Better Aircraft - Cirrus Vision SF50 vs TBM 940
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 вер 2024
- Hey guys welcome to a brand new video. Today we will be taking a look at 2 single engine aircraft but not the same type of engine. One has a jet engine, the next is turboprop. This will be our first comparison video where we compare a jet to a turboprop. yet alone a single engine jet. Our first aircraft is the The Cirrus Vision SF50. Next is the TBM 940.
Source : Cirrus Aircraft and TBM by Daher
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
#Cirrus #TBM #Daher #Socata # VisionJet #TBM940 #CirrusSF50
Payload (lack of) kills the VisionJet SF50. Load more than two people (or even 1 heavyweight + bags) and you have to start cutting back on fuel, which makes its useful range significantly less than stated. Whilst the SF50 has some nice cabin features, the TBM is by far the better aeroplane. Costs more as well, but there is little real comparison between the two.TBM wins every time!
I agree
Until you need the parachute that visionjet has and tbm not!!
@@shonix123 Lol
If you can afford the $4.5M the TBM costs, buy a Cessna M2.. Otherwise, nothing gets close to the Vision Jet
GAMA shipment data in Q1 2020, 18 Vision Jets sold vs. 4 TBMs. Market has spoken. gama.aero/facts-and-statistics/quarterly-shipments-and-billings/
Great video. It's in hot weather (like all the time this summer!) where the differences really show. On a 95F day at sea level the Cirrus Jet at 6,000 pounds takeoff weight requires 4,988 feet to clear a 50 foot obstacle. That is at sea level and it only gets worse as you go West in the US. That rules out the use of a lot of smaller, inexpensive local airports. In contrast, the TBM weighing 7,394 (1,394 pounds more than the Cirrus) under the same conditions only uses 1,880 ft for ground roll and clears a 50-ft obstacle in 2,595 ft. The TBM will then fly 1,730 NM non-stop at long-range cruise. On ice or snow contaminated runways the TBM has the safety of propeller reverse which will stop the aircraft before the first taxiway turnoff every time. Not so on the Cirrus Jet which doesn't have autobrake or thrust reversers. There's a big real world performance difference between the two airplanes.
Hey Paul, I Gave You A Thumbs Up Because You Pointed Out Reality, That Is To Say, "At Sea Level". What A Difference, Huh!?! It Obviously Takes That Jet A Long Time To Spool Up & Landing With No Reverse Thruster Will Be Hard On The Brakes. Do You Think Putera Usman (Above) Is Right About The Citation 2?
This! Though the new G2+ gives you up to 20% more performance (so probably around 4000 feet to clear 50 foot at sea level)
Maybe you could have the performance statistics on the screen as well....thanks
Thanks for the suggestion
@@marlintheaviator I Agree With Ron Williams On Screen Stats Would Be Helpful
Yes please
Agreed. It was a lot to juggle in my head. Not that I can currently afford either, but when I am able, I’ll opt for the TBM. 😉👍
I am in fact getting the TBM 940, and I have always known it was the best choice for me. It is a very unique single engine turboprop that meets all of my requirements, and has unrivalled capabilities. It flys at VLJ speeds, at less cost, and with superior STOL performance that means it can get into and out of airports that VLJ aircraft cannot. In my opinion, it is the ultimate aircraft in the world for the owner/pilot. Selecting the TBM was not much of a choice for me, as it simply is the most incredible aircraft that fits my needs perfectly. It's almost as if the TBM were made for me, rather than an aircraft that I selected. There frankly is no competitor that even comes close.
It really is a great aircraft
same here - our team is also considering a owner/operator setup and the TBM is just a win win all around compared to others.
What about the Pilatus PC-12?
epic e1000
Plus, the inertial separator and beefy landing gear mean it can even do soft field STOLs as well 👌🏼 If I had the money, it would be my choice
My family has an SF50 on order, but the delivery date is delayed. We're really excited once production resumes.
That’s awesome, enjoy it!
When you compare certain facts, it would be nice to have them in written form, too.
Hai perfettamente ragione
TBM. More upfront costs yes but after that it just seems to make more sense with payload speed and other variables.
