REFLECTOR: Cirrus vs. Velocity

Sun Apr 9 21:23:55 CDT 2006

There's no doubt in my mind that the Cirrus has a large cabin, can you 
say Bonanza, it also fly's just like a Bonanza, or at least the two I've 
flown felt like I'd come home to my old V-Tail... Large, roomy, handles 
like a bus or a big ol station wagon..  Some people like driving a bus.

The V, is no such animal and I think that bothers many people.  A Std V, 
is not rode in, it is put on and worn.  At least in the front seats. The 
XL is roomier but still cramped compared to a Cirrus.  I know many 
people that love the look of the V, but don't like the seating and will 
pay much more and go slower for that big seat comfort. 

My experience is the Cirrus burns about 20% more gas for the same speed 
and load, compared to a V.  It takes off in 2/3 the runway. Lands in 
about the same space..

I know a Cirrus beats my Std in baggage capacity.  The Std has no 
baggage area, its the seats and the floors.  My wing roots are taken up 
by plane cover, emergency/medical  bag,  maps, arm rest, etc..  I don't 
know about the XL.  It sure looks a lot larger than mine when parked 
side by side.

I think the mission of both are similar or in the same class, as Bret 
says, the Cirrus can carry a bit more,  The V goes a bit faster burning 
less fuel.

If I had to choose between the two, I don't know....  I'd probably 
choose the V because its faster(I always seem to fly full throttle!) and 
because I can work on it and have access to all the new goodies for 
experimental's and can buy my grease and incidentals and Auto-Zone.  
I've also found that 95% of my flying is done with 2 or less people 
aboard. 

My Std is the perfect 2 or 3 people airplane, it can carry my wife and 
I, all the luggage we can manage and full fuel and go 1,000 miles at 
17,500 no sweat.  With 3 we have to  curb on the luggage so the back 
seat person isn't buried, and 3/4 fuel.   I don't fly with 4 people, 
can't carry enough fuel to go any where. 

