Where the Airplane Market Is Headed in Q4 2026
Four things moved this market between July and the end of September, and each one changes the arithmetic on what your airplane is worth today. Inventory is thinner than it was a year ago and has stopped draining. Asking values have split. The Fed raised rates and has penciled in one more increase for December. And the FAA ended single-pilot operation in the legacy Citations. Here is the short version, and what I would do about it before December 31.
The short version
- Turboprop inventory is running about 12% under last year, and the field stopped shrinking in September.
- Piston asking values are still giving back. Turbine asking values have turned up.
- The federal funds rate is 3.75–4.00%, with one more quarter-point increase projected for December.
- The FAA rescinded the legacy Citation single-pilot exemptions on September 29, with no wind-down.
- Accepted offer to closing runs 30 to 45 days. To close before December 31 you need an offer accepted by about November 15 — which means listing by October 31.
Inventory is thin, and it stopped draining
In September, used single-engine piston inventory in the U.S. and Canada was down 12.2% against last year. Turboprops were down 12.0% worldwide. Jets were down 23.6%, with the large-cabin end off 39.8%. The field your airplane competes against is smaller than it was a year ago.
The monthly direction is the other half. Piston inventory was flat in September, turboprops rose 3.5% and jets rose 5.1% — the second month running that inventory added rather than drained. So the field is thin by the standard of a year ago, and it is no longer getting thinner.
Asking values have split
The three categories stopped moving together. Piston singles fell 0.74% on the month and are down 2.36% against last year. Turboprops rose 0.22% on the month and are up 0.57% on the year. Jets rose 2.02% on the month and are up 0.71%, led by the super-mids at plus 5.29%.
Asking prices are not values, and I will keep saying that. What they give you is the leading edge — VREF and the closed comps follow a quarter or two behind. Right now that edge says the turbine market has turned the corner and the piston market has not.
Rates went up, and may go again in December
On September 16 the Federal Open Market Committee raised the federal funds rate a quarter point, to 3.75–4.00% — the first increase since 2023, on a unanimous vote. The Committee’s own projections point to one more quarter-point increase in December. A financed buyer’s payment is higher than it was in the spring, and his offer reflects it.
The FAA ended single-pilot flying in the legacy Citations
On September 28 the FAA published a policy change rescinding the training-provider exemptions that let a single pilot fly the transport-category Citations. Effective September 29, no wind-down. Thirteen of the fourteen exemption holders reviewed were rescinded or denied renewal.
It catches the two-crew airframes: the 500, 550, S550, 552, 560, 550 Bravo, 560 Encore and Encore+. It does not touch the 501, the 551, the CJ/525 family, the Mustang, or any turboprop.
A large share of those airplanes are owner-flown. That owner now hires a second pilot for every leg, or he stops flying. NBAA and Citation Jet Pilots asked for a 90-day pause on September 29. No answer yet.
Why single-engine turboprops gain from it
The demand moves, it does not disappear. The owner-pilot still wants to fly himself, and what he can legally fly is a short list: the CJ family, the Vision Jet, and the single-pilot turbines — TBM, M500, M600, M700, PC-12, JetProp. Those are legal single-pilot by type certificate, not by exemption.
The budgets line up. A clean legacy Citation’s price buys a strong TBM or a good PC-12, so these buyers arrive at the top of the turboprop market, where supply is thinnest and inventory is already 12% under last year.
Expect it in the leading indicators first — inquiries, showings, days on market — with price following a quarter or two behind.
The number that should drive your decision
Our airplanes went from listing to closing in a median of 98 days last year. This year that median is 178 days, an 81% increase. Buyers take longer, financing takes longer, pre-buys are more thorough.
At that pace an airplane listed today closes in March, not December. The year-end buyer is the exception — he is working to a December 31 placed-in-service deadline and moves far faster than the median.
Work the calendar backwards from that deadline. From an accepted offer, 30 to 45 days covers scheduling the prebuy, the inspection itself, the acceptance window and then escrow and title. To close before December 31 the offer has to be accepted by about November 15. To have an offer in hand by then, the airplane needs to be in front of buyers by the end of October. That is the whole reason for the date.
