…if you ever sat in a Lancair…you quickly discover their interior is the Beemers and Cirrus’ a Chevy…
I agree completely, but only if we’re talking about the BMW and Chevy models shown below.
1957 Chevrolet El Morocco Convertible
1957 BMW Isetta
Hi Mike
You have read my mind with your response to Don Rennie comments. I, like you, can appreciate the big picture and watch aviation history being created in front of my eyes. (and yes, I do cut cirrus a lot of slack in their start up business even if they routed the handle cable with too many curves during their own learning curve).
vision on this scale takes courage,commitment,determination, and other Qualities That most of us can only dream of.
God knows we have not seen much of this pioneering spirit around aviation for the last 50 years.
Moses Grad
Sounds like a catfight brewin’, and, amazingly enough, it doesn’t involve me!
Unfortunately, Cirrus has given me the right with lucky ‘1069’ to be negative as you call it…I hope that sharing all the ‘negative experiences and failures’ will better inform other owners as to what to ‘expect’. I have more than 3 dozen emails from ‘owners and would be owners’ thanking me for taking ‘fair shots’. Also, to bring some balance to the Cirrus owners who defend these ‘continual, unresolved squawks’ beyond ‘common sense’.
Also, I paid 1/4 mill for a plane that should be ‘more right than wrong’. If you had 1/10 of my negative issues…it would fly you to negativity as well.
If you would like to discuss further 'negativity, call me at 800-RENNIES ext. 100 anytime…otherwise ‘don’t read my posts’ and keep your ‘personal’ negativity to your self.
Oh by the way, I noticed yesterday that 2 springs connected by 2 rods attaching to ‘baffling flanges’ had been actually ‘rubbing’ on ALL THREE FUEL LINES on the bottom of each side of the engine which would lead to a puncture and a fire…But i’d better not POST THIS
Jim, I knew there was a reason I liked your book. Mike
I think the more likely positioning between Lancair and Cirrus is BMW and Mercedes. Mercedes has positioned as the safe, luxurious somewhat sporty ride, while BMW has the performance niche.
Anyway, I thought the way to make a small fortune in General Aviation was to start with a large fortune…
-Curt
Jim, Don,
It seems to me that you both can be right.
Jim, you like the ergonmics of the Cirrus better.
Don, you like the materials choices and the quality of the fit and finish of the Lancair better.
They are two separate things.
Airplane manufacturers have always made trade-offs in materials and fit and finish over weight and other things. They are not held to the same standards as automobile customers because most of their customers are pretty forgiving (given the junk we’ve flown before).
Relative to other standard out of the factory GA a/c sold for under $500,000, perhaps the Cirrus is a BMW 5. However, if I was to make a direct comparison of materials and fit-and-finish against automobiles, I think this would be fair:
Cessna 172 = Trevat
Piper Archer = Yugo
Cirrus = Saturn SL1
Saratoga/Bonanza = Buick/Oldsmobile
Would I want to fly in a BMW? Sure, it is soundproofed (!!!), has really comfy adjustable seats with lumbar support, and a great 12 speaker stereo system.
Could I take the plane someplace and have all of that done? Sure.
Would I want to give up usable load? No.
Would I want to pay an extra $200K for that interior? No.
So, I’ll fly my Saturn and be comfortable with the cost and weight trade-offs because I have yet to take my BMW over 140KIAS or 7AGL.
the point of the BMW WAS regarding the 'fit, finish and details…but you don’t have to take my word for it…ask any mechanic who knows BOTH and see what they say…I have posted about the ‘discomfort’ in the Lance and have repeated it again for you below…but its appointments are spectacular. That’s what I was referring too. I don’t drive a BMW either because it is generally tight and less comfortable…But very well detailed.
To the sales person in Feb.:
A couple of negatives to an otherwise terrific plane:
- the seat as ‘upright’ is reclined too far . I have minor arthritis in my back and felt it tightening because I had to sit up unsupported and ‘reach for the stick’. If I had moved my seat closer, my legs would have been too cramped.
- The visibliity was much less than the Cirrus but probably because of more support structure across the top.
