Reading the comments ... I have flown both aircraft. I sold the TTx product for a (STAR) Cessna (Sales Team Authorized Retailer) in 2009-2011. I also have very strong opinions. I believe the TTx is an overall better aircraft. Yes ... Cirrus has outsold TTx handily ... however Cirrus made lemonade out of lemons. When the Cirrus could not pass spin certification for the FAA ... they were required to install the CAPS. So being the smart sales organization Cirrus is ... they spun it as a positive (which it is) and sold it as a feature the TTx did not have but also did not need. We often joked that Cirrus was a Sales organization that happened to build airplanes in the back whereas Cessna was an aircraft manufacturer that happen to sell airplanes. All said, I believe the TTx is the better aircraft but that's just one guy's opinion. Thank you for making this video.
I believe they opted for the parachute instead of going through spin certification. It’s not that they couldn’t do it they just chose not to. But I agree I like the ttx. Cirrus knew people would appreciate the parachute and greater useful load which are probably the biggest selling points.
If you do your research, I believe you will find that the Klapmeier brothers that started Cirrus planned for the CAPS parachute system from the beginning as a safety feature. In addition to spin recovery, the CAPS can be used in several other emergency scenarios such as engine failure at night over unfriendly terrain. Comparing the size of the rudders might explain the difference in spin recovery characteristics. Much effort has gone into Cirrus aircraft for simplicity and safety, as I'm sure Cessna did to the TTX. As similar as the two aircraft are, I believe that Cessna created its own problems when they moved Columbia production to Mexico and had problems that forced them to bring production back to Kansas. At that point Cirrus had a significant market share advantage for that category which made it difficult for the TTX to compete. They are two fixed-gear aircraft that will outrun many retractable single and light twins.
I wish the TTX was still manufactured. If I had the money, that would be my choice. I would buy that new before I touched a Cirrus! ask her too many people have to wait for parts for their SR 22s, and repack in that parachute is creeping up towards the $25,000 mark! That’s nuts! Give me the Cessna TTX any day of the week!
@@doriangray2020 I just learning how to fly safe like thousands of pilots have done for decades prior to parachute containing aircraft. That’s my alternative.
@@RusscanFLYif you go to the cirrus headquarters they have a hall dedicated to everytime the CAPS system has been deployed and what the outcome was. Last I’ve known it was a little over 250 people who were saved because of CAPS
Good video. A couple clarifications- The SR22T has a useful load of about 1100 lbs, not 1260. The TTX can be flown ROP or LOP whereas the Cirrus is only LOP. If TTX is flown ROP, it is about 15 kts faster but close to the same speed LOP. The Cirrus G7 has a G3000 avionics also. Also, the 2022 and newer SR22Ts are 7-9 kts faster than their predecessors.
Appreciate the clarifications, Michael! These two airplanes are a 2013 TTX and 2019 SR22T-G6. We are primarily comparing the specs on each specifically. The G7 was also released only a couple days before we filmed this video. Thanks for watching & commenting!
I hope the Pipstrel Panthera makes it through the certification process because I think it's one of the best looking single enfgine prop planes ever designed. And I like that it uses retractable landing gear, which maximizes cruise speed and frankly just looks better.
I like the TTX more, but if I had the money, I would pick the Cirrus. Why? Simple, Who wants to have a discontinued airplane instead of an airplane that is still being produced? I wonder why they stopped making the TTX, such as nice airplane
And best part about Cirrus's marketing that people don't realize... those 200 CAPS pulls in 20 years... 95% of those situations could have resulted in an injury-free off-airport landing if the pilots had merely tried rather than gave up and just pulled CAPS at the very first sign of a problem. So of all the CAPS pulls in 20 years, maybe just 10 have actually saved lives. If you consider the number of Cirrus flights over 20 years and only 10 flights saved as a result, everyone liking their airframe parachute so much is akin to the risk of walking outside and being struck by a meteorite.
The TTx is a far better aircraft. Stronger, faster, hand flies better, better avionics and far more beautiful. It just doesnt have the parachute for the wifey. But with nearly double the gliding capability perhaps a good pilot good land it on an airport in the event of an engine out and not in a bunch of trees as a passenger under a parachute.
Petty maybe, but if the TTx had the T-handle, center console throttle set up like Cirrus, would been the icing on the cake! Looks like Cirrus has better back seat visibility, too.
Long story but moving manufacturing from Oregon to Mexico casued moisture in the composite layups destroyed alot of brand new undelivered aircraft and one of those ultimately killed a higher up in the TTX program.