Our closings this year came in a median of 4.8% under the ask the airplane carried when it sold, and 7.1% under its original list price. We reduce the ask; we do not haggle.
On the fence about selling? List by October 31
If you own a Meridian, M500, M600, JetProp, TBM, Epic, PC-12 or Vision Jet and you have been going back and forth, here is the case for the next three weeks.
The buyers are shopping now. The displaced Citation owner-pilots are working through their options this quarter, and what they can legally fly is close to that list. An October listing puts your airplane in front of them while the field is thin. A March listing puts it in the spring wave, beside every other owner who had the same idea over the winter.
We took a full-price offer on one of our single-engine turboprops after a week on the market.
The call is yours. The calendar is the part that is not negotiable.
Similar Posts
Avidyne Vantage
For years, Cirrus owners who have the Avidyne Entegra PFD and MFD have been clamoring for Avidyne to come up with some sort of upgrade. The Entegra, or EX 5000 system, is late ’90s technology and, though it still works, there will be a certain point in the future when it gives up the ghost. Avidyne still supports the Entegra system, but it’s hard for a Cirrus owner to see all this new technology coming on the market while not being able to upgrade the original Avidyne screens.
Avidyne gave it a go in the late 2000s with a panel upgrade known as the R9. The R9 was a good system, but Avidyne was very slow on the release (rumors were the company wanted it to be absolutely perfect before releasing it, which frustrated Cirrus, who then switched to the Garmin Perspective panel, leaving Avidyne behind) which led to the R9 only being available as a very expensive retrofit to the Entegra system ($80,000-$90,000 for the system and install). Needless to say, there weren’t that many takers.
Late in 2020, Garmin announced it had received certification to retrofit Avidyne Entegra equipped Cirrus Aircraft with the company’s G500 TXi displays, which gave new hope to G1, G2, and G3 Cirrus owners. The price tag wasn’t outrageous, coming in at $16,000 apiece for each display. The G500 TXi works with any possible GPS that can be installed in a Cirrus (GNS 430Ws, GTN 650s, GTN750, or the Avidyne IFD 540/440) and with the DFC 90 Autopilot (if the Cirrus is still equipped with an STEC 55x, the Autopilot would need to be changed to either a DFC 90 or a Garmin GFC 500).
Fast forward to June of 2021 and Avidyne re-enters the game with the Avidyne Vantage. After the R9 debacle, Avidyne has opted this time to go for a more simple approach. The Avidyne Vantage system changes out the Entegra PFD and MFD with bigger screens (12″; Garmin’s TXi units are only 10.6″) with high quality pixelation, synthetic vision, engine gauges, checklists, charts, a hybrid touch interface, and all the other information that was offered on the Entegra system, just all more modern and updated. The best news is that the system provides redundant reversionary mode, which was one of the biggest complaints about the Entegra system.
The price tag comes in lower than Garmin, with each screen being priced at $12,500. The units will work seamlessly with the Avidyne IFD Series GPS units, though, as of this writing, it isn’t clear if the Avidyne Vantage will work with Garmin GTN 430Ws or the GTN 750/650. I would assume that the integration would be there, but I haven’t found any documentation stating that yet. DFC 90 Autopilot integration would be seamless, but not sure the integration with the STEC 55x or Garmin GFC 500.
Avidyne says the Vantage will be fully certified in early 2022, but the company is taking orders now. Visit the Avidyne Website for more information.
Setting Standards
Type Clubs Lead By Example with Standard Operating Practices
This article appeared in the May 2019 edition of EAA’s Sport Aviation Magazine. It is used with permission. For other articles by Charlie Precourt, please visit EAA.org and join for a full subscription.
Imagine a year when there are no fatal accidents in general aviation. Does that seem impossible? The airlines achieved that many years ago, and so can we if we focus on the right things in our safety pro- grams. In fact, the overall trend in GA accident rates over the last few years is very encouraging. AOPA’s Air Safety Institute published its annual GA Accident Scorecard recently (see www.EAA.org/ extras), revealing fatal accidents from 2008 to 2017 are down more than 30 percent. Nevertheless, there were 185 fatal accidents in 2017, so we still have a long way to go. But, there are many developments in safety programs across GA that can keep the trend going.
