29 Nov 2025, 13:27 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Eclipse vs. Meridian Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 17:25 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/19/11 Posts: 3308 Post Likes: +1434 Company: Bottom Line Experts Location: KTOL - Toledo, OH
Aircraft: 2004 SR22 G2
|
|
|
I've been flying the wings off my SR22T / Seneca this past year, running at ~350 hours / year with no signs of slowing down. 90% of my missions are out and back, same day business trips within a 3 hour radius. I really don't care to fly more than 6 hours / day.
The high altitude fatigue is kicking my butt although I've been able to combat it better lately with increased hydration & O2. The biggest thing I'm looking for now is time savings. A SETP would give me 120 hours / yr of additional business hours, which is VERY, VERY attractive. The time savings on maintaining (2) piston birds is also a huge potential time savings as most SETP's seem to go through the year with very few mx events. I can't even begin to estimate how much time I spend per year dealing with mx issues on these birds. Higher altitude & pressurization are nice bonuses as well. Thus far my thinking has been to sell my SR22T and share in the Seneca and buy an earlier model Meridian. Realistically, my budget for acquisition is in the $500K-900K range.
I've read many negative reviews about the Eclipse and had dismissed it from any potential list of upgrade candidates because of these reviews and the concerns about the long-term viability of the company. However, it sounds like there have been some good changes to the company / airplanes in the last year or so that may make them a viable option. 1.5, 1.7 and 1.9 models are showing up on the market in the $700K-900K range and when I run the total cost of ownership #'s, it comes out VERY close to the Meridian. It's basically a wash. There are also reasonable ADS-B upgrade options now available, whereas before there weren't reasonable economic options available.
As I understand, the life limits have been extended, so these are no longer pumpkins. I also understand that there are other shops besides Eclipse mx facilities that can / do work on these. From a time savings standpoint, the Eclipse would offer 175 hours of time savings for me per year since it's significantly faster than the Meridian.
So, what's the general feeling on these birds now. Am I missing something?
_________________ Don Coburn Corporate Expense Reduction Specialist 2004 SR22 G2
Last edited on 01 Sep 2017, 17:32, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Eclipse vs. Meridian Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 18:25 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 02/03/11 Posts: 197 Post Likes: +200 Location: San Diego, CA
Aircraft: B55, P46T
|
|
For me the eclipse 50ft landing distance dropped it out of the running. 3000 foot runways would require perfection and heavy brake action, $$$. Also flying to a meeting and getting out of a jet as pilot/ no passengers just feels wrong. I dont want millennials hog tying me to their Prius!! 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Eclipse vs. Meridian Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 19:04 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/19/11 Posts: 3308 Post Likes: +1434 Company: Bottom Line Experts Location: KTOL - Toledo, OH
Aircraft: 2004 SR22 G2
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Hi Don,
Think you could find an ex E owner on here that just purchased a TBM to get away from them. From a business standpoint I can't see them making it. Hope I'm wrong. Look at the older TBM's in your budget, you won't regret it in the end. Need a broker that knows that market. Many selling TBM's now but few have the knowledge. Good luck in your search. Thanks Chuck. I really like the TBM but from my homework thus far, it's going to be significantly more cost to own / operate compared to Meridian. Even if acquisition costs are on par with Meridian, I don't believe I can afford it at the present time.
_________________ Don Coburn Corporate Expense Reduction Specialist 2004 SR22 G2
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Eclipse vs. Meridian Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 19:06 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/19/11 Posts: 3308 Post Likes: +1434 Company: Bottom Line Experts Location: KTOL - Toledo, OH
Aircraft: 2004 SR22 G2
|
|
Username Protected wrote: How you think your client base will react to the two? There's a theory, mostly correct I think, that the general public lumps all prop planes together (172, meridian) and all jets (eclipse, gulfstream)
If eclipse - I'd suggest an exclusive lease for a year with option to buy. That's excellent feedback Charles and honestly a point I hadn't considered. I can definitely see how a client would see a jet (even a 'cheap' jet) as sign of extravagance.
_________________ Don Coburn Corporate Expense Reduction Specialist 2004 SR22 G2
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Eclipse vs. Meridian Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 20:10 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 05/29/09 Posts: 4166 Post Likes: +2990 Company: Craft Air Services, LLC Location: Hertford, NC
Aircraft: D50A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Old(er) airplanes, as great as they may be, inevitably have more maintenance issues to,deal with. I think Don is trying to save time spent on managing maintenance. I know Mike is back, and I'm not trying to start anything, but I don't think an MU2 is the answer. As much as this seems like common sense, it certainly hasn't been my observation.
_________________ Who is John Galt?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Eclipse vs. Meridian Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 20:43 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 05/29/09 Posts: 4166 Post Likes: +2990 Company: Craft Air Services, LLC Location: Hertford, NC
Aircraft: D50A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Craig,
Observation or experience? I understand that in the turbine world things are usually better maintained, and that common sense isn't always, so I'm curious. If dispatch reliability did not improve with newer models you'd think companies with better places to deploy capital than airplanes would not, generally speaking, prefer them.
Not trying to argue, just asking. Observation and experience. Dispatch reliability is more closely related to build quality, good maintenance, and factory support than it is to age. As an example, I'd put up a very nice forty year old King Air or MU-2 against a new Diamond DA-40NG in a heartbeat. Many businesses prefer new because it works great for their tax strategy, the warranty gives them some measure of predictability, and conventional wisdom is often times more prevalent than actual aircraft operational knowledge. It also gives the flight department director some clout when he has shiny new aircraft at his disposal. As a personal anecdote, I recently brought in some help in our operation. I had six aircraft working daylight till dark and the only one that had to shut down for a maintenance related item was a three year old plane with only 1600 total time. All three of mine are over 10K hours and mine personal hack is a 1979 and it never missed a beat.
_________________ Who is John Galt?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|