Plane Perfection

Guest Discussion
1

I’m in the process of making, what I consider to be, a most important step in my flying career-- the purchase of a high performance aircraft. I have tried some of aircraft out there and have found them to be disappointing(mainly the Skylane). When I approached mechanic’s, CFI’s and old timers with a question of preference they as a group steer me towards either Mooney’s or Bonanza’s. What I’d like to know is what mission did “you” intend for your “Cirrus aircraft” and did you pick your plane for it’s revolutionary design or flight characteristics. I have flown one other plane that seems to be interesting and overlooked, a Trinidad, and would like to know if in your selection process if that plane was considered. As a follow-up to these questions, I’d like to know for what reasons did prior Cirrus owner’s elect to sell their aircraft. And, what aircraft they moved into and if it was for a short-coming with the Cirrus aircraft.Thanks in advance for your collective answers!

Chris

2

I’m in the process of making, what I consider to be, a most important step in my flying career-- the purchase of a high performance aircraft. I have tried some of aircraft out there and have found them to be disappointing(mainly the Skylane). When I approached mechanic’s, CFI’s and old timers with a question of preference they as a group steer me towards either Mooney’s or Bonanza’s. What I’d like to know is what mission did “you” intend for your “Cirrus aircraft” and did you pick your plane for it’s revolutionary design or flight characteristics. I have flown one other plane that seems to be interesting and overlooked, a Trinidad, and would like to know if in your selection process if that plane was considered. As a follow-up to these questions, I’d like to know for what reasons did prior Cirrus owner’s elect to sell their aircraft. And, what aircraft they moved into and if it was for a short-coming with the Cirrus aircraft.Thanks in advance for your collective answers!

Chris

Hi Chris,

I own a Socata Tobago now, and the Trinidad was the only other plane I considered outside the Cirrus.

I think The Trinidad is a great plane, the only other “modern” design really available, but…

Its complex

Its performance is similar to the SR20 yet it costs TWICE as much

Its slower than the SR22 yet costs more

The Cirrus has better avionics

No parachute

Etc, etc.

The Cirrus won for me, and I get my new SR22 in 6 weeks! Get a test flight in the Cirrus, you’ll be hooked.

Best of luck,

Jeff

SR22 #085 N916LJ

BTW, I also found that “old timers” will always steer you to “old timer” airplanes designed when the “old timers” were not so old…

Mooney? Cramped, outdated, overpriced

Bonanza? Less cramped, still outdated, grossly overpriced

3

I’d like to know for what reasons did prior Cirrus owner’s elect to sell their aircraft. And, what aircraft they moved into and if it was for a short-coming with the Cirrus aircraft.Thanks in advance for your collective answers!

Chris:

I am a position holder for a SR22 and currently a partner in a Bonanza 36. I have several reasons for deciding to buy the Cirrus.

The value for your dollar is significantly better than a new Bonanza or Mooney. A similarly equipped Bonanza is close to $600K (!) and a Mooney is about $500K.

The SR22 is faster than the Bonanza and slightly slower than the Mooney but with fixed gear: significantly less maintenance and insurance cost.

The SR22 is roomier than the Mooney and more comfortable than the Bonanza. I always knew I hated having that damn yoke in my lap, but I didnÂ’t realize how claustrophobic it was until I sat in that SR22. And the visibility is much better, especially over the nose.

The Cirrus is a clean-sheet design that takes advantage of current materials and design technology. The Bonanza is a 1940s (!) design and reflects the limitations of that era, and the Mooney is only slightly newer. While there is some comfort that can be taken in flying a proven aircraft, I believe that the stringent FAA approval process, better materials, and CirrusÂ’ dedication to the aircraft (as evidenced here by almost unanimous praise of their post-sale responsiveness and candor) outweighs the newness factor.

We had a $17,000 annual last year in the Bonanza, and this year we were happy to pay “only” $7,500. ‘Nuff said as far as part and maintenance cost differences.

For my typical mission, 300 NM over mountainous terrain, with light loads, I want an airplane that can climb over terrain, weather, and turbulence, in ISA +20 conditions, but donÂ’t want the maintenance issues and possible dead-end (leaded fuel issue) of a turbocharged engine. In my demo ride in the SR22, with two adults on board we easily pegged the VSI at 2000 feet/minute. You can still get 1000 FPM at 9,000 feet. I am lucky to get half those numbers in the Bonanza (mineÂ’s a 285HP IO-520). Case in point: coming out of Phoenix last month with 4 adults and bags (but still 250 lbs under gross) in my Bonanza it took me 23 minutes to get to 8,500 MSL. These were not happy minutes. There was terrain, it was hot and bumpy, and I couldnÂ’t help thinking that in the SR22 IÂ’d have been at altitude in 8 minutes and probably would have gone to 10,500.

The simplicity factor was not an issue for me. I used to fly for a living many years ago and I actually like having lots to do in the airplane. IÂ’ll kinda miss the gear, prop, and cowl flaps.