One such development that I’ve advocated through a couple of type clubs is establishing standard operating practices (SOP). When I flew for both the U.S. Air Force and NASA, we had what we called standard operating procedures. They were the law for our flying. That is, we had to follow them procedurally because the folks that paid our salaries said so. The objective was to ensure we all used the same playbook, minimizing the risk that one of us might develop a bad in-flight habit that increased risk to the organization.
One way to think about SOPs is to recognize the difference between procedure and technique. For example, you have to follow the manufacturer’s pilot’s operating handbook (procedure)where it says to lower the landing gear before landing. If you don’t, you are in for a bad day. However, it does not tell you exactly when to lower the gear; that’s left to technique.
In the middle, between procedure and technique, is a best practice. In this example, lowering the gear just before the final approach fix is a “standard practice.” It is the generally accepted “best” place to lower the gear. In GA, however, aircraft owners don’t generally answer to a boss, so I prefer the term practices instead of procedures.
However, whether or not someone is paying us to fly, following best practices just makes sense. If you have a good set of practices, they enable you to do things the same way every time, leaving lots of brain cells to manage the unusual, the things that might go wrong. The safest approach to accomplishing a flight task is one that leverages consistency. On the other hand, if you are inconsistent, doing flight tasks differently each time, you’ll always be struggling to keep up. So, in my involvement with the safety committees for both the Malibu Mirage Owners and Pilots Association and the Citation Jet Pilots Association, there has been broad acceptance of recently developed standard operating practices.
The good news in this development is that a culture of safety is growing broadly across most sectors of GA through these type club initiatives. Perhaps more importantly, there is much to learn from each other about the effectiveness of these various initiatives. EAA has seen a four-year drop of 47 percent in fatal accidents among homebuilts! So, there must be something right going on there — a major focus on appropriate transition training before flying a new homebuilt (as a standard operating practice) is paying off.
So, what is covered in the SOPs these type clubs have developed? The following outlines the kinds of standard practices other type clubs have set up and represent SOPs you could establish for yourself regardless of the type of aircraft you fly. You just have to fill in the blanks for your particular type and commit to sticking to them in your flying. These are notional and are practices (not mandatory procedures). They don’t tell you how to fly your aircraft; they give you things to think about when you do. If you take a bit of time to set your own SOPs and then stick with them, you’ll be a far safer pilot. Here are some ideas:
Duty Day
Set the maximum number of hours of flight time during a calendar day and rest hours off between flying days. One example is a maximum of eight hours in the air and a minimum of 10 hours off until flying again.
Cargo
Establish best practices for what you will carry as cargo. One example is no lithium batteries in the baggage compartment.
Flight Planning and Preparation
What are your limitations for the types of flight you’ll take on? Consider SOPs such as designating a suitable alternate airport for all flights. Another might be for first flights after significant maintenance, such as no flight at night or in IMC until a day-VMC functional check flight has been done.
Runway Field Length Guidelines
Establish an appropriate minimum field length for your aircraft and commit to not going into shorter fields. Consider sea level operations and high-altitude airports as well.
Surface Operations
What should be your maximum wind conditions for taxi, takeoff, or landing? Maximum acceptable crosswinds on landing? Set them in your SOP and stick to them.
En Route
Consider establishing practices like no non-operationally necessary conversation below 10,000 feet MSL, during any segment of an approach procedure, or during the last 1,000 feet before leveloff during climb or descent. Also consider declaring “minimum fuel” when the fuel state becomes less than fuel to destination plus 45 minutes at current burn, even if flying day VFR.
Approach and Landing
Consider establishing personal minimums in your SOPs for things like visual approaches. Perhaps use a 1,500-foot ceiling and 3 miles’ visibility for day and 5 miles for night, even though these exceed the FAA’s requirements.
