elden Jr."
wrote: I'm curious what experiences any SR-20 flyers out there have had on both short hops, sightseeing trips, and on longer distance trips as well. I want some extra speed, and I like the fact that it can carry a bit more of a payload than a 172SP, but since I haven't flown one, much less to a faraway destination, I don't know if it will really be worth the hassle of the upgrade. I'm interested in hearing how well it performs, how comfortable it is, how useful it is as compared to 172s, Warriors, etc. When it works, it is a roomy, automated, and slightly faster, and much more expensive 172. I get 130 knots at 9 gph. It carries 540 lbs with full fuel and will fly for 5 hours with reserves. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
"ArtP" wrote:
I'm curious what experiences any SR-20 flyers out there have had... When it works, it is a roomy, automated, and slightly faster, and much more expensive 172. I get 130 knots at 9 gph. That seems awfully slow. Is that TAS? What altitude? -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 08:36:24 -0600, "Dan Luke"
wrote: "ArtP" wrote: I'm curious what experiences any SR-20 flyers out there have had... When it works, it is a roomy, automated, and slightly faster, and much more expensive 172. I get 130 knots at 9 gph. That seems awfully slow. Is that TAS? What altitude? That is TAS and at any altitude. At lower altitudes I am limited to 23" mp or less (65% so I can run LOP), at higher altitudes the mp is limited by the altitude and the fact I can't run full throttle without running at max rpm (the throttle is connected to the prop governor and can't be overridden so if you run at full throttle you run at max rpm). |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
"ArtP" wrote:
That seems awfully slow. Is that TAS? What altitude? That is [130K] TAS and at any altitude. Dang! My 172RG will do 136 KTAS at 6,000' on a standard day, full throttle, 2,500 RPM. -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
the SR20 only has a 200 HP engine.
now if it was able to pull the landing gear up, I am willing to bet his speed would increase by quiet a bit. Dan Luke wrote: "ArtP" wrote: I'm curious what experiences any SR-20 flyers out there have had... When it works, it is a roomy, automated, and slightly faster, and much more expensive 172. I get 130 knots at 9 gph. That seems awfully slow. Is that TAS? What altitude? -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jeff,
I am willing to bet his speed would increase by quiet a bit. 5 knots max, Cirrus says. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dan,
That seems awfully slow. Is that TAS? What altitude? See the latest issue of Aviation Consumer for a comparison of the DA40 and the SR20. Average speed seems to be 145 to 150 knots TAS, at around 10 gph. ArtP is quite well known here for not liking (his) SR20. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 1-Dec-2003, ArtP wrote: When it [SR-20] works, it is a roomy, automated, and slightly faster, and much more expensive 172. I get 130 knots at 9 gph. It carries 540 lbs with full fuel and will fly for 5 hours with reserves. According to the Cirrus website, the SR-20 cruises at 156 kts at 75% power. We all know that "book" speeds are sometimes a tad optimistic, but 26 kts???. I get better than 130 kts on 9 gph in my Arrow, with a lot more useful load. If I bought an SR-20 and it only gave me 130 kts at best cruise performance, I'd demand my money back! -- -Elliott Drucker |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message
... According to the Cirrus website, the SR-20 cruises at 156 kts at 75% power. What's the fuel flow at 75% power? For a 200 hp engine, my guess is that it's significantly more than 9 gph. Or conversely, it seems likely that the 9 gph isn't 75% cruise. If I bought an SR-20 and it only gave me 130 kts at best cruise performance, I'd demand my money back! Art didn't say 130 knots was his "best cruise performance". He said that's what he gets at 9 gph. I assume he used that figure because that's close to the fuel flow in a Cessna at normal cruise settings (with a 160 hp engine), and so gives a rough apples-to-apples comparison between the airplanes. Pete |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2-Dec-2003, "Peter Duniho" wrote: What's the fuel flow at 75% power? For a 200 hp engine, my guess is that it's significantly more than 9 gph. Or conversely, it seems likely that the 9 gph isn't 75% cruise. Art didn't say 130 knots was his "best cruise performance". He said that's what he gets at 9 gph. I assume he used that figure because that's close to the fuel flow in a Cessna at normal cruise settings (with a 160 hp engine), and so gives a rough apples-to-apples comparison between the airplanes. In my Arrow, which like the SR-20 has a normally aspirated 200 hp engine, I can true 135 kts at 65% with a fuel flow of around 9.4 gph. 9 gph would probably be about 60%, give or take a little. Since for a given airframe airspeed varies as the cube root of applied power, assuming equal propeller efficiency (and that's a good assumption with a constant speed prop) 130 kts at 60% would correspond to 140 kts at 75%, which, not surprisingly, is almost exactly what I get in the Arrow. (141 kts to be precise.) That is still a far cry from the 156 kt "book" 75% cruise speed for the SR-20. -- -Elliott Drucker |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|