Better Aircraft - Piper M350 vs Cirrus SR22T

Hey guys welcome to a brand new video. Today we will be taking a look at 2 popular single engine aircraft and comparing them! Our first aircraft is the The Piper M350 which is a variant of Pipers M-Class Aircraft. Next is the Cirrus SR22T.

The Piper M350 is an updated version to one of Pipers other aircraft, the Piper Mirage. Piper claims that the Piper M350 boasts the finest interior in its class. The aircraft has the same engine as its predecessor, but comes with an improved fuel quantity system, along with an improved flight deck. This newer aircraft also impressive safety features like Under-speed Protection, Emergency Decent Mode and Automatic Level Mode.

Now onto our next aircraft which is still produced to this day. The SR22T or Turbo. One of the main things Cirrus has always been able to do is seamlessly integrate style, luxury, technology and convenience across all of its aircraft and the Cirrus SR22T is no different. The aircraft has also always been known as the "plane with the parachute" and that seems to be one of the top things that set the aircraft apart from others in both wow factor and safety. I'll admit I'd be comfortable flying in just about any aircraft but there is no doubt having a parachute makes it a lot easier! BUT in additional to that the aircraft features more impressive safety features such as Stall & Spin Protection. Its called ESP short for Electronic Stability & Protection system. If the aircraft has unusual flight attitudes whether or not the autopilot is engaged the system passively corrects them without feeling as though you, the pilot, lost control.

Hope you guys enjoyed and If you did make sure to subscribe and ring the notification bell so that you are notified when I upload more awesome videos!

Follow me on INSTAGRAM! @MarlinTheAviator

[JohnS-eysi]

I have watched 1000s of videos and this is the first comment I’ve made so yes I do have a opinion. I have owned both planes a 22T g5 (n712CM) and a m350 (N36C).. they are way different airplanes. The piper feels more like a jet when sitting in front. It has the auto pilot that is on top of the panel..cirrus is on the bottom.. the piper even has the windshield divided by two sections like a jet the cirrus is just one window. The piper has a glass window that can heat up to melt ice away, the cirrus doesn’t even have a real glass. It’s acrylic.( which has fine scratches even when using a micro fiber cloth ), the piper has ice boots which work much better then the cirrus which has the tiny pores which secretes fluid out of it. Doesn’t even compare with the way it handles in icing..the piper even has the jet sound when you come up on your altitude which sounds like even the commercial planes ( like a dial tone) where the cirrus has a tiny whimpy beep...the piper has retractable landing gear, cirrus does not..piper has the three screens (again something all jets and commercial planes have) which is a cool factor if nothing else..the cirrus has VERY uncomfortable seats in back that are cramped. If you have 4 pax in the piper you can stretch your feet better then a first class seat in a commercial plane. Even with 6 pax the rear seats are more comfortable ( although some pax find it strange to sit backwards ). This a a HUGE advantage as I routinely fly with 6 pax. The pressurization I can’t say enough about it. I have a place in Miami and a place in Los Angeles. In the hot humid summer months where you are dodging thunderstorms which isn’t fun I keep the plane in LA. Winter time where I can fly at the east coast and the warmth of Florida I keep it there. So I do cross country flights twice a year. I fly routinely at flight level 250 where the jet stream gives me a nice tail wind at 110 Knotts. I can make it easily to New Orleans on one tank then to Miami ( I have the extended tanks which give me 20 extra gallons where the cirrus doesn’t have that option). It is so comfortable up at that altitude where in the cirrus it sucked to have the mask on..pax even hated the masks more, not to mention a extra 100 dollars plus to fill up, the oxygen. And with 4 pax the o2 would be used up before the destination so yes the pressurization is worth the extra money right there. I have gone to the Bahamas and Caribbean several times. There the xm weather doesn’t work. So the onboard weather radar is a great tool. The baggage compartment is so nice to have in the me50 as you can put easily three small suitcases up front and 100 pounds in the back. Having the baggage compartment up front also allows the ride to be quieter..I can actually keep my head set off on cruise and still be able to have a normal conversation. As far as operating costs yes the piper is more of a acquisition cost, but the overall cost after that is relatively the same. Fuel burn is around 17.5 GPH on the cirrus and 22.5 on the piper. However your true airspeed is a little better as the higher up you are the faster you go especially with the tail winds so in some cases it’s actually cheaper because you arrive at your destination faster and if you choose to fly high in the cirrus it will cost you more in the filling up the o2 then the extra fuel burn..also in real world flying I will get no more then 800 miles on normal cruise, no wind in the cirrus. In the piper I can do 1000 miles and 1200 with the extra tanks. I find my annuals are around 5 k more out the door with the piper, and the insurance costs are around 5 k more a year ( increased hull value along with the retractable gear). Because of the extra 5 feet on wing length sadly some individual hangers can’t accommodate the piper and even some tie downs at some airports you have to get two spots next to you. The cirrus is more comfortable for the pilot and co pilot and yes the parachute is a nice piece of mind but let’s be honest here. A properly maintained engine with the proper run ups and your chance of a engine failure is slim to none anyways. Ramp appeal is arguable. I have half of my friends who like the pop up doors and cool paint colours of the cirrus while half like the stairs and the bigger plane look of the piper. I’m sure I’m missing things still but I know these are the main bullet points... I like the piper so much I just sold this and am under contract on a ( new for me) 2017 piper m600 (N161WA). The m350 to me is such in a different league that to me there is no comparison, although the cirrus gave me some great flying over the years.

