I absolutely LOVE my 2015 SR22 and although some of the G6 features are appealing, I agree that the Fadec would be THE reason for Cirrus to unveil the G7…which should allow for Autoland.
I’m holding off until then…the SF50 just does not have the carrying capacity/range to make such a leap.
Seat locking mechanism. Time to upgrade from the 1950’s design. Something from, say, the 1990’s will be a welcome improvement.
I’d be happy if the rear headset jacks were actually in the rear. I HATE leaving the a20 boxes strung across the floor so my kids can step on them
They should be on the rear side panels…
As am I! I have a 2015 SR22 GTS and it is amazing, but I’m flying it for a decade unless FADEC/Auto throttle is introduced.
The Cirrus is quite advanced for a piston, but how is it more advanced than say the M350? For instance computer controlled pressurization system, built in pulse-ox, ground heating with a GPU, 110V as well as USB power front and rear, internal and external baggage compartments, speed brakes, fold flat seats at all positions, 3-D volumetric radar with ground clutter suppression and turbulence detection, control of XM music from the passenger cabin, sat phone for passengers isolated from crew…. That actually may be turbine only, not sure.
Al I can say is that it’s lucky for Cirrus that a Meridian, M500 or M600 will not fit in my hangar, as the wingspan is several feet too big to fit.
I love my Cirrus, but I miss really turbine power.
And yes, I am painfully aware the Vi$ion Jet will fit inside the hangar perfectly…
Dont be so sure, the “fit in a T-hangar” is a marketing gimmick, it did not fit in mine so I had to find a different hangar (3x the cost). The issue is the distance from the back of the wings to the nose.
Carbon fiber…
Maybe I need to measure it exactly…
The SR is mostly fiberglass, except for the spar. The SF is extensively CF, as you know well!
Yes, that’s the one that typically fails for a jet in a T-hangar. I’m in a large Port-a-Port T-hangar that works, other than it’s a leaky POS with no electricity.
Rear-mounted engines require a lot of stuff up front to balance them out.
From someone who has been there, you really seem to be overglamorizing it, don’t you think?
The M350 is quite a bit more expensive than a Cirrus SR22T. Certainly it has cutting edge technology, and it sold 15 airplanes in 2020.
In contrast Cirrus sold 347 SEPs.
Cirrus sold 76 SF50s compared to Piper’s 43 total for M500/600.
The market has spoken. The Cirrus is in the sweet spot folks are looking for, whether in SEPs or SEJ/SETPs and are willing to wait more than a year to get their hands on one.
Here are the 2020 revenue for the 3 companies being discussed:
Cirrus: $492m
Piper: $235m
Diamond: $146m
Yeah, I omitted the spiders and lizards and rust stains. It’s a family site! 
All control surfaces are metal. A Diamond is carbon fiber on everything.
I’m flying both my SR20-G6 and a DA42-VI (brand new) regularly now, taking my AMEL. The Diamond construction is on another level, similar to the SF50.
I disagree with “most advanced” anything on an SR. It’s a project from the 90s with an engine from the 50s. You can get a G1000 in any airplane today, and even the experimental touch panels are much nicer than the NXi. The SR doesn’t even have a radar option. I like my plane for what it is, but there’s nothing special about it.
Gordon’s hangar is half hangar, half legend.
If I’m going to spend more $$ than a SR22T, the next airplane won’t be a piston.
Not disagreeing, but to be fair, the SR-20 was launched in 1999, and the DA-42 was launched in 2004. It’s not like they’re that different in heritage. Certainly the engines in the Diamond are a more modern design. I’d love a chance to fly in a recent Diamond twin (ideally a 62). From the videos I’ve watched, they do seem to be very very nicely constructed.
I’d be happy to take you up on the 62 next summer.
The 42 is very well built but nothing too modern about it. Its CG limits are super narrow, which is quite annoying. Modern Diamond stuff would be the 62 and 50.