Speed definitely a determining factor for some
Marlin, You rattled off lots of numbers during this video. It would be nice if you threw those numbers up in some type of chart or graph.
Expand my comment above.
It depends on the buyer. You could buy almost two Cirrus jets for the price of the TBM. There is a performance difference, sure, but the Cirrus likely presents a better value.
TBM 940 my choice. Love the start up whine of the PT6.
VerAy good video ! But I recommend to keep a card with the numbers you say for each side by side so we can also see the numbers not only hear it!
TBM a dream!
For sure!
Honda jet a dream
I couldn't keep the numbers straight in my head either:
SF50 _vs_ TBM940
Cirrus Airframe Parachute System & Safe Return Emergency Autoland _vs_ has autoland too
7 passengers _vs_ 6 passengers
Cirrus Perspective Touch+ by Garmin _vs_ Garmin G3000 with fullscreen and splitscreen
Williams International FJ33-5A _vs_ Pratt & Whitney PT6-66D
Max Cruise: 311kts _vs_ 330kts
Max Altitude: 31000 ft vs
Climb: 1609 ft/min _vs_ 1650ft/min
Max Range: 1275nm _vs_ 1730nm
Runway length takeoff: 3192ft (2036ft in brochure) _vs_ 2380ft
Runway length land: 1628ft _vs_ 2430ft
Basic operating: 3550lbs _vs_ 4629 lbs
Max takeoff: 6000lbs _vs_ 7394 lbs
Max payload: 1400lbs _vs_ 1403 lbs
Cost: $2,380,000 - $2,750,000 USD _vs_ $4,300,000
Operating cost: $1,158.96/hr _vs_ $1,102.75/hr
Off to the bank now...
HariyDrumroll If you need a chute to feel safe, buy a boat.
@@RootBeerGMT How about suggest a more appropriate plane instead of a vehicle not even in aviation.
It’s hard to follow so many performance numbers. Add them so we can read and follow or create a map, graph or something to make it easier to follow. Cool voice!
My money is on the Cirrus Vision Jet, it's the Toyota of the private jets. I don't want to sell my kidney just for an annual overhaul of the TBM.
The 940 looks like a WWII fighter turned into a fun family cruiser. I want one!
The TBM940
Seems to be the favorite for most people
We need both in MFS 2020 😭
i love both planes 🤩 greetings from Argentina!
The Vision Jet SF50 is half the price of the TBM 940. Let's see how the TBM 940 stacks up against something closer in price like the Honda Jet.
thats a great idea
Don't know how true it is but I've heard that waiting for parts with tbms take forever.
You need to put the comparison numbers side by side on screen or the narrated information becomes useless.
If that was the class i was aiming for....the TBM. Otherwise, I'd select the PC 24 for a personal jet.
Not bad choices
Even if I could own one I find the turbo props to be awesome.
In another channel a TBM pilot just took his TBM out of regularly scheduled overhauls. $92K worth of overhaul. Add that to your cost line.
If you're referring to Steveo, it was an annual maintenance inspection; not an overhaul. Words have meanings.
Just sayin'
The vision jet G2 can carry 2000lbs of fuel leaving it with only 350 lbs of passengers and bags. That means you are going to have to subtract some fuel. So you you are carrying a 1000 lbs of passengers and bags. You may have to stop and refuel twice on a 1000nm trip.
You can always diet...
Luiz Schmidt lol
I don’t think you know this but you actually have 1,350lb for passengers and luggage at max. You have a max takeoff weight of 6k and empty weight of 3,550lb and max fuel weight if 2k. Now you can’t take all of your fuel if you want more than two people but jet fuel weighs a lot so taking out a couple of gallons isn’t a big deal. If you take away ten gallons you can easily fit another person and their luggage. The other thing is the most amount of fuel you will need to take off to be able to hit the payload max is less than half but I’m pretty sure not everyone flying will weigh over 200lb so that’s not really an issue.
@@wolfaja755 taking away 10 gallons is like 70ish pounds.... that’s not a whole person AND their bags lmao
@@wolfaja755 800 pounds of passenger/luggage will get you about 800nm. Range is the limiting factor in the SF50 but it's going to cost you ~3MM instead of ~4.4MM so there's that. Depends on mission. Shorter than 700nm as your typical mission and it's a great plane.
