Cirrus or Lancair?

On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 17:19:03 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

Contemplating a Lancair to downsize my six seater to a four seat.

Seems, though, that the Cirrus SR-22 is rather more popular than the
Columbia 350.

Can anyone shed some insights on these two side-by-side?

I have flown the SR22 (one time), but not the 350. I enjoyed my
flight in the SR22. The interior is much like an auto in terms of fit
and finish. Nothing like the Pipers/Cessnas I am used to flying. The
plane handled well. Also, it only took me a few minutes to get used
to the sidestick. It is nice to have a clearer view of the panel than
a yoke provides.

You can download Pilots information manuals from both Cirrus and
Lancair's websites. Here's a few interesting facts I captured from
the info.

Both planes use a Cont IO-550-N, 310hp @ 2700rpm

@ 8000ft PA and standard temp:
SR22 @ 2700rpm @ 22MP = 183ktas on 18.6gph
L350 @ 2700rpm @22MP = 191ktas on 17.4gph

The L350 has 98 gallons useable vs 81 for the Cirrus. If the numbers
in the manuals are correct and ignoring taxi, takeoff, and climb
allowances, the Lancair has a no wind, no reserve range of 1075 nm vs
796 for the Cirrus. That is a substantial delta.

"Nathan Young" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 17:19:03 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

Contemplating a Lancair to downsize my six seater to a four seat.

Seems, though, that the Cirrus SR-22 is rather more popular than the
Columbia 350.

Can anyone shed some insights on these two side-by-side?

I have flown the SR22 (one time), but not the 350. I enjoyed my
flight in the SR22. The interior is much like an auto in terms of fit
and finish. Nothing like the Pipers/Cessnas I am used to flying. The
plane handled well. Also, it only took me a few minutes to get used
to the sidestick. It is nice to have a clearer view of the panel than
a yoke provides.

You can download Pilots information manuals from both Cirrus and
Lancair's websites.


I have, but I'd like some "objective" and outside opinions.

Here's a few interesting facts I captured from the info.

Both planes use a Cont IO-550-N, 310hp @ 2700rpm

@ 8000ft PA and standard temp:
SR22 @ 2700rpm @ 22MP = 183ktas on 18.6gph
L350 @ 2700rpm @22MP = 191ktas on 17.4gph

The L350 has 98 gallons useable vs 81 for the Cirrus. If the numbers
in the manuals are correct and ignoring taxi, takeoff, and climb
allowances, the Lancair has a no wind, no reserve range of 1075 nm vs
796 for the Cirrus. That is a substantial delta.

Thanks for the lowdown, Nathan.

The 300 that I rode in was also very comfortable but what struck me is how
smooth it was. I fly a Beech 36 (which is what I'm looking to trade...I need
more room than the B36 on many flights, but only two on the rest) and it was
similar in that it is quite stable it is...like riding in a big car.

While both Cirrus and Lancair are spin-resistant, the Lancair is supposedly
spin recoverable and is certified without the recovery parachute. I'd say
that's a positive. Hell, they look identical (to my eye, maybe not the eye
of an aeronautical engineer).

How did the Cirrus ride?

One thing I'd like to see is a turbo model (for those of us at 6,000 feet
with 14,000 terrain all around) for the Cirrus to compare to the Lancair
400.

"Nathan Young" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 17:19:03 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

Contemplating a Lancair to downsize my six seater to a four seat.

Seems, though, that the Cirrus SR-22 is rather more popular than the
Columbia 350.

Can anyone shed some insights on these two side-by-side?

I have flown the SR22 (one time), but not the 350. I enjoyed my
flight in the SR22. The interior is much like an auto in terms of fit
and finish. Nothing like the Pipers/Cessnas I am used to flying. The
plane handled well. Also, it only took me a few minutes to get used
to the sidestick. It is nice to have a clearer view of the panel than
a yoke provides.

You can download Pilots information manuals from both Cirrus and
Lancair's websites. Here's a few interesting facts I captured from
the info.