I will not miss the vacuum system at all. I am still a bit wary of everything electric, but if the dual-bus system in the SR22 has been implemented properly than the failure risk and management thereof, and the much better “partial panel” situation, are far superior to the very real and potentially deadly prospect of vacuum failure. And I don’t care how proficient you are partial panel – you can get very dead that way. Case in point: a very well known Bonanza flight instructor (a BPPP instructor) and his family died in a low-overcast vacuum failure on takeoff accident just last year. The Governor Carnahan accident was another recent high-profile example. This risk should (big should) be less, but not eliminated, in the SR22. (I’ll still have backup.)

My wife likes the ‘chute. And, kicking and screaming, if I’m night IFR over the mountains etc., I have to admit that my butt pucker factor will be a notch lower.

Go for it.

4

I’m in the process of making, what I consider to be, a most important step in my flying career-- the purchase of a high performance aircraft. I have tried some of aircraft out there and have found them to be disappointing(mainly the Skylane). When I approached mechanic’s, CFI’s and old timers with a question of preference they as a group steer me towards either Mooney’s or Bonanza’s. What I’d like to know is what mission did “you” intend for your “Cirrus aircraft” and did you pick your plane for it’s revolutionary design or flight characteristics. I have flown one other plane that seems to be interesting and overlooked, a Trinidad, and would like to know if in your selection process if that plane was considered. As a follow-up to these questions, I’d like to know for what reasons did prior Cirrus owner’s elect to sell their aircraft. And, what aircraft they moved into and if it was for a short-coming with the Cirrus aircraft.Thanks in advance for your collective answers!

Chris

as far as i can tell, the reasons that prior owners have sold their aircraft are as follows :

  • mostly to upgrade ( i bought my sr20 from someone who was taking delivery of a 22 and i am selling my 20 next year when my 21 arrives)

  • a number of people bought more than 1 position, speculating on future price etc

  • while searching for my plane, i came across a couple of people selling due to nasdaq losses. no-one i came across was selling due to shortcomings with the aircraft

your other questions have been answered fully already i think - personally i did not look at any other aircraft, the parachute alone was enoughfor me as it makes me feel more comfortable crossing water and mountains on my weekly journey from england to southern france. having the parachute also means that most people i know have overcome their fear of light aircraft and are happy to come flying with me, which certainly was not the case before.

5

I’m in the process of making, what I consider to be, a most important step in my flying career-- the purchase of a high performance aircraft. I have tried some of aircraft out there and have found them to be disappointing(mainly the Skylane). When I approached mechanic’s, CFI’s and old timers with a question of preference they as a group steer me towards either Mooney’s or Bonanza’s. What I’d like to know is what mission did “you” intend for your “Cirrus aircraft” and did you pick your plane for it’s revolutionary design or flight characteristics. I have flown one other plane that seems to be interesting and overlooked, a Trinidad, and would like to know if in your selection process if that plane was considered. As a follow-up to these questions, I’d like to know for what reasons did prior Cirrus owner’s elect to sell their aircraft. And, what aircraft they moved into and if it was for a short-coming with the Cirrus aircraft.Thanks in advance for your collective answers!

Chris

Not so much to do with the plane but check and double check the CPI issue. Do some costs based on contract period and the index for the past year, then project forward for the contract period to guess-t-mate. Depending on timing, it could be significant.

M. Myers

6

Chris,

First of all, I’d venture to guess every single person who has bought an airplane has spent no less than ^^!#@ hours searching for that perfect plane. No surprise that there is no perfect plane, so you settle for the best available. Gordon’s post below does as good a job extolling the virtues of the Cirrus as I’ve read. CD should use that.

Currently, I fly a 260SE, which is modified version of a 182 airframe. It has a canrad, new engine, new everything…except for the airframe. I chose this from all the planes available at the time (the SR22 was not) based on price and performance. Performance being 150kt cruise - 30kt stall - steep turns at 50kts - 350 ft landing - full 182 carrying load.

Of new airplanes, the value you get out of Cirrus and Lancair is undeniably one full level better than anything else out there. Still, there are a lot of solid airplanes you can purchase used and fix up. For an investment of 300K, cost of a new 22, you can end up with a really nice airplane, few thousand hours TT, even a nice twin. You could even end up with a Bonanza like the AOPA plane - which is going to be unreal!

But they are not new. How much does new matter to you? How much does new matter to your passengers? How much will it matter in ANOTHER 20 years, when that 1973 airframe you bought instead is now 50 years old. The truth is, it shouldn’t matter but it might.

A new plane will be smoother and quieter. Better ergonomics. Does it fly better? Not necessarily better, but as well and with more comfort. Does that matter? How about visability? My single favorite thing about the Cirrus is how much you get to see. To me, that’s why I fly, so to me that’s a big plus. A new plane will also be yours and only yours. You’ll know every story about it. Every landing. That’s nice.