The TTx is beautiful, it looks more aerodynamic. I like the stronger utility category airframe. It also has increased Va speeds, glide ratio, takeoff/climb rate, max speed, and max range. I also like that it has speed brakes and a prop control. Unfortunately, the avionics will never get an upgrade.
@@user-ey6up9vu1x Don’t NEED an upgrade but the connext feature on the nxi sure is nice being able to easily transfer flight plans from ForeFlight to the mfd and have the autopilot fly any point you choose by just touching the screen. I love that feature. But you’re right, you don’t need it. I’m just saying, there will be new and great upgrades to avionics.
@@LifeStyleAviation . Lot's of reasons. I spent a good deal of time in Bend Oregon where the TTx was born. The passion is unmatched from the folks behind the machine... The Cirrus and Columbia which ultimately became the Cessna TTx were both born out of a NASA program called AGATE trying to encourage new innovation in aerodynamics and manufacturing processes, decrease complexity, etc. for aircraft... That's why both of these aircraft look similar, are made of carbon composite, have fixed gear, etc. But in my opinion, the TTx is grossly overengineered (thats a compliment), and the Cirrus was engineered with a budget and bandaids... Cirrus didn't want to do spin certification and so they stuck a parachute in the aircraft. Columbia just built their aircraft like a tank and went through all of the Part 23 certification requirements... SO both manufacturers just chose different routes... Columbia chose to play by the harsh rules and make its aircraft survive double the rules. In my humble opinion, one cannot become a master of the stick and rudder behind a Cirrus. It doesn't fly or feel like a proper aircraft. Because of the spring center system and very mushy feel of the controls, it is very much designed for simplicity, getting a person in the air and up-to-speed fast, so quick progression then a lifelong plateau... In the TTx with the push rods and bell cranks with zero tolerance or give, when you place your hand on that stick, you are part of the aircraft. You can feel the speed, the stall point, the overbank point, everything. And the way the seat and cockpit is designed to wrap around you, you literally become one with the aircraft... Take a 25kt direct crosswind in the Cirrus and the TTx on the same day and you'll never want to fly the Cirrus again... I'm not against Cirrus. They have an amazing business machine and have built a massive cult following that continues to support the business. I think its a great aircraft to spend a season of your aviation career flying... The newer models have great fit and finish, are fairly economical, good visibility, and trim out very well without AP on a long cross-country. But that's what they are designed for... You're not supposed to FEEL a Cirrus. They aren't designed to go out and just maneuver around and fly. They are designed for Point A to Point B... Doctors, Attorneys, Wealthy Dot-Comers, all folks who don't have the time or desire or perhaps even the love of aviation and the mastery of its skills. And that's OK... Some people are destination oriented and for the its a tool, and some are journey oriented and after 10 hours of flying in a day, can't wait to get up the next morning. Those are the journey oriented folks and for them, there just isn't a better choice than the TTx. In that aircraft, you can have your cake and eat it too...
There is no contest. The Cirrus all day. 200 pounds more payload is huge. Cirrus is in business and doing well and still making all the parts. For me, I don’t like the TTX doors at all. The deal breaker for me is the Cessna 182 style throttle/mixture. OMG, after training in a 172, I never want to see those again. It’s like putting a giant 1963 Buick steering wheel on a new sports car.
You can still get parts for ttx no problem. I love the throttle/mixture. Very easy to make precise adjustments. Not with the cirrus. The 200 pounds extra payload is nice I agree. But most of the time I’m flying by myself or with one other copilot anyway… these planes aren’t meant to take the whole family on vacation.
If you’ve flown all three, you’ll rank the Mooney last… it’s not a fun plane to fly, isn’t comfortable, and lacks utility capability. how often are you going to climb to space unpressurized with a nose cannula for a long cross country to gain that 10 extra knots in the acclaim… the Cessna TTx is an absolute masterpiece and to date, has no match in my humble opinion…
@@brandonjones6780 I’ve flown two of the three, and I couldn’t disagree with you more. With its control rod rigging the Mooney is a tight and responsive plane to fly. With high wing loading it’s a great IFR platform, it’s wicked fast and fuel efficient. As far as flying high for long cross countries, I do it about three times a month. Last week was flight level 210. Nasal cannulas are not an issue and the extra 10 kn over the Cessna is available from ground level up. But frankly, I think the Cessna is a great airplane, and I have no use for the Cirrus.
@@trrmbath97 Style points for the humor. In truth, best useful load on a SR22T is 1248 lbs. Mooney Acclaim is 1000. However at 10k altitude for example, Acclaim is roughly 40 kts faster than the SR22T on the same fuel burn. On a 500 mile trip, the Acclaim would require 60 lbs less fuel and arrive more than 30 minutes quicker than the Cirrus. Useful load is better on the Cirrus, but not as much as it first appears. In this hypothetical, 188 lbs. difference between the two fueled for same trip.