Scott

Brett Ferrell wrote:
> I don't know, maybe you are, but I'm just looking for data, not 
> feeling.  At work we have a saying, "in God we trust, all others must 
> bring data".
>
> I'm not flying yet, but I feel that have lots of baggage room behind 
> my rear seats and over the whale-tail (I could easily get 4 
> rollaboard-sized bags in there), and yes, I do consider the area in 
> strakes a light baggage compartment.  And I don't believe you can 
> really load EITHER of them with 4 "standard-sized" people AND baggage 
> AND fuel.  The SR22's full fuel load payload is 664 pounds 
> (http://www.cirrusdesign.com/aircraft/performance/). According to this 
> (http://www.halls.md/chart/height-weight.htm) the average American 
> male weighs about 200 lbs and the average woman about 175 lbs.  If you 
> take one of each, you're over 660 easy, without any luggage.  Say you 
> and your friends are more comely than the rest of us and the men only 
> weigh 180 and the women 130, you're still at 620 sans baggage, so you 
> better not take much (and you get that for less useful range).  Maybe 
> you can share toothbrushes.  ;-)  Are you overloading that SR22?
>
> As far as the top end on "most XLs", "most" are equipped with the 
> 260HP Lycon versus the 310HP Conti, and the manufacturer only claims 
> 212MPH (185kt) cruise, so I think you're being a bit generous on the 
> top end of the Cirrus.  Since deice is listed as an option, I doubt 
> it's lowering their performance figures either, but it's not stated 
> explicitly.  The XL/RG's stated cruise with the big engine is 235 MPH, 
> so they are theoretically faster.
>
> Below are the stated cabin dimensions, and the SR clearly has more 
> room, so I grant you that.  As far as facing reality, I'm all for it, 
> but I think you have an undocumentable belief that you can load the 22 
> more heavily than the XL AND go faster.  I really find it easy to load 
> a plane to gross long before I run out of places to put stuff, but 
> that's me, your mileage may vary.  Your 22 may be faster than spec, 
> but data doesn't support the class being significantly faster than an 
> XL, nor able to carry more payload (if you can fit it in) than an XL 
> *particularly* if you put a comparable engine in it.  You can believe 
> what you want, but that's what the data tells me. And I'm not 
> offended, I just don't want to let conjecture go unchallenged. You 
> claim to do things (faster than spec more heavily laden than spec) the 
> manufacturer's data show to be doubtful.  That doesn't mean it isn't 
> true, but it would seem to be an aberration.
>
>                              SR22       XL             SE
> Cabin Length           130"        94"            84"
> Cabin Width             49"         47.5"         42"
> Cabin Height            50"         43.5"          42.5"
>
> Brett
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Martino" 
> <tmartino at troubleshooter.com>
> To: "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list" <reflector at tvbf.org>
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2006 8:33 PM
> Subject: RE: REFLECTOR: Take Off Performance
>
>
> Am I the only one who finds it hard to believe that you can load up a
> Velocity with full fuel, four people and baggage?  Even the mighty XL?
>
> Where do you put the payload?  I haven't seen any STCs for roof racks.
>
> Do you really believe those side compartments at the wing roots
> constitute a baggage compartment?
>
> Talk all you want about payload ... but you need a place to put it!
>
> Meanwhile I can load up four people and lots of bags in the Cirrus (been
> there, done that) .. and still fly more than 200 MPH.
>
> My Velocity happens to be very fast ... probably faster than most (even
> Xls) because of the IO-540 in the 173 Standard Elite body ... but it
> still just barely keeps up with the Cirrus.  Both cruise around 220 MPH.
> (My Cirrus is one of the few without TKS which adds several knots to
> it).
>
> I can't imagine any normal Velocities (200 horsepower or 250 horsepower)
> coming close.  And I already know what the V does with 300 horses.
>
> I do not prefer the Cirrus.  I love both planes for what they are!
>
> I did not mean to offend anyone ... but it seems like we Velocity owners
> really don't want to face reality.  It is not a family plane.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org] On
> Behalf Of Brett Ferrell
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2006 6:18 PM
> To: Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list
> Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Take Off Performance
>
> Tom,
>
> I'm glad that you're happy with both your airplanes, and not to start a
> holly war, but I'm curious why you say that that "Cirrus is clearly
> better
> for cross-country" and it "carries more people and weight" than the
> Velocity.  That's pretty subjective.  I'll give you that the SR22 gets
> off
> of the ground quicker (1,020' versus 1,300'), which is very useful out
> west.
> However, the stated useful load of the SR22 is 1150 pounds versus the
> XL's
> 1100, the SR22 has a range of only 700 nm against 1,000 for the XL, and
> they
> have comparable top end speeds.
>
> Looks to me like the XL and 22 are very evenly matched, with the V
> having
> slightly more range, with a little less load.  I'd say you have a
> preference
> for the 22, maybe the 22 has greater payload than the SE, but I don't
> think
> the data is clear that the 22 has an advantage over the XL.  That's
> using
> the publsihed data by the factories
> (http://www.velocityaircraft.com/airspecs.html and
> http://www.cirrusdesign.com/aircraft/performance/).  Were you referring
> specifcally to the SE, or did you have different criteria in mind?
>
> Brett
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Martino" 
> <tmartino at troubleshooter.com>
> To: "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list" <reflector at tvbf.org>
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2006 7:49 PM
> Subject: RE: REFLECTOR: Take Off Performance
>
>
> Since I own both and fly them extensively ... I admit that the Cirrus
> burns more gas (not much more) ... but it carries more people and weight
> than the V.
>
> For cross-country performance there is no comparison.  The Cirrus wins.
>
> However, the V (which I LOVE) is a great hot rod.  Those who call it a
> true four-place cross-country machine are compromising a lot.  Even the
> XL leaves much to be desired in this department when you try taking four
> people with any kind of baggage.
>
> I realize Vs can be built (even professionally) cheaper than I paid for
> the SR-22 ... so price wise ... the argument could go on forever as to
> what is the best value.
>
> I believe the Lancair (kit) and RV10 leave V in the dust for
> cross-country purposes.
>
> Don't mistake this as a "put-down" of Vs ... I cherish mine.  But I know
> it's limitations.
>
> Maybe I'd feel differently living at sea level and flying to lower
> airport.
>
> Cheers.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org] On
> Behalf Of Scott Derrick
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2006 4:31 PM
> To: Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list
> Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Take Off Performance
>
> Tom Martino wrote:
>>
>> Once flying ... the performance is about equal.
>>
>> Is it the canard that makes it sluggish on take-off? That's the only
>> tin I can surmise.
>>
> Really?? I've flown a couple SR22's and seems to me they use a lot more
> gas than a Velocity for the same speed. Which isn't equal performance in
>
> my mind.
>
> Scott
>

-- 

-
    Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.

    George Bernard Shaw, Liberty 