You should read up on them then. It's essentially the equivalent of the Garmin Autopilot for the G1000. I wish they were available for our beech's!

Understood.

Some people have criticized Cirrus over the years for marketing to novice pilots, and feel that may have something to do with some of the crashes in these high performance planes.....

....oh, wait. That's the subject of a different thread going on here right now..

It's Magic, you know. Never believe it's not so.

Why would the WAAS upgrade be more than a standard upgrade? Does the Avidyne have to be updated as well?

Not saying that. Just saying you should read a review of the dfc-90 and 100. If you love avionics like I do, Im sure you'll enjoy the read. It is way better from what I've read. No personal experience unfortunately. It would be a major plus for cirrus in the cirrus vs bonanza debates though in my opinion.

It's Magic, you know. Never believe it's not so.

Why would the WAAS upgrade be more than a standard upgrade? Does the Avidyne have to be updated as well?

Not saying that. Just saying you should read a review of the dfc-90 and 100. If you love avionics like I do, Im sure you'll enjoy the read. It is way better from what I've read. No personal experience unfortunately. It would be a major plus for cirrus in the cirrus vs bonanza debates though in my opinion.

All good info - thanks.

That is a nice improvement, but it really is not needed at this point. For me, I get bored as it is flying and having the autopilot do it all would leave me with nothing to do but play Flightcontrol and Angry Birds! I doubt if my friend would want to spend $15k to make the autopilot fully intergrated with the Avidyne.

One thing I like about this plane from an IFR standpoint is the big screens. I also like that it has a WX-500, XM, terrain, and traffic all displayed on the PFD along with built-in charts. The engine guages on the PFD are very nice as well. It seems like a lot of plane for a single, but have some have posted here - $10k for WAAS upgrade, marginal at best icing performance, and also a high time engine.

I called my friend and then put an offer in - we will see what happens. It does not matter to me either way.

The 55X is a rate based autopilot. The Garmin GFC 700 is a little different where it detects movement data from the magntometer. It allows smaller and more frequent input, which adds precision in turbulence and winds.

A lot of people are comparing prices to A36s. I think a more accurate comparison would be the 33 or 35 series, just in terms of the number of seats. That would also put the buyer in a newer Beech at this price point (compared to the 36 market), with more modern radios, although obviously not glass. And the -550 in the smaller platform would put the speed closer to the SR22.

This is still a lot of airplane for the money. But keep an eye on the engine TT, and it looks like it's out of annual. Even with a strong purchase price, the annual, sales tax (if applicable), plus an overhaul in the next 24 months could make this a $250k plane before it's in the hangar for long. That's not such a great deal.

Alex,

I was thinking $160K. $10k for WAAS and $5k for an annual puts it at $175K done.

Now, for that you are getting TKS, Dual screen EFIS with full engine monitor, flight charts, WX-500, Terrain, Weather, 55X autopilot, and a 6-year-old 180 knot plane with a high time engine.

Now, the closest comparison would be a slower F33A. The newest you will find is an early 90's model. It would have to have a G600 to be compareable and with all of the other options it would be $300k with the same high time engine, 15 years older, and slower.

The engine and prop can be rebuilt for $40k putting the plane at $215K and ready to fly for the next 20 years. I think a guy could get another 200-300 hours out of this engine if it is currently healthy.

Like I said, it is not for me since I am a Baron guy, but for my friend I just don't see any better value for what you are getting.

Yup, that's a lot of bang for the buck. You could quit the airplanes with that plane.

I have flown the G3 and I'll take the tack that it is a really easy to fly aircraft even for a beginner. Why:

No prop control so it's a constant speed prop that flies like a 172.

Unbelievably easy stalls. You have aileron the whole time, makes others look dangerous by comparison. No sharp break just a mush when you hold the stick full aft. I've never understood the frequency of stall spin accidents given this ultra benign behavior.

With a new engine perhaps consider the new composite prop. It is a giant speed brake, when you pull the power you will slow down and come down quickly. VERY easy to hit approach speeds (remember to land with a little power though).

Easy as anything to land, after a couple of tries it was easy to grease it on with good over cowl visibility.

For a person that wants to take the spouse and travel it's an excellent choice especially since they're just about giving the used ones away.

meant airlines?

..but you can't really entirely replace airliners with prop piston planes can you? Airliners have pressurization to fly over weather that piston bug smashers have to go through, they have better deicing, they have engines that are more reliable and more powerful so they can fly "on one" more safely, their altitude capability and climb performance is way better, they handle turbulence better and are more stable...I could go on...but point is there are some times when you are still gonna need the airlines, don't ya s'pose?

I haven't been on the airlines except when I take my son skiing and only because his schedule isn't as flexible as mine.