The point of all of this is: yes, do the math, pay attention to all the basics everyone will tell you: what’s your mission? what will you need 90% of the time? BUT don’t forget to listen to your heart. I mean, buying an airplane almost never makes sense, but is almost always worth it.

Which one will get your pulse up?

7

BTW, I also found that “old timers” will always steer you to “old timer” airplanes designed when the “old timers” were not so old…

Mooney? Cramped, outdated, overpriced

Bonanza? Less cramped, still outdated, grossly overpriced

Jeff: You may be interested in an article posted to www.avweb.com dated 7-9-01 to the effect that Mooney has not paid it’s county property taxes usually paid in May of each year. Mooney is denying financial problems, but the tax collector says the taxes have not been paid.

8

Gordon: Great answer. It is hard to add anything else. I also think you hit the nail on the head as to what part the CAPS played in the decision - Passengers love it.

One discussion point I might add is that if you, Chris or anyone else is considering the SR2X compared to either used planes in similar price classes or even to rebuilding a run out plane, let’s say a T182RG, is no matter how much you replace your still have 10, 15 or 20 year old sheet metal and other components. This means a higher potential for corrosion, metal fatigue aond other hidden defects.

Also, as planes age, they tend to have higher maintenance costs. With a factory new plane, Cirrus or otherwise, you will have warranties and factory support.

Marty

9

No one knows yet whether Cirrus will come close to Beech’s exhorbitant parts’ cost. Parts are a good way to boost profits after the warranty period ends. But I’d bet they would never meet or excede Beech’s prices.

We had a $17,000 annual last year in the Bonanza, and this year we were happy to pay “only” $7,500. ‘Nuff said as far as part and maintenance cost differences.

10

I’d like to know for what reasons did prior Cirrus owner’s elect to sell their aircraft. And, what aircraft they moved into and if it was for a short-coming with the Cirrus aircraft.Thanks in advance for your collective answers!

Chris:

I am a position holder for a SR22 and currently a partner in a Bonanza 36. I have several reasons for deciding to buy the Cirrus.

The value for your dollar is significantly better than a new Bonanza or Mooney. A similarly equipped Bonanza is close to $600K (!) and a Mooney is about $500K.

The SR22 is faster than the Bonanza and slightly slower than the Mooney but with fixed gear: significantly less maintenance and insurance cost.

The SR22 is roomier than the Mooney and more comfortable than the Bonanza. I always knew I hated having that damn yoke in my lap, but I didnÂ’t realize how claustrophobic it was until I sat in that SR22. And the visibility is much better, especially over the nose.

The Cirrus is a clean-sheet design that takes advantage of current materials and design technology. The Bonanza is a 1940s (!) design and reflects the limitations of that era, and the Mooney is only slightly newer. While there is some comfort that can be taken in flying a proven aircraft, I believe that the stringent FAA approval process, better materials, and CirrusÂ’ dedication to the aircraft (as evidenced here by almost unanimous praise of their post-sale responsiveness and candor) outweighs the newness factor.

We had a $17,000 annual last year in the Bonanza, and this year we were happy to pay “only” $7,500. ‘Nuff said as far as part and maintenance cost differences.

For my typical mission, 300 NM over mountainous terrain, with light loads, I want an airplane that can climb over terrain, weather, and turbulence, in ISA +20 conditions, but donÂ’t want the maintenance issues and possible dead-end (leaded fuel issue) of a turbocharged engine. In my demo ride in the SR22, with two adults on board we easily pegged the VSI at 2000 feet/minute. You can still get 1000 FPM at 9,000 feet. I am lucky to get half those numbers in the Bonanza (mineÂ’s a 285HP IO-520). Case in point: coming out of Phoenix last month with 4 adults and bags (but still 250 lbs under gross) in my Bonanza it took me 23 minutes to get to 8,500 MSL. These were not happy minutes. There was terrain, it was hot and bumpy, and I couldnÂ’t help thinking that in the SR22 IÂ’d have been at altitude in 8 minutes and probably would have gone to 10,500.

The simplicity factor was not an issue for me. I used to fly for a living many years ago and I actually like having lots to do in the airplane. IÂ’ll kinda miss the gear, prop, and cowl flaps.

I will not miss the vacuum system at all. I am still a bit wary of everything electric, but if the dual-bus system in the SR22 has been implemented properly than the failure risk and management thereof, and the much better “partial panel” situation, are far superior to the very real and potentially deadly prospect of vacuum failure. And I don’t care how proficient you are partial panel – you can get very dead that way. Case in point: a very well known Bonanza flight instructor (a BPPP instructor) and his family died in a low-overcast vacuum failure on takeoff accident just last year. The Governor Carnahan accident was another recent high-profile example. This risk should (big should) be less, but not eliminated, in the SR22. (I’ll still have backup.)

My wife likes the ‘chute. And, kicking and screaming, if I’m night IFR over the mountains etc., I have to admit that my butt pucker factor will be a notch lower.

Go for it.

Well said Gordon.