Both planes use a Cont IO-550-N, 310hp @ 2700rpm

@ 8000ft PA and standard temp:
SR22 @ 2700rpm @ 22MP = 183ktas on 18.6gph
L350 @ 2700rpm @22MP = 191ktas on 17.4gph

The L350 has 98 gallons useable vs 81 for the Cirrus. If the numbers
in the manuals are correct and ignoring taxi, takeoff, and climb
allowances, the Lancair has a no wind, no reserve range of 1075 nm vs
796 for the Cirrus. That is a substantial delta.


http://www.cirrusdesign.com/aircraft/compare/

I notice they left out the Lancair line from their comparison, instead
comparing apples and oranges.

Not very reassuring.

Matt Barrow wrote:
snip...
that's a positive. Hell, they look identical (to my eye, maybe not the eye
of an aeronautical engineer).


Lancair stands taller.

Here's a few interesting facts I captured from the info.

Both planes use a Cont IO-550-N, 310hp @ 2700rpm

@ 8000ft PA and standard temp:
SR22 @ 2700rpm @ 22MP = 183ktas on 18.6gph
L350 @ 2700rpm @22MP = 191ktas on 17.4gph


How does this work? The same Engine/MP/RPM has 1.2 gph difference.
Methinks someone is fibbing. Al





"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Nathan Young" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 17:19:03 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

Contemplating a Lancair to downsize my six seater to a four seat.

Seems, though, that the Cirrus SR-22 is rather more popular than the
Columbia 350.

Can anyone shed some insights on these two side-by-side?

I have flown the SR22 (one time), but not the 350. I enjoyed my
flight in the SR22. The interior is much like an auto in terms of fit
and finish. Nothing like the Pipers/Cessnas I am used to flying. The
plane handled well. Also, it only took me a few minutes to get used
to the sidestick. It is nice to have a clearer view of the panel than
a yoke provides.

You can download Pilots information manuals from both Cirrus and
Lancair's websites.


I have, but I'd like some "objective" and outside opinions.

Here's a few interesting facts I captured from the info.

Both planes use a Cont IO-550-N, 310hp @ 2700rpm

@ 8000ft PA and standard temp:
SR22 @ 2700rpm @ 22MP = 183ktas on 18.6gph
L350 @ 2700rpm @22MP = 191ktas on 17.4gph

The L350 has 98 gallons useable vs 81 for the Cirrus. If the numbers
in the manuals are correct and ignoring taxi, takeoff, and climb
allowances, the Lancair has a no wind, no reserve range of 1075 nm vs
796 for the Cirrus. That is a substantial delta.

Thanks for the lowdown, Nathan.

The 300 that I rode in was also very comfortable but what struck me is how
smooth it was. I fly a Beech 36 (which is what I'm looking to trade...I
need
more room than the B36 on many flights, but only two on the rest) and it
was
similar in that it is quite stable it is...like riding in a big car.

While both Cirrus and Lancair are spin-resistant, the Lancair is
supposedly
spin recoverable and is certified without the recovery parachute. I'd say
that's a positive. Hell, they look identical (to my eye, maybe not the eye
of an aeronautical engineer).

How did the Cirrus ride?

One thing I'd like to see is a turbo model (for those of us at 6,000 feet
with 14,000 terrain all around) for the Cirrus to compare to the Lancair
400.

Aviation Consumer has a story on the Lanceair 400 this month. I haven't read
all of it but just a quick look at it showed a bunch of comparison to the
SR-22




"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Nathan Young" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 17:19:03 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

Contemplating a Lancair to downsize my six seater to a four seat.

Seems, though, that the Cirrus SR-22 is rather more popular than the
Columbia 350.

Can anyone shed some insights on these two side-by-side?

I have flown the SR22 (one time), but not the 350. I enjoyed my
flight in the SR22. The interior is much like an auto in terms of fit
and finish. Nothing like the Pipers/Cessnas I am used to flying. The
plane handled well. Also, it only took me a few minutes to get used
to the sidestick. It is nice to have a clearer view of the panel than
a yoke provides.

You can download Pilots information manuals from both Cirrus and
Lancair's websites.


I have, but I'd like some "objective" and outside opinions.

Here's a few interesting facts I captured from the info.