Pilot Limitations, Training, & Currency
FAR Part 91 rules allow us to fly with pretty marginal levels of currency. Consider setting your own SOP to something more appropriate for the kind of aircraft you fly and the kind of flying you do in it. For example, consider these ideas as SOPs:
- If you have less than 100 hours of time-in-type or have not flown at least 15 hours as pilot in command in the last 90 days, use a minimum planned fuel reserve of one hour.
- Also, if flying IFR in this situation, use a minimum visibility for takeoff of 1 mile.
- On instrument approaches, increase the published minimums by one- half mile visibility and add 200 feet to the decision altitude or minimum descent altitude.
- Perform landings at a weight that allows a full stop in 60 percent of available runway length.
- Consider an SOP that establishes you will fly with a CFI on a refresher flight before flying as pilot in command if you have not logged at least an hour of flight time and one takeoff and landing in an aircraft of the same type within the preceding 45 days.
Maneuver Standards
Wherever there are “techniques” associated with things like takeoffs and climbs, cruise, use of autopilot, power settings, and approaches and landings, you can write down your preferred technique as your own SOP. Describe each maneuver in enough detail (speeds, altitudes, power settings, configurations, etc.) to define a routine you will use each time. This ensures you fly consistently each flight and leverage the power of the standard operating practice, that is, to give you the bandwidth you need should you encounter an unexpected event or an emergency.
SOPs are among the exciting concepts underway to make safety programs work for us. Hats off to type clubs like MMOPA and CJP and many others that are taking the initiative. But even if you’re not in this kind of group, you can still set up your own SOPs. Let’s all look forward to our first year in GA without a fatal accident — and let’s make it soon!
Fly safe!
Charlie Precourt is a former NASA chief astronaut, space shuttle commander, and Air Force test pilot. He built a VariEze, owns a Piper JetPROP, and is a member of the EAA board of directors.
A Flying Car in the Future?
EAA Airventure at Osh Kosh always draws great innovators every year, leading the aviation consumer to discover something new and different. Flying cars have always been a dream for the everyday pilot. Why not fly to work? Why not park the plane in the parking lot? Why not drive from the runway onto the freeway? All excellent questions!
Well, Samson Motorworks is trying to make those dreams a reality. Samson’s Switchblade flying car is in the (hopefully) finally stages of development this summer. The company expects to be able to conduct test flights early next year, then begin selling the experimental kit.
The Samson Switchblade will be in the Experimental category, but Samson has a builder assist program that only adds $20,000 to the final cost of the kit. The total price of the kit, which comes 49% completed and only takes 3 weeks to complete with the builder assist program, comes in at $140,000. That includes the engine, avionics (it’s equipped with Dynon’s 7″ Skyview glass panel display, a Dynon radio and transponder, a Dynon intercom, a Dynon AOA, an iPad mini, and an ADS-B GPS), and the builder assist program. Similar to a Cirrus, it is also equipped with a Ballistic Parachute Recovery system.
The Samson Switchblade has several different engine options, including a supercharged, liquid cooled, V-4 similar to a Corvette engine that will produce 190 HP. Max cruise in the air should be around 170 knots. The Switchblade will hold 30 gallons of mogas, burn 9 GPH in the air, and get 35 mpg on the ground. The gross weight will be 1,750 pounds.
How does the car to plane transition happen? Samson has developed a fly by wire system to retract the rudder down while the car is in drive mode. The wings use a mechanical linkage to fold up into the belly.
There are several different packages for the Samson Switchblade: the Snowbird, the Aurora, and the Trek options. Details can be found on Samson’s website.
I, for one, will be keeping an eye on the freeways next summer to keep an eye out for cars sprouting wings. No more traffic jams!
Lightspeed Tango Headset
I recently purchased the new, wireless, Lightspeed Tango headset. I’m a little OCD, so when a headset wire is banging against my shoulder while I’m trying to tune a radio or point something out, it’s a little annoying. A headset without the wires caught my eye.
As I’ve stated before in a previous article, I really like Lightspeed headsets. They are more comfortable than Bose, and a little bit more affordable too. The noise canceling quality is very high in the different Lightspeed models. I personally believe it got even better with the Lightspeed Tango.