[kevinbarry]

Enjoyed the video, but the Piper is pressurized. That is a very significant difference that you did not mention

[danielsimpson]

So I'd personally go with the M350 based on range, cabin size and appearance, pressurised cabin, and normal day to day operations. Its just more ergonomic better suited for more versatile situaitons

[jsh]

I have owned two Cirrus SR aircraft and now own a PA46. There is no comparison the piper wins hands down.

[carlrossi]

So...if anybody is interested in more owner flown real-world reports, posted below is a write-up I did for the COPA forum comparing my experience with flying our 2017 TTX [equivalent to SR22T] from San Diego to Oregon on a Saturday Morning, followed by a trip from Eugene to Phoenix the same afternoon in our M350-note that we are having an engine cooling STC [modified cowl] installed on the M350 which should hopefully eliminate some of the temperature issues [I'll find out this weekend when I pick the plane up]:

It’s been just under three months, and just over 50 hours since we picked up 46LY at the factory, FWIW thought it would be fun to write up a report on ownership experience to date, something to do on a foggy afternoon here in Florence. So here goes…



My memories of the comforts of pressurization had not dimmed with the years and repetitive unpressurized hypoxia. We did another “comparison flight” yesterday [more on that in a bit] which reinforced this, it really is a different flying environment. Among other things, there is one less umbilical to yank on your head when you look to the side [or to exert even more force on your headset], your insides do not feel like the Michelin Man with attendant need to outgas [always fun with others sharing your cabin] and you are going to use those high teens and low Flight Levels routinely. Other than one short trip from Eugene to Florence, all of our flights thus far have been at or above 15K. You get treated a bit differently up there by ATC, and you need to be on your game-if unfamiliar with SIID’s and especially STAR’s one stepping up needs to get up to speed on their use, because it will be expected of you to comply like your turboprop/turbojet brethren. The benefits are easily worth the price of admission in terms of the additional study [as to the other, much steeper price, that is for the pilot to decide].



Performance is very much on a par, if not slightly worse, than the TTX and I’m assuming the SR22T. In fact in some regimes, such as climb, it is inferior. Full-power climb rate is 1, 100-1, 200 fpm but you are not going to want to keep the power there very long because engine temps can quickly become an issue unless you are willing to tolerate CHT’s in the 410-420F range. So the drill is to use full power for takeoff and initial climb, I typically do so up to about 5K [this, of course, will vary depending on surrounding terrain, need to climb thru icing layer, departure requirements, etc.] than reduce power to a “Cruise Climb” setting of 2500/35", 125 KIAS. This will give you a solid 5-600 FPM climb all the way up into the FL’s, and will also give you max CHT’s < 380F. POH calls for leaning mixture to 32 GPH but that is going to result in substantially higher temps so I usually leave mixture full [35 GPH] and will come back to 33-34 GPH if by doing so I can keep the CHT’s below 380. In contrast, in the TTX, you leave everything forward and at 130 KIAS you will climb at 1, 000 FPM up into the flight levels, with CHT’s < 380 and fuel burn of ~ 40 GPH. So, you get twice the climb rate in the TTX with marginally higher fuel burn, pretty much a wash in terms of total fuel use.



Cruise performance for the M350 is also slower than the TTX, at least at the power settings I have been using. “Economy cruise” is 220/26", the POH says you should be able to run this power setting at 15 GPH, leaning to peak [ugh], but again if you want to keep the temps down you are going to be burning 17-18 GPH at this power setting and even then you are going to see 400F on hottest cylinder. LOP is verboten courtesy of the Lycoming Legal Department and even though this has been thoroughly, absolutely, and completely debunked by the late John Deakin and the good folks in Ada, OK, unlike Chuck who’s plane apparently came from the factory fitted with a magic Lycoming LOP kit, my few attempts to run LOP have been meet with a rather alarming sequence of an end, for the moment at least, to further experiments. Legacy Flight Training, which does factory-approved initial training for the M350, recommends running this power setting initially at 20 GPH, than leaning to keep CHT’s below 400 and ideally below 380, in my experience this is right at or under 18 GPH.