No contest, the TTX is superior. If you filled all the tanks , you have weight left over for a pilot and one less than 170 lb passenger or luggage instead and all the back seat room to keep it in.
Reading the comments ... I have flown both aircraft. I sold the TTx product for a (STAR) Cessna (Sales Team Authorized Retailer) in 2009-2011. I also have very strong opinions. I believe the TTx is an overall better aircraft. Yes ... Cirrus has outsold TTx handily ... however Cirrus made lemonade out of lemons. When the Cirrus could not pass spin certification for the FAA ... they were required to install the CAPS. So being the smart sales organization Cirrus is ... they spun it as a positive (which it is) and sold it as a feature the TTx did not have but also did not need. We often joked that Cirrus was a Sales organization that happened to build airplanes in the back whereas Cessna was an aircraft manufacturer that happen to sell airplanes. All said, I believe the TTx is the better aircraft but that's just one guy's opinion. Thank you for making this video.
I believe they opted for the parachute instead of going through spin certification. It’s not that they couldn’t do it they just chose not to. But I agree I like the ttx. Cirrus knew people would appreciate the parachute and greater useful load which are probably the biggest selling points.
Great insight. Thanks for the comment!
If you do your research, I believe you will find that the Klapmeier brothers that started Cirrus planned for the CAPS parachute system from the beginning as a safety feature. In addition to spin recovery, the CAPS can be used in several other emergency scenarios such as engine failure at night over unfriendly terrain. Comparing the size of the rudders might explain the difference in spin recovery characteristics. Much effort has gone into Cirrus aircraft for simplicity and safety, as I'm sure Cessna did to the TTX. As similar as the two aircraft are, I believe that Cessna created its own problems when they moved Columbia production to Mexico and had problems that forced them to bring production back to Kansas. At that point Cirrus had a significant market share advantage for that category which made it difficult for the TTX to compete. They are two fixed-gear aircraft that will outrun many retractable single and light twins.
Thanks for stipulating that your comment was only an opinion.
Cirrus could pass the spin cert and they did in Europe, they just flexed the chute for the FAA cert
I wish the TTX was still manufactured. If I had the money, that would be my choice. I would buy that new before I touched a Cirrus! ask her too many people have to wait for parts for their SR 22s, and repack in that parachute is creeping up towards the $25,000 mark! That’s nuts! Give me the Cessna TTX any day of the week!
What’s the alternative for spending $$ for packing the parachute? Death? Totaled aircraft?
@@doriangray2020 I just learning how to fly safe like thousands of pilots have done for decades prior to parachute containing aircraft. That’s my alternative.
@@RusscanFLYif you go to the cirrus headquarters they have a hall dedicated to everytime the CAPS system has been deployed and what the outcome was. Last I’ve known it was a little over 250 people who were saved because of CAPS
Good video. A couple clarifications- The SR22T has a useful load of about 1100 lbs, not 1260. The TTX can be flown ROP or LOP whereas the Cirrus is only LOP. If TTX is flown ROP, it is about 15 kts faster but close to the same speed LOP. The Cirrus G7 has a G3000 avionics also. Also, the 2022 and newer SR22Ts are 7-9 kts faster than their predecessors.
Appreciate the clarifications, Michael!
These two airplanes are a 2013 TTX and 2019 SR22T-G6. We are primarily comparing the specs on each specifically. The G7 was also released only a couple days before we filmed this video.
Thanks for watching & commenting!
I went to the Cessna plant in Independence KS and saw the TTx on the assembly line, then flew one. It was awesome!
they started production again?
Thanks for sahring. It's the first I am hearing about the Cessna TTx.
I'll take the Cessna any day it doesn't need a parachute
I hope the Pipstrel Panthera makes it through the certification process because I think it's one of the best looking single enfgine prop planes ever designed. And I like that it uses retractable landing gear, which maximizes cruise speed and frankly just looks better.
Agreed the Panthera is a sexy bird. Nobody would insure me in it -- and for now -- rightfully so.
I like the TTX more, but if I had the money, I would pick the Cirrus. Why? Simple, Who wants to have a discontinued airplane instead of an airplane that is still being produced? I wonder why they stopped making the TTX, such as nice airplane
Pretty good video!
And best part about Cirrus's marketing that people don't realize... those 200 CAPS pulls in 20 years... 95% of those situations could have resulted in an injury-free off-airport landing if the pilots had merely tried rather than gave up and just pulled CAPS at the very first sign of a problem. So of all the CAPS pulls in 20 years, maybe just 10 have actually saved lives. If you consider the number of Cirrus flights over 20 years and only 10 flights saved as a result, everyone liking their airframe parachute so much is akin to the risk of walking outside and being struck by a meteorite.