Let’s talk about the obvious first. Not having a wire connecting you to the headset jacks is really nice. You’re not tethered to anything, so your head is free to move anywhere without getting yanked back in place. Lightspeed developed a new technology, called Lightspeed Link, which bypasses Bluetooth or Wifi and connects the Panel Interface to the headset wirelessly.
The Link technology works pretty well. The only problem I have noticed is in certain airplanes, I occasionally lose one ear, but after I wiggle the input wires around, the deaf ear comes back up. It may be a loose connector in the plane itself.
The really nice thing about the Lightspeed Tango is the fact that it doesn’t need AA batteries anymore. Lightspeed put rechargeable lithium ion batteries in both the Panel Interface and the headset. You get 12 hours of battery life out of both, far surpassing any length of time you would want to be in an airplane. If the battery dies, there is a handy aux cable that can connect the Panel Interface directly to the headset (the ion batteries recharge with the included wall charger and USB cables in 2 hours).
Though the Lightspeed Tango is slightly heavier than the Zulu 2 due to the Link hardware and the lithium ion battery, it is still extremely comfortable. The ear cups actually fit better over my ears and give me a better seal with glasses on then the Zulu 2 did. As with all Lightspeed products, there is no squeezing of my head and the cushions on top of the headset sit very comfortably on top of my head.
The Bluetooth is much simpler to use than the Zulu 2 and definitely simpler than the Bose A20. Sound quality is very good for phone calls and music. The volume control on the headset itself is set to make smaller adjustments so you don’t have to deal with wide swings in volume.
Overall, I’m a big fan of the Lightspeed Tango. I am recommending them to all the pilots I talk to. Rolling in at $400 cheaper than the Bose, you can’t go wrong.
Utilizing Personal Minimums
The FAA defines personal minimums “as an individual pilot’s set of procedures, rules, criteria, and guidelines for deciding whether and under what conditions to operate (or continue operating) in the National Airspace System.” Have you actually given thought as to why we choose the personal minimums we do? From the beginning of initial pilot training, weather minimums were established for day-to-day training and during solo flight. I didn’t realize it at first, but I later learned these limits were not just an insurance mandate, but these minimums were set at the time to safely operate an aircraft based on my “then” current experience.
So here’s the question: what are your personal minimums and WHY do YOU have them? Do you ever lower or raise your minimums? Are your minimums based solely on your overall experience level or do they take into account other variables such as advanced avionics? For pilots that fly multiple aircraft like I do, can and do your minimums change in regard to category or type of aircraft you are flying? It’s a judgment decision on how you chose your minimums. However, it’s important that time is taken before you strap into the cockpit for each flight to critically think about the different risk factors and variables which may affect your decision for the minimums you choose.
To guide us, let’s try briefly apply the FAA’s Personal Minimums Checklist to see how risk factors might shape what personal minimums or decisions we make for the day. Remember, just because you have been flying with a certain set of minimums one day, doesn’t mean you can’t adjust your minimums to a higher value given an ever-changing situation.
The acronym most pilots have heard is PAVE:
Pilot– We all should be familiar with the acronym IMSAFE associated with this. It addresses variables such as Illness, Medication, Stress, Alcohol, Fatigue, and Emotion. But how do you adjust your personal minimums using this guideline? Have you ever thought about raising your minimums for a training flight if you only got 4-6 hours of sleep, instead of 8? Or if you anticipate a hard IFR flight with a long day, maybe taking a safety pilot to mitigate the chance of a mistake if you’re forecasting having to shoot an approach to your weather planning minimums.
Aircraft– Personally, this is a really important factor for me when deciding what minimums to apply. I often spend a large majority of my time asking myself; is this aircraft properly equipped for the flight? This question goes beyond just looking at the logbook for a properly equipped and legal aircraft. A professional pilot should think further. Am I flying a traditional 6-pack “steam gauge” layout, non-slaved compass card, with a separate OBS gauge for course guidance? What if the aircraft doesn’t have an auto-pilot? What if I’m flying an aircraft equipped with a dual auto-pilot, dual GPS with an integrated glass cockpit? I can comfortably say my personal minimums change depending on the equipment I have available.