Both are absolutely beautiful airplanes, however their costs are out of reach for 98.9% of pilots to own and operate as evidenced by only 57 likes out of 1024 views.
Got my PPL in 1989 when I first saw the TBM 700 on the cover of flying magazine. The TBM940 wins it for me but yes it costs twice as much!
The Vision jet loses on paper. In the real world though it wins. If the SF50 fits your mission profile it could be a good fit. For a wealthy individual with no flying time Cirrus has a fast track path to get them in the SF50 in very short time. Get your private and instrument ratings in the SR20/22 and by the time you have about 150 hours you move to the jet. Get the type rating and fly another 50 hours with a mentor. You can do all of this in three to 6 months time. From zero to hero jet pilot. After that if there’s a need for more capability you could get a twin rating and move up to a used CJ3+. Cirrus has created a good ecosystem for pilots to grow their skills and work toward that jet rating.
Would like to know the noise and vibration levels in each plane.
Ill take the one with a parachute 😊
You could have included the PC12NG in this comparison
It would wipe the floor with both these aircraft in terms of capability, versatility, reliability etc... The only think the pc12 lacks is speed compared to these but considering you can carry more passengers and payload for longer distance and you can pretty much land on any surface i think it is a worthy trade off.
Supercharged Petrolhead I agree it is more expensive but I think it’s the most versatile plane. It has a huge cargo door as well.
Supercharged Petrolhead the PC-12 has a downside other than speed I’m sure but I can’t remember what it was, the veraiatility is cool but I think it also didn’t have much range or something
PC-12 is better than the TBM based on capabilities, pax and payload. But it comes at a higher purchase and running cost. Main question is do you need something bigger than a 2+4 seater. If the answer is no, the TBM is your choice.
Gunther D. The other criteria is do your passengers need a toilet during the flight!!!
Yeah I like that TBM-940. Wish I win the lottery and get me a PPL!
TBM would be my choice hands down.
I'll wait for the 400 nm jet suit that will be even cheaper and more fun!
Technically a turboprop is a jet engine with prop and gearing.
I'd love for you to post a link to a document with the comparison specs between these 2 beautiful airplanes. Thanks
I will go with the TBM 940 I think it’s just it’s more cost-effective it’s a little bit more fuel efficient and you get a little bit more range than the vision Jet
Just so you know the operating cost was wrong in this video for the cirrus vision. The cirrus operates at $632 an hour which is less than half of the tbm. Also the price is at just under 2mil for the g1 and the g2 is just over 2mil. The g2 has a tv and is so quiet you don’t need hearing protection but both are fitted with ir cameras for IFR flight and can carry more people than the tbm. Overall you’re spending 2.5mil less at purchase than the tbm if you get a cirrus and $800 for every hour you use it. Not to mention the cirrus is made to be flown by its owner so maintenance is not that much on it compared to the tbm. Just saying you might get 14 more knots out of the tbm and 3 more pounds of luggage but you get to save millions with the cirrus and be safe while doing it.
I would go with the TBM940 hands down.
So here’s my rub! The emphasis on climb rate and payload with little mind paid to the fact that the Vision Jet is rough 50/60% of the cost and by far and away safer. Auto return and CAPS. All day long, I’ll take the insurance of safety and almost half the cost over payload and climb rate. I have also “heard” but have not experienced the difference but that the TBM prop versus Jet difference from minor oscillation based on a myriad of factors - differentiates Jet power over turbo prop
I am fully vaxed therefore the TBM is the right plane for my needs.
For a bit more, the HondaJet Elite blows them both away. The direct operating cost per hour, not including things like debt, is around $1,250 /hr. And it goes between 422 knots at FL31, around. 400 knots at FL43. That said, a single engine is a lot easier to learn and fly. So there is a true market for both the Cirrus and the TBM, plus the Meridian.
I'd still get the TBM over the HondaJet as the latter needs close to 4,000 feet of runway, which precludes it from operating at a surprising number of small airports, my local included.
