E-190 Vs. C700
 

Sorry if this has been discussed at great lengths but searched and nothing came up. Possible rumor of E-jets at QX, was wondering if anyone has flown both could compare the performance or just explain some of the performance characteristics of the E-jet. I heard they are slower and can not climb as high. Just curious. Thanks.:cool:

E170- Mach .83, FL410.
CRJ700?

yeah... same with the crj 700. but it better be brand spankin new, and empty, and with min fuel to get that high, and go that fast.

I asked this in my original post "Anyone flown a ERJ 170 or 190" but I am wondering about the operating costs; as in which one is more expensive to operate. Does anyone have an idea?

Sounds pretty comparable. Is that a 76 seat config.? Anyone know what the typical seating capacity for the 190/195?

.85 Mach and can climb at 2000 fpm even above fl 350

guess the crj wins

i wouldn't take slaphappys word for it,,,, after reading his post he doesn't seem...."right"

uh no.

try 500-1000fpm at .77 high speed or .74 standard climb. typically above FL370 500fpm is a "good" climb rate to maintain a speed. you can climb at 2000fpm but you may see what happens to slow CRJ's (albeit the example we have was a 200).

62,000# is typically the magic weight for FL390+ in the 700. 67000# is the magic number typically for FL390.

http://www.embraercommercialjets.com...p?tela=summary

states E-170 is M.82. crj 700 is .85. the 700 loves speed and will accelerate to this in the mid to higher 30's. you will only get about .79-.80 at FL410. fun airplane to fly as i'm sure the e-170 is. the crj also slows fairly quickly clean under the 1nm per 10kts old adage. i've seen 250 to the marker in it.

e-170 is newer and thus more "technologically" advanced.

i've heard that the e170 is more thirsty than the RJ (it has the same engines as the CRJ-900 I believe) and costs more with maint... But, from a passenger standpoint, the E170 wins.