DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Any DA50 related topics.

Moderators: Rick, Lance Murray

User avatar
Soareyes
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2020 12:47 pm
First Name: Dan
Aircraft Type: DA42-VI
Aircraft Registration: N518R
Airports: KINF
Has thanked: 231 times
Been thanked: 191 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by Soareyes »

More than 20 Cirrus that landed under the chute have been repaired and returned to service. Often it is a question of insured value. Newer, more expensive planes are worth repairing.

Many on the Cirrus forum complain about the reliability of the Continental IO-550. Of course that engine fails just as often in Bonanzas, Mooney's and Cessna 400s but without a parachute. You hear about it more often in a Cirrus because there are so many of them flying. The turbo models can expect cylinder work between 800-1,000 hours. With a turbo it helps to think of cylinders as a wear item, like tires, haha. The normally aspirated version frequently surpasses TBO without major work.

The NA SR22 cruises at 168-170 TAS on 13.5 gph at 8-11,000'.

I don't believe Cirrus has anything to worry about in the DA50. And I don't think Diamond expects it to compete with the SR22 in the North American market, at least as long as avgas is plentiful. The DA50 has jet fuel for those few here who prefer it, a bigger cabin and is probably more fun to hand fly. That's about it.

An SR22 GTS G3+ as referenced in the title of this thread has better:

Parachute
Speed
Range
payload (?)
Fits in a standard hangar
Maintenance availability
Wife acceptance - parachute
Cirrus Perspective Panel with regular updates and new features including AoA (on FIKI planes) and all the latest Garmin goodies
A full function keypad located on the center panel
Comfort flying over rough terrain, a low undercast, at night - parachute
Air conditioner that works
Beringer wheels and brakes standard
Parachute
Current: DA42-V1

Previous: Hang gliders, Paraglider, DA40(x3), Cessna 150 Aerobat, SR22
User avatar
MackAttack
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 261
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:20 pm
First Name: Joel
Aircraft Type: DA62
Aircraft Registration: N251JM
Airports: KIWS
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 160 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by MackAttack »

FWIW, I drove into OSH this evening alone Interstate 41 from Milwaukee, where I flew commercial (our M600 is getting an inspection). Diamond had a 2-panel billboard along I-41 right by the airport touting the DA50RG! Was driving or would have taken a picture. I am planning a visit to the Diamond booth tomorrow am, mostly to visit with my sales rep about my DA62 timing and chat up the folks, as well as take a friend to check out a 42-VI (he might be interested in one). I plan to check out the 50 while there and hopefully get some info.

But I think the above post has some merit; the range is less than the Cirrus at normal cruise (vs. economy cruise), the speed is also a bit less and the fuel consumption at normal cruise is comparable to a SR22 NA, based on what I have heard so far - nothing really confirmed tho other than what’s on the Diamond website. I think it will be interesting to see how many preorders they get at OSH… and what the buzz is about the plane.

I will try to get some info and report back …
User avatar
TimS
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:10 am
First Name: Timothy
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N1446C
Airports: 6B6 Stowe MA
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by TimS »

Chris wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:51 pm If I were flying behind a Continental TSIO-550 I might want a chute as well. Do any of these make it anywhere close to TBOH without needing some cylinders and/or valves replaced? When I was shopping around for a new aircraft last year, I looked at dozens of logbooks and every Conti 550 I looked at had some major work done on the cylinders, usually before they reached 1000 hours.

The jury is still out on the new CD-300 engine in the DA50. Hopefully it fares better in that department, but it will take time to find out.

Even with all that, it's hard for me to come up with a good argument to pick the DA50 over an SR22. If the DA50 went a bit faster and had larger fuel tanks, it would be a better competitor, IMO.
We are past TBO, all original cylinders, no work done on them except a couple exhaust values replaced. In general, for SR22 planes the N/A planes make it past TBO without cylinder work. The turbo charged and turbo normalized both are known for needing top ends. They can be flown so they make TBO without top end work, but that is more the exception than the rule.

And yes, multiple Cirri have been rebuilt and are back in service after a chute pull. It is just a matter of economics.
Per our insurance agent about a year ago, Cirrus tend to have slightly higher hull coverage compared to other fixed gear of the same performance due to more airframes totaled because of the chute. However, the liability of the Cirrus is much lower since the property/body damage is significantly less. His opinion, unlikely any retract plane will be as cheap as a Cirrus or TTx to insure. Too many gear up incidents.

Tim
User avatar
VickersPilot
3 Diamonds Member
3 Diamonds Member
Posts: 181
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2020 6:41 pm
First Name: Dave
Aircraft Type: DA62
Aircraft Registration: N00TBC
Airports:
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 80 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by VickersPilot »

To assess to two aircraft, we must give the DA50 a lot more credit:

1) Landing Gear - focus in on the frequency of landing accidents in the SR22 and compare it to say a DA42/DA62 (trailing link). IMHO, Cirrus and the Cirrus community never really deal with this issue to protect the value of their respective investments but the landing gear should have been redesigned by now (made easier to land). Cirrus have a landing issue that no amount of training has succeeded in resolving - they've been trying that for 10+ years now. The fact is, for the "pilot skills available" (as opposed to the "ideal pilot"), the aircraft asks for too much. This is my opinion, if anyone saw the spreadsheet on NTSB recorded landing accidents in the Cirrus that I have, they would never buy one. Insurers will likely suffer less losses in the DA50 as the trailing link will forgive and not penalise that once a year bad landing.

A majority of accidents in the Cirrus fleet will look like this: bounce, bounce, nose wheel breaks OR bounce, bounce, crash left of runway.