@@MaxVliet This is very true and a good point I forgot to make. With any jet you need more runway than any turboprop or piston. I was able to get my Meridian in and out (lightly loaded) of 2,500'. I could do 3,500' full loaded without thinking about it. I know you can do that too easily with a TBM. TBM's are hands down, great turboprops that offer a lot of flexibility. Often you can get there as fast or even faster because you can make use of an airport that is closer to where you need to be. Add to this if the runway is contaminated by rain, snow or sleet. Then your 4k runway need might be at least 7k to be conservative. With my Meridian I didn't have to worry about that because I had beta thrust. You just don't have that on light jets. That's a big difference. Be well, Don
I agree plus with HJ you will make up the price difference with use. Runway length and complexity aside, if you want to go high and fast Honda wins. With the engines un-attached to the cabin it makes for a quieter ride. I believe operating cost is a much greater driver than people acknowledge. Also, as a guess I think many are buying Cirrus for the name dropping... "I went on a ski trip in my Cirrus *Jet* " vs. "I went on a ski trip in my TBM-950" it just looses some cool factor than saying "Jet" with more name recognition - if you don't believe me try adding Citation, Gulf Stream, etc. to "Jet" and watch eyes pop open.
One thing better in Jet engine is that it lasts long and quieter in operation, that is it.
You made a wrong comparison. TBM is powerful and a lot bigger than vision jet. You should have compare tbm with honda jet. It has same power, same cost, same passenger capacity.
TMB has slightly better performance than Vision Jet in all aspects. But TBM is twice more expensive than Vision Jet. Which one would you buy? I would have my hands down on Cirrus VJet.
They both have (different variants of) G3000
Compare a cheaper turboprop Piper M600 and Sirrus Vision SF90
it should be vision sf50 vs eclipse 550
Piper has auto land too.
Manufactured in Minnesota? Well, that's one strike right there...
Cirrus Jet is for owner-pilots who want to say 'come look at my jet parked next to my Audi... I'm the man!' - TBM is for people who need to get multiple people and luggage where they are going quickly. Pilatus carries the entire family, dog, plus kitchen sink.
You could buy citation ii for 550.000, could fly 2000nm and have a fuel burn not far from those two. It is old but still a capable airplane.
The issue is that this video has the wrong figures for operation cost for the cirrus. The cirrus actually operates at $632 an hour. The citation operates at closer to the tbm. I would say the citation is a wonderful jet and has its purpose which is way different than either one of these aircrafts. The funny thing is that this video doesn’t even take Into account the mission of the aircraft so it’s just a bunch of random inaccurate facts about the aircraft.
Cirrus because you can do a whole lot of fly got $2mil. Because of the selling price!
TBM 940 is the better plane. I love the price of the Vision Jet. I think the Vision Jet is price right for what it does.
You should have written data as you spoke them
If you're in the market or thinking about the Cirrus Vision Jet, i believe a better comparison would be the Cirrus versus the Eclipse 500/550.
ua-cam.com/video/zA0nDVcFD14/v-deo.html
Hondajet elite s vs TBM940?
Is there even a comparison? I bet my family jewels that Cirrus will come out with a turboprop.
I'm lucky to be able to afford a computer that can run Flight Simulator 2020 so that I can fly anything like these planes / jets.
Gana ampliamente el TBM 940. en todo.
Seems like the TBM a far more useful plane by almost any metric.
Mate the video got the cost per hour of the cirrus wrong and the price wrong as well. The const per hour is only $632 which is way less than half of the tbm and it cost just under 2mil for the g1. He didn’t really compare the g2 to the tbm but he put 2.75mil as its price which is right for the g2. The g2 performs better and has more luxury like and interior tv and an interior so quiet you don’t need ear protection for. The g2 can range from 600-1200 an hour to operate with maintenance and everything involved for the whole year. This video has really done an injustice to aviation by mixing the worst part of the g1 and g2 to make the cirrus vision look like garbage.
As a passenger, If you can save me money, eliminate TSA and give me Municipal airports to fly into, I say 10 thumbs up!
It doesn't have to fly as fast is a 737 because of Saving Time doing the above. No time spent going to and from airports in a car. No time spent going through embarrassing TSA lines. This is the way to go!
