We’ve had two recent CJ3 clients decide to switch to M2 Gen2s.

In this business, it’s not unusual for clients to start out shopping for one model and end up buying something different. Normally, I’d chalk that up as a one-off, but two in a row starts to look like a trend.

On paper, the CJ3 offers more seats, range, and performance. But in the $5–$6.5M range, you’re generally looking at 2006–2014 aircraft, and those are becoming harder to find.

By comparison, that same budget can buy an M2 that’s only a few years old—the two we recently acquired were 2022 and 2025 models.

That trade means giving up some capability in exchange for a much newer airframe and the Garmin G3000 flight deck.

Worth it?

I have owned a couple of CJ’s and an older CJ3. I would choose the older CJ3 over a newer M2. So much more airplane. In a CJ/M2 you are always thinking about fuel. Not so in the CJ3.

Are these owner pilots or will the bill payer sit in back?

I would think that that would depend on their mission profile, among other things.


Robert T

>Are these owner pilots or will the bill payer sit in back?
^^^^ This seems like a key question....
My guess is that these are owner flown.

Are these owner pilots or will the bill payer sit in back?

I guess if Pro flown the Proline is not that big a deal, if owner flown, then the G3000 is by far easier, especially if Garmin background, and mission of course.

Some owners and pilots research aircraft and find the one that fits their mission.

Others just go for the pretty one, even if it doesn't fit their mission.

And yes, even those that have the means to buy jets.

You are correct.

In both of these cases, careful consideration was paid to their specific missions. There's obviously a trade off there because the CJ3 will do almost any US mission.

Neither had an abundance of 1500nm trips and the number of seats in the M2 were sufficient.

I do have to admit that the 2025 M2 Gen2 is pretty! Maybe the prettiest airplane we've done, and considering how many new and much more expensive aircraft we've done, that is saying something!

I guess if Pro flown the Proline is not that big a deal, if owner flown, then the G3000 is by far easier, especially if Garmin background, and mission of course.

This is where the CJ2+ really shines…

Haha really? "Pro" flown? Any proficient pilot will be able to use the avionics, especially if they don't rely on being "pro" for their proficiency

Love the 2+! Wish they still made it! But I get where it was too close to the CJ3.

Haha really? "Pro" flown? Any proficient pilot will be able to use the avionics, especially if they don't rely on being "pro" for their proficiency

I’m a CJ3+ owner who upgraded from an M2. A few thoughts:

1. An M2 Gen 2 is essentially an identical airplane to any M2, aside from a few interior appointments. There is one big difference after serial number 1048, and that is better G3000 boxes, with higher resolution, faster processors, and an upgrade path to things such as GWX8000 radar. That said, any M2 can get the upgraded boxes, and the GWX 8000, for something just north of $300K.

2. If you can accept a higher time airframe, you can be in a 3+ for less than you describe. I am in a high time plane, but I did new paint, interior, and all of the Garmin box upgrades, at a price point less than $2M over my comparably equipped late model M2, with arguably better aesthetics.

3. The 3+ is a hell of a lot more plane than the M2. Almost twice the full fuel payload, over 40% more range at max cruise, and FL450 vs FL410. It’s nice not to have to be thinking about fuel reserves all the time.

4. IMO, the sweet spot for the owner flown CJ series would be a CJ2, with new paint, interior, and the full Garmin panel upgrade. (Not available in the 2+). That gets you something that looks and feels like a late model M2/3+, for under $4M. You get the payload of the 3+, FL450, and a max cruise range squarely in between the M2 and the 3+.

The operating costs of any of these 3 options are so close, that it’s not even a consideration. In fact, for my milk run of 1,200nm, I often had to make a stop in the M2, due headwinds. Eliminating the stop actually reduces my operating costs.

The straight 3, or the 2+, are also great planes, if you are happy with the Collins avionics. Most owner pilots prefer the Garmin systems, because they normally move up the ranks from Garmin equipped planes.

If you really want the best bang for the buck, it's probably the Citation V, if you can accept an older airframe, the lack of a modern autopilot, and the international flight limitations that come with the single pilot exemption. You get similar performance to the 3+, with lower operating costs, and better short field landing performance, all at a much lower capital cost.

I went with the 3+ because I could stomach the capital cost, prefer the CJ aesthetics, and prefer the G3000 avionics. Makes no financial sense, but I don’t really care, ‘cause I can’t spend it from the grave.