Jeff’s denigration of the venerable Cessna 182 notwithstanding, you may wish to look into the Peterson’s Performance Plus refurbishment and conversion of 1970s vintage 182s into his amazing 260SE/STOL. Check it out at http://www.260se.com.
I looked very closely at the Cirrus aircraft, even visited with them in Duluth. Cirrus has developed dandy products that look very promising for GA in general and the company in particular. Because I greatly admire what they have accomplished and respect their tremendous effort, my following words are not in any way intended to denigrate their fine work.
As an “old but not bold” guy who has flown since 1959 with many hours and multiple ratings, I decided upon Todd Peterson’s product for several reasons. First, I like the very wide performance range, with a stall speed of 35kts and the ability to cruise (“loiter”) without hanging on the prop at 50 - 55kts at the low end, and a fairly respectable cruise speed of 150+kts at the cross country end of the speed range.
Second, Todd Peterson is a high quality guy who personally buys only the 182s he considers good enough for him, and then he personally goes over the aircraft and refurbishes it to like-new standards inside and out. He personally installs a fuel injected IO-470 which increases horsepower from 230 to 260, and cleans up the otherwise “dirty” and draggy 182 airframe.
Third, and of most interest, Todd installs an STC’d canard off the nose of the aircraft, which imparts an amazing improvement to the aircraft’s low speed control and stability. The canard provides lift, and has a control surface that acts in unison with the elevators for pitch control. Talk about state-of-the-art.
Add to the equation new paint and interior, and the result is one fine aircraft with performance capabilities well beyond the vast majority of comparably priced products and other 4 seat birds.
Clearly, the 260SE/STOL does not have the speed and pizzaz of the SR22, but it also does not have the demands (Read: potential safety concerns) of a hot rod, either. In fact, AOPA’s ASF statistics show that the Cessna 182 shares with its stable-mate (172) one of the best safety records over many years such records have been kept. Something to think about there, I might add.
With a new avionics panel and gear, my total cost for the project will be equivalent to a comparably equipped SR20, much lower than an SR22, and lower than a new Cessna 182.
BTW, when compared to either a new SR20 or new Cessna 182, my aircraft will be better equipped and will have a superior performance envelope, including cruising speed (100 knots from 150+ high to 50kts low), superior range, and a greater fully fueled useful load. All for a comparable or lower cost. Not too bad in my book.
IMHO, notwithstanding Jeff’s comments, while the SR22 is a great aircraft, and I sure hope I someday have the opportunity to fly one and put it through its paces, if I were a newly licensed pilot knowing that I needed to build a significant amount of time and flying experience, there’s no way I’d try to do so in a “hot” aircraft when a known aircraft with a much more forgiving alternative is available at less cost and lower risk.
Good luck to you, and congratulations on your good fortune to be able to pursue one of the greatest experiences we have - aviation.
I’m considering an airplane purchase (pilot-in-training right now) and have heard from more than one source that a Cessna 182 would be the route to go for a first airplane…
Is an SR22 too much of a “hotrod” for a beginner?
Would I even be able to find an insurer?
What about maintenance? (I’m in Oklahoma…)
Thanks for any suggestions —