- The center beam that holds the reading lights is an unwelcome structure and seems to reduce the size of the interior…when I looked over at Mark, it seems I had to lower my head. I can’t imagine anyone taller than me being comfortable in the pilot seat. It ‘seems’ the front cockpit is smaller than the Cirrus and although beautifully appointed, not nearly as comfortable to me.
- Besides having to ‘reach’ for the stick, the movement seemed heavy to me and I had to ‘work it’. I also felt to be comfortable with the stick you had to hit the trim after every move. Others have complained about this as well on the Lancair pilot’s site. I now know what they mean.
- The absense of BRS it still an issue for me. When I was 4, mom said it was difficult for me to give up my ‘security blanket’. At 43, I still have this problem!
But, the planes features, interior appointments/decor and structure seem superior to the Cirrus and it was incredibly smooth and vibration free. I could tell I was flying what seemed to be a stronger plane than my cirrus sr20. I am wondering if the 22 is going to ‘feel stronger’ than the 20 because of the increased weight. AS far as overall ‘sex appeal’, it is a toss up.
I appreciate your offer to return after I test fly the 22…We’ll book a few hours so I can go over the machine in more detail.
Thanks
Don Rennie
It is aweful when you consider flying a Cirrus, stuck! What maybe 5% of Americans can afford to own a new airplane?
Anyway, I think the issue here is one of expectations. Many people (Bob, Art) feel that they plunk down $200K to $330K and they should get a very reliable, safe, comfortable airplane where everything works exactly as promised. And why not? They can spend $40K to $80K and get a car that does just that. (Well, let’s not bring up my wife’s Benz.)
Then we have folks like Gordon, Jerry, Mike Radomsky, Dave Katz, and honestly, most others who post here, who understand that the state of the aviation industry is not there yet. They are willing to compare what they have received to the alternatives and find that for the money, they have a more reliable, safer and better built aircraft.
Somewhere along the line, the auto industry in the 70’s and the computer industry have conditoned most of us to lower our expectations. It took an oil crisis, the Japanese and about 25 years to change that, and the job isn’t done.
Is either side right? Yes, they both are. We SHOULD expect a damn good, reliable airplane and hold Cirrus Design’s feet to the fire. They should be accountable for fixing their problems and providing very good service. On the other hand, we, as pilots and buyers should also understand that the state of the industry is unfortunately not at that level, yet. We need to temper our expectations with common sense.
From every knowledgeable source with whom I’ve spoken has said the Cirrus is better built and more reliable than the new planes being built by Cessna, Piper and Beech. It is designed to higher safety standards and has, in fact, built up a remarkable safety record as far as protecting its occupants.
Do you think Lancair is better? Read their site. They complain about head room in the front and back, deliveries, runaway trim, etc. Any of this sound familiar? Their members speak down about the Cirrus and use our posts as ammo. It is unfortunate that they don’t realize the competition is the 40 year old, metal spam can designs, not your partner in innovation.
OK, I’ve over spent my $0.02. Whoever is collecting, here’s my $0.06.
Marty
how did you escape this one??? C ya in the next go-around! Ladies and gentlemen…in this corner, don rennie…in that corner…all other cirrus owners!
I better get to the gym and start hittng the bags again…300 against 1…can’t remember having worse odds!
Again, someone taking something totally out of context…as far as being ABLE to fly any plane as compared to others…we are all indeed very fortunate and probably dam hard-working and have earned this luxury. I earn it everyday.
Being ‘stuck’ refers to the issue that the chute for my wife, chilfdren and passengers is a coveted asset. Therefore, if we want that security, Cirrus is the ‘ONLY’ manufacturer to offer BRS in GA. I call it ‘stuck’ you call it maybe ‘lucky’ and we both are right.
However, as a group, we haven’t done that yet and until we do…we will have continuing problem/failures with the same issues. I hope you do appreciate me not running on with ‘the list’.
I am glad you have come around 180 and realize that we should hold Cirrus’ feet to the fire…Was it finally a ‘failed chute’ which brought you around?
As far as the ‘industry’ goes…GA needs a 'lemon law.
I am happy to work with you in any way to ‘hold Cirrus accountable’…A Duluth fly-in (concerned protest if you will) would get ‘serious’ attention.
Remember, I do not knock Cirrus regarding thier ‘service and attention’. I knew there would be many problems with a new company. What I am consistent about is their inability to ‘permanently resolve’ those problems. That is the issue…not the squawks.
