As has been mentioned here before, they seem to have a reputation of "the only" airframer in the lowly certified piston-single echelon that continually innovates.

When you think about it, Beech didn't need to "continue innovating" as the Bonanza they introduced in 1947 was just short of pure magic.
Robert

As has been mentioned here before, they seem to have a reputation of "the only" airframer in the lowly certified piston-single echelon that continually innovates.

I think getting an initial design right is way more important than innovating. Vans is selling more planes (in kit form) than anyone else by a country mile. They just get the design right the first time, and then let people customize the basic design. An RV-7 is the same today as it always was. To a lesser extent you can do that with a Bonanza too, not so much with a Cirrus. That's a huge disadvantage in my opinion. Again, the chute is what sells it... all the rest of the "innovation" is really fluff.

One thing we neglect to realize is that Beechcraft DID innovate the 35 Bonanza until they quit making them. Cirrus has been building airplanes for 13 years on the SR22 and longer on the SR20. Lets look at it though the first 16 years of the Bonanza. It went from the straight 35 185hp, four seats, 40 gal of gas, and went 160MPH. Sixteen years later it was 285hp, up to 6 seats, 80 gallons of fuel, and ran almost 200MPH. Beech hit the plateau in 1985.

I think getting an initial design right is way more important than innovating. Vans is selling more planes (in kit form) than anyone else by a country mile. They just get the design right the first time, and then let people customize the basic design. An RV-7 is the same today as it always was. To a lesser extent you can do that with a Bonanza too, not so much with a Cirrus. That's a huge disadvantage in my opinion. Again, the chute is what sells it... all the rest of the "innovation" is really fluff.

:btt:

Having purchased a new Cirrus a little over a year ago I have about 18 months experience with Cirrus Aircraft the company. I have been uniformly impressed by every human being connected with the company that I've dealt with. And the products they produce, from training materials to the airplane are well done. Every person I've met is passionate about aviation, their company and their customers. Even the clerical people return emails on Sunday afternoon. When I commented on that a young lady said "I love my job and want to help." I believe she meant it.

A year after the commission was paid my salesman is still engaged with me. He and a half a dozen others want to know how I'm enjoying my plane, how much I'm flying, if they can be of any assistance. I have called on him to borrow a ground power unit to show someone the avionics, asked advice for hot engine starts and other similar questions. I always get cheerful, quick and friendly help.

They have surveyed me twice and when I remarked on a small cosmetic problem I had calls from engineering, sales and the executive team wanting to immediately fix the problem and then following up to insure I was satisfied. My airplane is annual and its taking a couple of weeks. One reason why is that some owners have reported radio static when flying in rain or snow. Cirrus came out with an SD to correct that with wicks and is installing it and paying for the 22 hours of labor, etc. without having to be asked.

A great company is defined not just by the products they build but by the people who build and support them. Like many here I've purchased a lot of quality goods and services in my life and have seen good and bad. I think Cirrus is a great company. I'm impressed as hell with them.

Wait a minute. Where do I put all this on my spreadsheet?

Circular reference. Does not compute. 00100111001010011001011010