Unlike a trailing link gear, the fixed spring landing gear is unforgiving. At low speed, if the pilot fails to correctly recover from the balked landing (apply sufficient right-rudder) going from 0-310hp the results are catastrophic with the added dynamite of wet wings.

2) Cabin - the DA50 is a FAR larger aircraft and based on an original 7-seat cabin whereas the Cirrus is based on an original 4 seat design. So yes, it'll require more hydrocarbons to move - thus understating it's true efficiency. It's just the usual airplane comfort compromise, otherwise we would all fly Mooneys and get there fast! The DA50 anti-submarine seat design is superior for occupant protection.

3) Fuel Fires - the fuel system is of a far superior design in the DA50 vs a wet-wing (performance over safety selection). Compare Diamond vs Cirrus post accident fires.

4) Chute - yes, the DA50 should have a chute but at a statistical level, it'll likely be a safer aircraft overall. However, implementing the new Garmin Auto Glide function should at least help mitigate this problem.

5) Global - the aircraft won't be effected by the Biden administration/EPA push to remove lead from AvGas. It can be resold globally so larger exit market (AvGas is disappearing worldwide so Cirrus is becoming a US-centric aircraft).

6) Noise & Fatigue - having not flown it, I'll speculate that will be will considerably less noisy and fatiguing than the Cirrus.

7) Trim Wheel - the Cirrus has no manual trimwheel like the DA50. A manual trim wheel is essential as as a electrical or trim servo fault leaves the Cirrus out of trim making a fault an emergency.

8.) Circuit Breakers - again, safety first here, in the DAXX, the pilot can see the circuit breakers.

9) Carbon Fibre / Glass Fibre Control Surfaces - no corrosion on DA50. Cirrus (inc. hanger Cirrus) for some reason suffer a lot of control surface corrosion.

In summary, the DA50 will likely prove out as a far superior aircraft but will have a more select audience who priortise cabin space and safety.
User avatar
AndrewM
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 2:05 pm
First Name: Andrew
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N897KC
Airports:
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by AndrewM »

In certified aircraft, Smart Glide will become available with a GTN Xi series navigator paired with a compatible Garmin flight display including the G500 TXi™/G600 TXi, GI 275 electronic flight instrument, the G3X Touch™, or G5 electronic flight instrument, with others to be added later4. Compatible Garmin autopilots such as GFC 500 or GFC 600 can be automatically engaged when Smart Glide is activated.

Smart Glide is expected to be available as a software upgrade at no additional charge from Garmin on compatible systems in August 2021 through the Garmin Authorized Dealer network6. The optional Garmin Smart Glide activation button is also available for a list price of $129.
User avatar
dant
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:45 am
First Name: Dan
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N787DM
Airports: KPAE
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 59 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by dant »

@VickersPilot, now that we know the da50 cost vs the da62, don't all of those points apply to the da62 as well? Does the da62 have anti-submarine seats?
User avatar
VickersPilot
3 Diamonds Member
3 Diamonds Member
Posts: 181
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2020 6:41 pm
First Name: Dave
Aircraft Type: DA62
Aircraft Registration: N00TBC
Airports:
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 80 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by VickersPilot »

@dant, yes, it’s the same airplane just a big engine vs 2x small ones…
User avatar
michael.g.miller
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2015 12:52 am
First Name: Mike
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Airports:
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 122 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by michael.g.miller »

VickersPilot wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 8:38 pm @dant, yes, it’s the same airplane just a big engine vs 2x small ones…
And 65% of the gas capacity
User avatar
TimS
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:10 am
First Name: Timothy
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N1446C
Airports: 6B6 Stowe MA
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by TimS »

@VickersPilot

Please post aforementioned spreadsheet on bounced landings.
I am on COPA, and a search there does not reveal much about this issue in the past decade.
Does it happen, yes, but has been declining since the IFOM was published.
Beech Bonanza has a very nice soft landing gear, yet the insurance companies have determined it is more expensive to insurance than the fixed gear planes. Gear up just happen more than bounced landings.

In terms of chute, this is a rather long article but covers it in a way I have never seen before. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021 ... 0982&esrc=
The article is from the perspective of the passenger, living with a pilot. Very fascinating, and for me very enlightening as many of the comments I have heard over the years with my wife are pretty much encapsulated in the single article. My wife, needless to say, loved it.

As for range, the DA50 is just too short legged for many in the USA, especially where we have avgas or soon GU1000 (see Osh announcements) along with long distances.

Tim
User avatar
mfdutra
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2021 10:49 pm
First Name: Marlon
Aircraft Type: DA62
Aircraft Registration: N272DD
Airports: KHWD
Has thanked: 207 times
Been thanked: 162 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by mfdutra »

I own a Cirrus and I ordered a DA62 a few months ago. When I heard about the DA50 price at Oshkosh, I just can't understand why anyone would buy one. The 62 is just so much better. And I think an SR22 has a better value proposition, although that's personal opinion.

It's hard to stomach a single-engine airplane without a parachute now that there are 8000 Cirrus out there and the feature has proved to be very effective. I had an engine failure (partial power loss) on my Cirrus last month. Clear day, 7nm from an airport, pretty straightforward dead stick landing. But over mountains, IMC, on top of an overcast, etc, I'd probably have pulled. I had ordered the 62 already, and after that, I want it so bad now.

If the CD-300 proves to be really reliable, and only time will tell, maybe I would consider carrying my family on one. If I had the bucks to fly behind a PT-6, I wouldn't even think twice. That thing is rock-solid.
Post Reply