My T210N has more useful load than either of these and they are about the same as a bonanza. When you consider that these birds both require a lot more fuel, the load carrying numbers just get sad if you want to cover any amount of distance. If I somehow had this much money to blow on a personal plane and associated operating costs, I’m going to be looking toward Pilatus. I don’t like to knock the tbm or the vj, because I think the TBM is a super-sexy machine and the cabin width of the vj is glorious, but that lack of useful load would be infuriating to deal with.
TBM cover all maintenance cost, including annuals for first 5 years on a new plane purchase.
Rather buy an L39. Blows both of them out of the sky. Millions cheaper too.
This video has a lot of wrong information in it regarding the cirrus. The cirrus cost just under 2million which is well under half the cost of the tbm. The cirrus operating cost is only 632 according to test and owners of the aircraft. The cirrus is also far more advanced with a cockpit that is almost completely made up of glass instruments with very few necessary buttons and nobs. The cirrus can also fly in any condition because it is equipped to deal with every condition. The cirrus comes with infrared cameras for IFR flight and the newer ones are quiet enough on the inside for passengers to not have to wear ear protection. For a plane that cost less than 50% of the other plane to operate and purchase it is safer and almost performs at the same level as the other one. Not to mention the g2 cirrus has a built in tv in the back and has more space. This video makes the cirrus look like garbage when in reality it is known for being the cheapest private jet to own and operate by miles but still having comforts like TVs and a quiet interior. The tbm is cool and all but for me I’d rather have the cirrus since it’s cheaper and safer and at the end of the day I’d rather have an experience that is safe, cheap, comfortable, and just as fast than one that isn’t. I wouldn’t pay 2.5million more for three extra pounds of storage, less safety, 14 more knots of speed, more expenses, and less comfort.
Under 2? Yeah right, It's 2.85MM plus the jet stream program.
You are so confused. The rule of thumb for the vision jet is you can go 600 miles and carry 600 pounds. Do the math. With 1400 pounds of usable weight, you fill those seven seats up with 160 pound average person weight, And that leaves you 280 pounds of fuel. That’s 46 gallons of fuel. Cant even legally take off and circle the airport with that. The jet engine burns 100 gallons an hour. The Visions yet is a two person airplane if you want to go anywhere. The TBM carries way more and goes much farther @50 g/hr or less @ cruise. No comparison.
I would buy a TBM 940
The price difference is so big, you might as well ask: "What would you buy: two Cirrus Vision SF50s or a single TBM 940?"
There's *so* much Cirrus hate. And it all looks deeply irrational.
Anybody have actual costs of annual inspections? And insurance?
For the TBM 940, scheduled maintenance costs are included for 5 years or 1,000 hours in the Elite package.
It's not "jey vs. turboprop".... it's turboprop vs. turbofan. They're both "jet" engines....
Vision is a sports car vs TBM SUV
Cruss jet
How can you even compare airplanes with a $2 million difference in cost?
The cirrus actually cost 632 an hour to operate and is one of their biggest selling points.
Definitely the TBM 940 is the better airplane. Payload and range are the main arguments as well as the cabin volume. And despite nacelle anti icing the little tiny jets are extremely sensitive of getting ice particles in the compressor and therefore risking an engine flameout.
4.3m for the TBM? Spend an extra 200k and get a Honda Jet that comes with a bathroom.
and then lose out on runway lenght requirements?
If I had the money to buy either one of these,I would buy a yacht
Lol
True, when you have that type of money whats the point of racing through life when you can sail along at an easy pace. Life in reality is very short!
TBM ALL THE WAY
Your fuel costs per hour is kind of wrong
Patato-potatoo
Why would anyone buy the Vision Jet?
Cirrus
Dropping a bunch of numbers without display (chart) is pretty pointless.
M
Pay more Flight more
TBM anyday - cirrus design is poor and overrated
6-66D no thanks. Don’t need any devil engines
Lol, you’re the first person to mention those numbers 😂
MarlinTheAviator I quit flying on planes about 2020 years ago. I’ve been watching videos lately of smaller planes to try and get my heart back into it. I saw that number and my heart dropped just a little, hahaha. Very interesting number.
TBM is a beauty! Cirrus Jet is so ugly.
Lol
No it's not ugly
100% agreed 😂