Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Falcon 900EX vs. G-IV SP

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web


Well-known member
Apr 24, 2006
Hey guys - The boss' are looking to buy a new airplane and are asking about real world fuel burn numbers. Can someone give me the fuel burn #'s for a flight from VNY-HPN and VNY-PDX for a F900 and G4?

Does anyone have any custom Fltplan.com F900 and G4 performance profiles that I can use? I would just need your user name and "N" number. You can PM me.

Thanks for the help!
GLF4 #'s

VNY-HPN - 13,400# @ .80 / FL450

VNY-PDX - 5,900# @ .80 / FL430

I'd be willing to be that the F900 burns are 30% less than than the G-IV, plus just ask the boss what aircraft he would rather be in over the North Atlantic if 2 engines quit....;)
Last edited:
And onboard his Falcon 900 with three TFE-731 engines rather than two Rolls RB-611's he'll have about 30 more chances of engine failures.

Fltplan.com actually has a 900EX profile...I presume the cruise speed is 0.80M:

VNY-TEB is 5+11 and 9775lb burn @ FL450; 5+01 and 10,708lb @ FL410.

VNY-PDX is 1+56 and 4562lb @ FL430; 1+55 & 4784lb @ FL400.
A few years ago I made a comprehensive study between the 900EX and the G-IVSP.

To make a long story short, I visited both factories, we took a number of demo flights in and out of Aspen, from OKC non-stop to London and back, to Bogotá and to islands in the Caribbean in both aircraft. I contacted some operators of both type aircraft to get realistic operating costs.

The end result was that we bought the 900EX, primary reasons were high and hot performance and the comfort of having three engines for the trans Pacific and Atlantic crossings. Around 20f and lower the Falcon 900EX can go from Aspen to London non-stop (with good VFR weather in England), the G-IVSP can not, no matter the temperature.

As for my personal feeling; I liked both aircraft very much, the 900 was nicer hand flying aircraft than the G-IVSP, but not enough to be factored into the decision of which aircraft to buy.

I'll try and find the report I summited to my boss and if I can find it I'll post it here, but in truth I believe it is long gone, along with 900EX when the boss got poor and he had to sell it and replace it with a Falcon 50EX.

In any case, I envy you, because doing such a study is a lot of fun. And do tour both factories, that was a blast.

So have fun and good luck.
Typed and flown both quite a bit some time ago. They are both fantastic planes. But, when you get down to brass tacks, heads of state, CEO's, Kings & Queens, US Military have more Gulfstreams in service for a reason. Reputation, reliability & Customer Service.
I think the boss has a pretty bad case of the "G" fever too. Maybe I'll get to try on that grandiose Gulfstream swagger you guys have!


Latest resources