This power setting results in about 180 KTAS in the high teens, and yesterday at FL 230 we were seeing 185 KTAS. In contrast, at 16K, the TTX will turn 180 KTAS on 14 GPH, running 75 degrees LOP and burning 14 GPH and while I do not routinely use the flight levels in either the TTX or the 400 at say FL 210 you will see close to 200 knots in either at the same power setting, which is ~ 62% power. Of course in the M350 you are hauling around a lot more airplane and you are flying in pressurized comfort, so the relatively slight differences in cruise speed are more than made up for with these amenities, but if anything this goes to illustrate once again that, like warships, aircraft design is largely a series of compromises.



Descents are an area where the differences become more apparent, at least in smooth air. In the TTX/400 my sinuses and middle ear thank me whenever I keep the descent rate to 1K/min or less, and if flying with somebody not used to light unpressurized aircraft I prefer 5-700/min. In contrast, the M350 begs you to hustle down [conditions permitting, of course], you can easily do 1, 500/min with the power up at 25" [go below say 23 and you start to loose pressurization], with the cabin descending at 400 fpm or so, more comfortable, especially when you are operating in areas where terrain precludes early descent, let alone traffic. We were taught for descents of > 1K to use FLC @ 165 KIAS, which is also a speed right at the upper limit of flaps 10 and gear extension, so if things get bumpy and speed brakes alone are not sufficient, you have some other levers to literally pull to let you slow quickly if need be. ATC loves this flexibility, going into a Bravo [like we did yesterday] you can easily mix in with the turbojet traffic. True, I do this all the time in the TTX/400, but it feels more comfortable in the M350, or perhaps that is just the Piper Intracranial Implant talking? No, seriously I feel more comfortable which I guess is the relevant point.



Maintenance-God, I hate to even write this…but so far, so good. During initial training Ann noticed a slight oil leak which of course I ignored, the next day on a subsequent training flight we had an oil-streaked cowling. After consulting with various folks we flew the aircraft back to Cutter in Phoenix for what turned out to be replacement of some rocker arm gaskets, and the leak stopped. About a month ago the “Oxygen Cannister Activated” CAS warning came on, indicating that one of the emergency oxygen generators had been activated, but on inspection none of them had and this is going to be dealt with at the 50 Hour inspection.



Real World Comparison-Yesterday’s mission should serve as a decent example. We needed to bring the M350 from Eugene to Phoenix for 50 hour inspection [part of the “Fly For Free!” package] and to have a long-range fuel tank STC installed. This of course meant that we first had to get ourselves to Eugene…could have gone commercial, but what is the fun of that? So we decided we would fly the TTX from San Diego to Eugene.


We started out at 12K, but eventually climbed [as we usually do] to 16K both for terrain and to remain clear of smoke. Ann got to do a LIFR departure at MYF, and a rather abrupt “Cleared for the Visual” at EUG, good stuff for her. 4+07, comfortable.


Parked at Atlantic [where we keep the M350], had lunch inside the FBO, packed up, and we’re off!

A somewhat longer flight, but subjectively much more comfortable than the flight to Eugene-at FL230 we were sitting in a ~7K cabin, plus each of us could get up every now and then and walk to the back of the plane, stretch out if need be. 4+33.



Winner-M350 [duh!] but…to get that extra comfort we ended up burning 30 more gallons of gas, and spending nearly 2X in acquisition cost. Don’t get me wrong, I do not regret the purchase decision, but I think this also serves to illustrate the pretty exceptional performance you get in the SR22T/TTX/400. Lance Neibauer and the Klapmeier’s both, in my estimation, hit home runs when it came to designing fast, efficient, and safe Part 23 airplanes. So it’s all good.



In contrast, Leg 3-PHX-EUG on American Eagle Saturday Evening-was by far both the fastest [2:30] and least comfortable part of the trip. A hot, full, cramped RJ packed with what appeared to us to be a disproportionate number of unhappy people, no cabin service beyond water. incessant reminders that “Masks must be worn the entire flight, and must completely cover the nose and mouth!” [a rule which appeared to be being honored more in the breach than anything else]. After deplaning at EUG we both agreed that GA travel, even in our reciprocating, lead-spewing [but hopefully for not much longer! Bring on that G100UL, so long as it actually works…] “toy airplanes” was by far the better choice for domestic travel, excepting perhaps First Class. We are all incredibly fortunate.

