Cirrus - Turbo vs non turbo

[extralite]

Apologies if its been asked before, can't find too much. Really like to hear opinions.

In the market for a new Cirrus. Very typical customer i would think, Wife who likes idea of parachute and so do i given country i sometimes fly over, 3 kids under 10 so would fit in a 5 seater easily, they all like the comfort of it.

Initially was going to go non-turbo. Most flights I do are around 2 hours, about half with family. Usually not too affected by weather but would nice sometimes to be higher. But i doubt family on portable oxygen for prolonged periods is something most pax are happy with? So turbo probably not worth the extra engine issues.

However been thinking that Cirrus sell almost 3 turbo for every NA engine. Will that mean a non turbo cirrus hard to sell later as everyone chasing turbos? In that case it would be worth the extra for the turbo as the resale would be much easier.

Any opinions very welcome.

[Jonzarno]

I fly a N/A SR22 and have a similar mission profile to yours.

Advantages with the turbo are:

Quicker climb, higher altitude limit (25,000 ft vs 17,500). Note: both types will go a bit higher, these are POH limits.

Disadvantages are: more expensive to buy, more complicated and slightly more frequent maintenance. You would also probably need cylinder work earlier with the turbo.

Personally, I fly fairly high when I'm alone (FL160 or 170) and use a portable O2 system with the Mountain High demand system. When I have passengers I stay below O2 altitudes.

Selling either type shouldn't be excessively difficult although there is obviously a specific market.

I recommend strongly that you visit the COPA website, search for this topic and then ask any further questions you have there: you will find a huge amount of well informed guidance on all aspects of owning and operating these aircraft there. You will need to register, but don't have to join. That said, if you are serious about flying a Cirrus, it's definitely worth joining.

If you would like to discuss this, please drop me a PM.

[ChickenHouse]

Family of 5 on oxygen ain't going to make them happy. As a rule of thumb, Turbo is between nice and necessary, if you usually need to fly high and make use IFR reliability. Keep in mind the non-pressurized fuselage. A decent from FL250 with family on board may sometimes mean not steeper 500fpm ... a long way down and for the usual family trip usually a NoGo. My rule, if you are longer than 30 minutes on descent the advantage of the turbo is gone and down low you don't need it. If you typically have 2 hours trips, there may even be no difference for non-turbo vs. turbo, so I would abandon the expensive turbo idea if I were into a family aircraft.

[The Ancient Geek]

The real advantage of the turbo is hot and high performance so it depends on where you will be operating.

[Jan Olieslagers]

For as little as I know, I understand the turbo versions get more wear so they require more (and/or more delicate) maintenance. Also, managing temperatures might need more care and more insight. So I tend to concur: if you don't need the turbo, as your mission profile seems to suggest, it is only more cost and more hassle.

[007helicopter]

Extralie, SR22 NA owner here 9 years, Jonzarno has it spot on.

+1 for join COPA first, $65.00 and an ammazing resource.

My $0.02 for your profile non turbo

[extralite]

Thanks all, will join the COPA but was good to hear your thoughts. Looking non turbo at the moment.