I will also say this…If I were CEO of CIRRUS…I would have pulled 10 chutes this week on the ground to give my customers (and myself) some answers. Nobody would have had to tell me to do that…it should have been a ‘no brainer’ and done.
“I am glad you have come around 180 and realize that we should hold Cirrus’ feet to the fire…”
Not new for me, I am a fan of Cirrus Design and a critic. If you read my posts, you’d notice that. I just try to measure my responses with reasonable expectations. I still wish and hope…
"…If I were CEO of CIRRUS…I would have pulled 10 chutes this week on the ground to give my customers (and myself) some answers. "
10 may be a bit extreme, but who knows, maybe if we call for it here, Cirrus will listen.
We all have the fortune of being able to talk to the world in a matter of seconds. We get mad, annoyed or frustrated, and blow our mouths off, often without thinking about what we’re really saying. I’ve never seen a company that worked that quickly, and probably, most shouldn’t I’m lucky if my employer can make a seemingly straightforward decision in a month… Anyway, it took the FAA over 3 weeks to issue an AD AFTER the Cirrus requested it and COPA supported it! Let’s see what happens.
We, COPA, speak with cirrus, and other vendors, regularly. If our members have reasonable concerns, we ensure that they are heard. We never guarantee miracles. All we have is the collective voices of about 400 owners and buyers.
Marty
In life in the internet age, it is important for a company not only to be responsive, but also to ‘debounce’. That is an electronic term for not taking the first input from a switch transition, but waiting a few milli-seconds until the contacts stop bouncing up and down. Marty’s exactly right; with the web the feedback is instantaneous, but reaction shouldn’t be. The company needs a pause to debounce, but then act decisively.
-Curt
Posting at 7:16 this morning, who would have known Cirrus was 'pulling 3 ’ later in the day! the right thing to do…there is more work/understandin yet to come. Thankfully, we are on our way! Frankly, the future of their franchise and our equity rests in on a very positive solution.
In reply to:
So, I’ll fly my Saturn and be comfortable with the cost and weight trade-offs because I have yet to take my BMW over 140KIAS or 7AGL.
Paul - you’ve had your car 7 feet off the ground? I assume this was on a garage lift rather than an Evel Kneival-type stunt!
Paul…you got it!
Thanks,
Don
So, I’ll fly my Saturn and be comfortable with the cost and weight trade-offs because I have yet to take my BMW over 140KIAS or 7AGL.
Paul,
Clearly you’re not driving your Beemer hard enough. [:)]
As I posted before, both planes are wonderful and having flown the Columbia 400 as opposed to the 300, I can tell you that it is a damn hot rod. The SR22 is the plane I’ve chosen to buy, but the C400 is in a different league perfomance wise. Easily 30-40 knots faster and extraordinarily stable. Price, ergonomics, availability and above all safety give the edge to Cirrus but Mama Mia what a rocket Lancair has built.
What, me worry? Just don’t drink a quart of Jack Daniels while watching [url link=http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&cf=info&id=1800042439]Bullitt if you have less than the ultimate driving machine. You really want to hit those hills in the city just right so that you grease your landings and don’t cause any suspension damage.
Very clever Roger!
I’m giving away my age, but those are the same spinners I had on my 54 Ford Skyliner, (the one with the plastic roof). I customized it back in the 50s with 56 Packard tail lights, 54 Chevy grill etc. Brings back my teenage memories!
Hmmm, maybe I could do some customizing of the SR22…remove the door handles, and put in selenoids, tail fins? No it already has those.
I’ll give it some more thought.
Walt N224AZ
I’m giving away my age, but those are the same spinners I had on my 54 Ford Skyliner, (the one with the plastic roof). I customized it back in the 50s with 56 Packard tail lights, 54 Chevy grill etc. Brings back my teenage memories!
Walt,
I’m jealous! I’d love to own a Ford Skyliner or a Mercury Sun Valley. But for now I’ll have to be content with our http://www.physics.ucsb.edu/~airboy/our_metro.htmlNash Metropolitans and http://www.physics.ucsb.edu/~airboy/tga/babypics/our SR20.
Cheers,
Roger
1954 Ford Skyliner