The TTx is a far better aircraft. Stronger, faster, hand flies better, better avionics and far more beautiful. It just doesnt have the parachute for the wifey. But with nearly double the gliding capability perhaps a good pilot good land it on an airport in the event of an engine out and not in a bunch of trees as a passenger under a parachute.
Petty maybe, but if the TTx had the T-handle, center console throttle set up like Cirrus, would been the icing on the cake!
Looks like Cirrus has better back seat visibility, too.
Seems like the ttx gets the nod for a better plane. Why the heck did they stop producing it?
Long story but moving manufacturing from Oregon to Mexico casued moisture in the composite layups destroyed alot of brand new undelivered aircraft and one of those ultimately killed a higher up in the TTX program.
Because Textron really wants to just sell Citations. They would love to kill off all piston airplanes if they could. Nasty organization.
The TTx is beautiful, it looks more aerodynamic. I like the stronger utility category airframe. It also has increased Va speeds, glide ratio, takeoff/climb rate, max speed, and max range. I also like that it has speed brakes and a prop control. Unfortunately, the avionics will never get an upgrade.
Well said, Riley. Thanks for your input!
Who needs an upgrade. The G7 is NOT a G3000 by the way,, its an upgrade to the G1000. The G2000 is still right with it 10 years later.
@@user-ey6up9vu1x Don’t NEED an upgrade but the connext feature on the nxi sure is nice being able to easily transfer flight plans from ForeFlight to the mfd and have the autopilot fly any point you choose by just touching the screen. I love that feature. But you’re right, you don’t need it. I’m just saying, there will be new and great upgrades to avionics.
It’s not even a contest worthy of comparison. The TTx slaughters the Cirrus in every way…
We love a strong opinion! Have you flown both aircraft? If so, why are you so persuaded?
@@LifeStyleAviation . Lot's of reasons. I spent a good deal of time in Bend Oregon where the TTx was born. The passion is unmatched from the folks behind the machine... The Cirrus and Columbia which ultimately became the Cessna TTx were both born out of a NASA program called AGATE trying to encourage new innovation in aerodynamics and manufacturing processes, decrease complexity, etc. for aircraft... That's why both of these aircraft look similar, are made of carbon composite, have fixed gear, etc. But in my opinion, the TTx is grossly overengineered (thats a compliment), and the Cirrus was engineered with a budget and bandaids... Cirrus didn't want to do spin certification and so they stuck a parachute in the aircraft. Columbia just built their aircraft like a tank and went through all of the Part 23 certification requirements... SO both manufacturers just chose different routes... Columbia chose to play by the harsh rules and make its aircraft survive double the rules. In my humble opinion, one cannot become a master of the stick and rudder behind a Cirrus. It doesn't fly or feel like a proper aircraft. Because of the spring center system and very mushy feel of the controls, it is very much designed for simplicity, getting a person in the air and up-to-speed fast, so quick progression then a lifelong plateau... In the TTx with the push rods and bell cranks with zero tolerance or give, when you place your hand on that stick, you are part of the aircraft. You can feel the speed, the stall point, the overbank point, everything. And the way the seat and cockpit is designed to wrap around you, you literally become one with the aircraft... Take a 25kt direct crosswind in the Cirrus and the TTx on the same day and you'll never want to fly the Cirrus again... I'm not against Cirrus. They have an amazing business machine and have built a massive cult following that continues to support the business. I think its a great aircraft to spend a season of your aviation career flying... The newer models have great fit and finish, are fairly economical, good visibility, and trim out very well without AP on a long cross-country. But that's what they are designed for... You're not supposed to FEEL a Cirrus. They aren't designed to go out and just maneuver around and fly. They are designed for Point A to Point B... Doctors, Attorneys, Wealthy Dot-Comers, all folks who don't have the time or desire or perhaps even the love of aviation and the mastery of its skills. And that's OK... Some people are destination oriented and for the its a tool, and some are journey oriented and after 10 hours of flying in a day, can't wait to get up the next morning. Those are the journey oriented folks and for them, there just isn't a better choice than the TTx. In that aircraft, you can have your cake and eat it too...
Good luck finding parts for a TTx
5:53 is that a go-around with the speed brakes extended? Lol
I was just wondering that. Yikes lol
The Cirrus can recover from a spin. Its not impossible
There is no contest. The Cirrus all day. 200 pounds more payload is huge. Cirrus is in business and doing well and still making all the parts. For me, I don’t like the TTX doors at all. The deal breaker for me is the Cessna 182 style throttle/mixture. OMG, after training in a 172, I never want to see those again. It’s like putting a giant 1963 Buick steering wheel on a new sports car.