A pilot should also look at his/her recency with the aircraft. For example, if you are qualified to fly both airplanes and helicopters, maybe you should choose to have higher personal minimums in one particular airframe or if you haven’t flown that airframe within 30, 60 or 90 days. This is a very important factor for the owner/pilot.
EnVironment– Most of the time, when we think of environment, we ask ourselves, is the weather legal for me to take off and, more importantly, can I conduct this flight safely? Basic flight planning should have taught us to take into consideration crosswind limits, day versus night, and the type of airspace the flight is conducted in. Thought should also be given to how you set your personal minimums in regards to the particular type of environment you might rarely encounter. Flying an approach to your minimums in the flat plains of Texas during the day is one thing, but how would you adjust your weather minimums flying to a new airport, at night, with no moon illumination, in the mountains of Colorado? Could you reduce the risk and adjust your minimums in this scenario with two pilots?
External Pressures – What external pressures are affecting your flight? Passengers, the owner, “get-there-it is”, the desire to impress someone? Although external pressures should never be a factor when conducting a flight, they almost always play a role in your decision whether to conduct the flight or not. For example, a professional pilot gets hired to do a flight and the weather is below their personal minimums. The pilot could be tempted to lower their minimums by 100 feet to take the flight for a paying customer. This scenario plays out every day across the country whether it’s a professional pilot or owner/pilot. It would be foolish not to consider this type of pressure. Always make sure you have a plan if and when you encounter this situation. Planning your flight and having a plan to deal with these potential scenarios ahead of time ensures you stick to your minimums. It can be as simple as telling your passengers, or the owner, well ahead of your flight what your personal minimums are to accept the flight, and to ensure they, or you, have a back-up plan!
Most pilots will never break a hard limitation such as an airframe cross wind limitation, or engine limit, but the chances of breaking a personal minimum are realistic. Think about the last time you went on a diet and broke your plan because you were tempted by your friends or family during an outing. Self-imposed personal minimums can be hard to enforce and we need to acknowledge this as humans. Here are a few techniques that you can use to assist in making a decision using personal minimums and help reduce the influence of external pressures.
Step 1: Sit down with your CFI/CFII and fill out a personal minimums worksheet. Filling one out by yourself is a good start but having an outside objective view will help in making sure your personal minimums are realistic. Remember, it is easy to convince ourselves that we can do something even though we have set personal minimums. Talk with other pilots to see if you have set realistic expectations.
Step 2: Preflight planning must start a few days in advanced. It can be as easy as checking what the forecast might be and looking at the projected route, near-by alternate airports, and various approaches. This can be done quickly and will give you a heads up on whether the flight can be safely conducted or not. By alerting the passengers or owner early enough, alternate plans can be developed. An extra pilot can be added, the passengers can fly commercial, bring along a CFI, or cancel the trip altogether and seek alternate transportation. The main point is the decision was made well ahead of the flight when conditions didn’t look favorable. This helps in removing external pressures and ensures you don’t go below your personal minimums.
Step 3: Never be afraid to ask for a second opinion. Part 135 operators have set procedures for conducting flights which assist the pilots in making decisions. These set procedures help remove external pressures by allowing the pilot to say, “The rules don’t allow for this, or this is how we will conduct the flight!” However, under Part 91, the pilot has to take ownership for all phases of the flight. This is where talking it out with another pilot helps with mitigating external factors and the environment. Ideally, this person should have more experience and be able to talk through the situation. For instance, if I’m flying to a new destination, I often seek the advice from another pilot who’s familiar with the area. They may have key insights into weather patterns, preferred approaches, or hazards to avoid. In certain situations, asking for another pilot’s opinion might be what influences your go/no-go decision! You’ll be amazed how much you can learn just from talking to other pilots.