Both planes use a Cont IO-550-N, 310hp @ 2700rpm

@ 8000ft PA and standard temp:
SR22 @ 2700rpm @ 22MP = 183ktas on 18.6gph
L350 @ 2700rpm @22MP = 191ktas on 17.4gph

The L350 has 98 gallons useable vs 81 for the Cirrus. If the numbers
in the manuals are correct and ignoring taxi, takeoff, and climb
allowances, the Lancair has a no wind, no reserve range of 1075 nm vs
796 for the Cirrus. That is a substantial delta.

Thanks for the lowdown, Nathan.

The 300 that I rode in was also very comfortable but what struck me is how
smooth it was. I fly a Beech 36 (which is what I'm looking to trade...I
need
more room than the B36 on many flights, but only two on the rest) and it
was
similar in that it is quite stable it is...like riding in a big car.

While both Cirrus and Lancair are spin-resistant, the Lancair is
supposedly
spin recoverable and is certified without the recovery parachute. I'd say
that's a positive. Hell, they look identical (to my eye, maybe not the eye
of an aeronautical engineer).

How did the Cirrus ride?

One thing I'd like to see is a turbo model (for those of us at 6,000 feet
with 14,000 terrain all around) for the Cirrus to compare to the Lancair
400.

Assuming 2700 @ 22" is 75%, both are ROP, but one could be more so than
the other.

Peak EGT should be around 15.5gph, seems to me.

"Al" wrote in message
news:1120585632.e6282c89befb86f01d2984b2fbd4c5b8@t eranews...
Here's a few interesting facts I captured from the info.

Both planes use a Cont IO-550-N, 310hp @ 2700rpm

@ 8000ft PA and standard temp:
SR22 @ 2700rpm @ 22MP = 183ktas on 18.6gph
L350 @ 2700rpm @22MP = 191ktas on 17.4gph


How does this work? The same Engine/MP/RPM has 1.2 gph difference.
Methinks someone is fibbing. Al

Or leaning differently

Lancair offers the TCM "Platinum" engine option, though I don't know if that
would be the difference. Lancair also "recommends" running LOP.

A buddy of mine who flys big helicopters for Erickson has been looking
for a partly-completed Legacy kit. I don't know how the Legacy
compares to the Columbia, but here's an interesting story.

The other week, he flew down to an airport near Fresno to talk to a
man who had a kit for sale and they had a long talk. What floored my
friend was the Legacy's engine-out rate of descent: 2000 fpm.

This is a guy who's had numerous engine failures in 22,000 hours
flying big rotary-wing craft, and as a helicopter-driver, he considers
the club's Cherokee 235, which the rest of us regard a powered flying
anvil, to be a "floater," but 2000 fpm in a plane that comes over the
fence at 100 kt.struck him as challenging.

He told me he'd decided to sacrifice a little speed and was going to
start looking at RVs

How fast does a Cirrus come down when the fan's off? I can't find the
data on the Web.

Lancair owners are invited to comment..

Don

Don Tuite wrote:

A buddy of mine who flys big helicopters for Erickson has been looking
for a partly-completed Legacy kit. I don't know how the Legacy
compares to the Columbia, but here's an interesting story.

Legacy is 2 seats / 300 Knots (Check Reno race results)
Columbia is 4 seats / 200 Knots

http://www.airrace.org

The other week, he flew down to an airport near Fresno to talk to a
man who had a kit for sale and they had a long talk. What floored my
friend was the Legacy's engine-out rate of descent: 2000 fpm.

Short narrow wings, and not a very wide body...

This is a guy who's had numerous engine failures in 22,000 hours
flying big rotary-wing craft, and as a helicopter-driver, he considers
the club's Cherokee 235, which the rest of us regard a powered flying
anvil, to be a "floater," but 2000 fpm in a plane that comes over the
fence at 100 kt.struck him as challenging.

Piper 4 seater, nowhere in the same speed class as a Legacy that has 100
more horses...

He told me he'd decided to sacrifice a little speed and was going to
start looking at RVs

How fast does a Cirrus come down when the fan's off? I can't find the
data on the Web.

As fast as the chute will allow...

Lancair owners are invited to comment..

Lancair Super ES has better glide ratio. Not an owner but spent a good
bit of time in the right seat of a supercharged one that has managed to
keep its 3 blades turning...

I don't think Cirrus and Lancair spin the same props, but I could be
wrong...