You can still get parts for ttx no problem. I love the throttle/mixture. Very easy to make precise adjustments. Not with the cirrus. The 200 pounds extra payload is nice I agree. But most of the time I’m flying by myself or with one other copilot anyway… these planes aren’t meant to take the whole family on vacation.
One has CAPS and has sold over 9000 units. One doesn't...And Textron can hardly give them away. Not much more needs to be said.
Yeah if you are an airplane driver (which many are now days) instead of a pilot. BTW Textron hasn't made them in 8 years so keep up.
@@user-ey6up9vu1x Your right...I bought a Cirrus 8 years ago and didn't even consider the textron product b/c its inferior on several levels.
RV10‼️ ❤
I'd love to have either one. Sadly, I'm still waiting for my sugar momma to come into my life...
Plenty of sugar daddies out there for you.
Meanwhile the Mooney Acclaim says “hold my beer” and smokes them both.
If you’ve flown all three, you’ll rank the Mooney last… it’s not a fun plane to fly, isn’t comfortable, and lacks utility capability. how often are you going to climb to space unpressurized with a nose cannula for a long cross country to gain that 10 extra knots in the acclaim… the Cessna TTx is an absolute masterpiece and to date, has no match in my humble opinion…
@@brandonjones6780 I’ve flown two of the three, and I couldn’t disagree with you more. With its control rod rigging the Mooney is a tight and responsive plane to fly. With high wing loading it’s a great IFR platform, it’s wicked fast and fuel efficient. As far as flying high for long cross countries, I do it about three times a month. Last week was flight level 210. Nasal cannulas are not an issue and the extra 10 kn over the Cessna is available from ground level up. But frankly, I think the Cessna is a great airplane, and I have no use for the Cirrus.
With the Acclaim's payload someone has to hold its beer lol.
@@trrmbath97 HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAH 💯! That's awesome.
@@trrmbath97 Style points for the humor. In truth, best useful load on a SR22T is 1248 lbs. Mooney Acclaim is 1000. However at 10k altitude for example, Acclaim is roughly 40 kts faster than the SR22T on the same fuel burn. On a 500 mile trip, the Acclaim would require 60 lbs less fuel and arrive more than 30 minutes quicker than the Cirrus. Useful load is better on the Cirrus, but not as much as it first appears. In this hypothetical, 188 lbs. difference between the two fueled for same trip.
Martin John Hernandez Eric Martinez Charles
Who has the better baggage area size/shape
No contest, the TTX is superior. If you filled all the tanks , you have weight left over for a pilot and one less than 170 lb passenger or luggage instead and all the back seat room to keep it in.
The numbers don’t tell the whole story. If you fly the 400 you’ll know you’re in the better airplane.
The TTX is statistically safer than and as fast and slick as a Cirrus.
Robinson Richard Lee Steven Taylor Melissa
Young George Williams Richard Perez Christopher
Lee Richard Garcia Michelle Johnson Sandra
Lopez Eric Thompson Robert Wilson Sarah
Johnson Gary Gonzalez Susan Lewis Eric
Rodriguez Patricia Martin Carol Jones Sandra
I have a hard time understanding why lifestyle published this video TBH
Clark Jeffrey Martin Thomas Jackson John
Hall Sarah Jackson Jose Gonzalez Karen
Taylor Cynthia Rodriguez Anthony Smith Margaret
Jones Lisa Young Brenda Jackson Laura
You could have ended the video after telling everyone the Cessna is no longer being built.
Cirrus is a better plane hands down.
Said the guy that hasn't owned either one. I have owned 2 of each. So I MIGHT be a bit more qualified than you huh?
Lmao they’re both WAAAAY over priced
Thats another argument for another day. lol.
Name anything "certified" in aviation that isn't overpriced!?!
Wilson Richard Davis Karen Wilson Nancy
Brown Donald Johnson Paul Jackson Betty
😂 These are the same airplanes that fly out of north Perry report their drug dealers use at north perry port in hollywood , florida
May I suggest Grammerly?
Robinson Daniel Taylor Sandra White David
Garcia Amy Williams Ronald Moore Laura
Clark Sharon Walker Brenda Lewis Lisa
Harris Carol Jackson Ronald Lee Linda
Brown Mark Gonzalez Karen Thompson Donald
Williams Frank Brown Jose Hall William
Lee Carol White Steven Brown Sharon
Brown Kenneth Harris Sandra Martin Donna