[neg]

Have owned a cirrus (Centennial) since 2003. Most of my flights have been by myself or with one passenger, and not that often need to get into oxygen breathing levels. It would be nice to be able to fly higher, have onboard weather radar, roomy cabin, and all of the other great features of the M350. A friend of mine bought one not long ago and I had a opportunity to fly co-pilot. I love everything about it except one thing, the cockpit area is extremely cramped for 6', 230 lb old man (64). This is a deal killer for me, but if I routinely carried more people farther I would choose it over the cirrus in spite of the contortion needed to access the cockpit (oh and I have to almost hold my head sideways). Both are great planes depending on your mission needs.

[fireballaz]

Liked your recent video but you forgot some major differences between the M350 and the Cirrus SR22T. 6 seats vs 4 seats and Pressurized cabin vs none on the Cirrus. Huge difference in flight requirements on long trips as well.

[hendersona]

Great video..lots of info...I just felt these two planes are different classes..but close in price range!

[gerardoh]

what did you include in the operating costs? that seems to high on both.

[eco-beehive]

Hi I seemed to have missed how many seats they had?

[speedomars]

These are not comparable aircraft. Though the M350 performance and range are similar to the SR22T the M350 seats six (the SR22T seats 4), the M350 burns nearly twice the fuel and requires a MUCH larger onboard fuel capacity to get the similar range (120 gallons, versus 90 gallons). Though the ceiling is the same and the panel is the same (with associated capabilities of the Garmin NXi) the M350 costs $1.35m compared to the similarly equipped SR22T at $950k. So you are paying significantly more to get the pressurization and the extra seat, including a 40% uptick in cost per hour to run the aircraft.

[toddfather]

Agreed on the comment regarding pressurization in the 350. Also the passenger capacity. I love the Cirrus but I believe the M350 is by far my choice, for the type of flying that I want to do. Not sure what Cirrus's turbo does for the plane relative to the 350 im performance in the mountains/high altitude though.

[edsonroadmoto]

Need to give a score at the end on your opinions and based on the specs given

[Heneling]

I have flown on a PA46 as a passenger, its really just a private jet but with a prop instead. SR22 seems to be a vastly different aircraft

[ipro]

How many seat positions in each plane???

[alext]

Not sure what owners you think are flying 450hrs a year. Probably more like 50-100hrs/year for a majority of owners. Your numbers overall seem off. I am a cirrus fan, but this is not a fair comparison to be honest. Most would take the M350.

[thewatcher]

I Agree With Many Of The Comments Here. Why Would You Compare Two Aircraft That Are So Dissimilar!?!

[renoguy]

While it's certainly been made clear here that, these two planes aren't really equally comparable, what I have l earned in all the comments, is substantially better data/real life experience etc, than I have gotten from reading and watching hrs and hrs of other material .
Marlin The Aviator ... Thanks kindly for what you started .
and for what it's worth, I vote Piper .
I'm sure that the Cirrus certainly has a valued place in the GA world, and no doubt, it's a excellent aircraft .
As an Older guy, the comparison that I'd make, is that the SR22 is the modern fancy flashy type of plane that a younger person would fly, the the M350 is a well defined . very capable , very comfortable , even elegant, aircraft that us older guys would fly . ( the paint jobs alone should show that ) .

[carlrossi]

Electronic Stability Protection is available in both aircraft which is not surprising since both airplanes use the same GFC 700 autopilot. Cirrus “Perspective” is Cirrus’s brand name for Garmin G1000/1000 NxI, so basic avionics are same in both aircraft. M350 has third screen to display radar, XM weather, moving map, and a host of other products which are displayed on the Cirrus MFD. Did I mention weather radar? Available in M350 [currently changing from GWX 68 to GWX 75] not available in Cirrus. Perhaps biggest difference of all which you failed to mention [and which others have pointed out] is pressurization, yes both aircraft have identical service ceiling of FL 250 but in the SR 22 you will be wearing a mask and be operating in a very physiologically hostile environment which is not comfortable and can be downright dangerous if you have oxygen failure. In contrast pressurization means you will routinely use the flight levels, M350 maintains sea level cabin to ~12, 000 feet and 8, 500 foot cabin at FL250. M350 cabin is large enough to walk around in while in flight, kinda difficult to do that in an SR22.

Not sure where you got your price data base price is good place to start but nobody buys a base aircraft and BTW base price of M350 is over $1.1M, once you equip for flight into known icing and other stuff the out the door price is just over $1.5M. Having one on order I am very familiar with this figure. Similarly most well equipped new SR22T’s are approaching $1M.

Both nice capable traveling machines. Mission is of course important. If you are going to routinely be doing lots of long distance flying it’s difficult to beat pressurization and with it ability to comfortably use altitudes which are often smooth and which allow you to stay above some but by no means all weather. Ever tried wearing an oxygen mask for 5 hours? Not much fun. Even staying below FL 180 and using cannula is a PITA.

[billymitchell]

Most important differences are that the Piper is a pressurised 6-seater whereas the Cirrus requires oxygen and is a much smaller 4-seater.