Step 4: Continue to build your experience and knowledge base. Building experience requires us to push our abilities, and sometimes this may be to the limit. However, this can be done in a controlled training environment or just going out and experiencing it. Get a new license, fly regularly with a CFI/CFII, and always try and take advantage of training opportunities. For example on your next flight from point A to point B, practice hand flying an approach, do a short field landing, a quick steep turn, etc. Quality flight time is always better than quantity. Continue to challenge yourself and try not to become complacent.
Personal minimums are a tool to assist in every pilot’s aeronautical decision making process. Use your personal minimums to guide your final go/no-go decision and remember to stick to the plan. I encourage you to review the FAA’s Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2). Appendix B has Sample Risk Management Scenarios and reviewing them will give a better understanding how to apply the techniques discussed to your everyday flying.
Pedro Vargas-Lebron is a King Air 200 and uH-60 Blackhawk Instructor pilot with the Texas Army National Guard. Pedro is a CFI/CFII/MEI both in airplanes and helicopters with over 4000 hours of flight time, half as an instructor pilot.
Epic E1000 Gets the GFC 700
When the Epic E1000 was finally certified in the spring of 2020, there was much celebrating across the aviation world. Epic Aircraft expended a lot of time and energy getting the E1000 certified and into production (more information on that journey here and in Flying Magazine here).
The airplane is amazing. In the single engine, 6 seat turboprop market, it easily blows away the competition. With it’s 1,200 SHP PT6-67A, it has double the horsepower of the M600 (600 SHP), and 350 more horsepower than the TBM 940 (850 SHP). It’s 60 KTAS faster than the M600 and, even though the TBM can keep up (both airplanes have equal top cruise speeds of 330 KTAS), the Epic E1000 can carry a payload of 1,024 pounds with full fuel, while the 940 can only carry 584 pounds with full fuel. The TBM carries about 15 minutes more of fuel, but to me, that’s pretty negligible.
Did I mention climb rates? The E1000 climbs at an average of 1500 FPM at Vy (it’s capable of 4,000 FPM), making it to 25,000 feet in 10 minutes. The TBM climbs at 1000 FPM, taking 13 minutes to climb to the same altitude, while the M600 settles in at about 800 FPM, reaching FL250 in 21 minutes.
If you expand the comparison to include the Pilatus PC-12, the two airplanes have 1,200 SHP, but the Epic is 50 KTAS faster and they both have about the same weight carrying ability.
In the most important arena, price, the E1000 is around a million dollars cheaper than the TBM 940.
The one drawback to the Epic E1000 that immediately was noticeable was the autopilot. Epic originally installed the STEC 2100 autopilot to pair with the G1000 (and later the G1000 NXi). Epic decided to stick with the STEC 2100 through certification for the plane since that autopilot was on all of the E1000s paperwork going through all the levels of FAA approval. To change to the GFC 700 during the certification process would have been a massive undertaking that probably would have delayed certification.
The STEC 2100 is a good autopilot, but, as any G1000 pilot can tell you, the lack of integration between any STEC autopilot and Garmin panel leaves some to be desired. Not all the bugs talk, which often requires dual data entry, which can lead to forgetting to do both the bug and the autopilot when things get busy. Hello, altitude deviation.
The goal for Epic was never to leave the STEC autopilot in the airplane. The first E1000s were rolled off the line with the STEC, but Epic didn’t take long to change the autopilot to the much more integrated Garmin GFC 700. That took place this winter (2020), and the E1000 received it’s first upgrade, with Epic dubbing the airplane the Epic E1000 GX.
I expect the innovators in Bend, OR, where Epic is based and where tons of innovation in aviation happens (Lancair/Columbia started in Bend while RDD is based there as well), to quickly come out with more avionics upgrades for the airplane. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a G3000 version at some point, complete with auto throttles and the new Garmin Autoland. Epic would be smart to follow in the steps of Daher and offer two models, one with the G1000 and one with the G3000 (the TBM 910 has the G1000 NXi while the TBM 940 has the G3000).
I have yet to fly in an Epic E1000, but I would certainly jump at the chance to do so. Someone asked me yesterday what airplane I would buy if I had a blank check. With the GFC 700 now in the Epic, it would absolutely be the E1000 GX.
