In an ongoing thread regarding pilot's conversion to the Cirrus, there has been an active volley from both sides regarding Cirri's long suits and short comings, if any.

I think the reluctance to "buy in" is based on a very pronounced demographic shift in this web site, the buying pattern of the newer proponents of Cirrus and their creative use of the tax code to make purchase price and depreciation almost irrelevant.

Many members joined 5 - 8 years ago and had purchased their "once in lifetime" dream machine, a Beech Bonanza in the halcyon days when Beech was king and the buy in fairly significant. It took about $150 K (+/- 10 - 20%) to get a nice example and then "personalize" it from there. The Cirrus initially was not particularly well received by experienced pilots, had a perception of plastic flimsiness and a chute that was reputed to avoid rigorous certification standards. That didn't make it a bad machine, just not the equal of Beech. Now obviously much of that has been refuted or corrected, but to some the perception remains.

At about the same time as the financial meltdown, Cirrus' product improved, the pilot demographic morphed into the younger tech savvy individualist (this group is very well represented within BT and perhaps dominant) and some of the older Bonanza owners were looking to move on with their life as their flying days wound down.

If there is any doubt about this generational division look at the group of 33/35 owners who were former military/airline/old line corporate/GA who have said they'll never own a Cirrus . . . and why would they? In their mind they own the best 4 place GA aircraft and have survived 30 - 40 - 50 years without a chute. Then compare with the newer BT member who is a younger successful entrepreneur that really buys into technology as a method to improve the life experience.

As can be expected, the supply of really good used airplanes suddenly became very competitive and 'most' of that competition came from that danged plastic airplane.

So what we end up with is a few "old dinosaurs" flying their mil-spec high quality Bonanzas
being replaced with an airplane who's best quality is "it has a chute".

It does make for some interesting reading.

Cheers from London

There is also one more thing playing here. Money. There is huge (I think) population of owners that simply can not afford Cirrus (me including) but they can afford and fly nice mid range Bonanza. And as we all know every pilot owner is the first to admit that they can not afford something. it's way easier to blame the chute.

My dream was/is to own capable cross country machine for (way) under $100k. There's no Cirrus that fits that bill.

And Tim missed it on this . . . it is not about something as easily defined as '60s muscle car vs new, my E92 M3 would destroy a 66 GTO in any performance metric, plus traction control, anti-lock brake, A/C, airbags, the list goes on.

And a 33/35 can easily match any performance metric of an SR22. You can put FIKI, turbo, A/C, similar if not in someways superior avionics (GTN750 w/ airways, holds etc) . . . except . . . yes the chute.

It's interesting that Jason and I are the same page on this. He sees it even if others don't.
This is about the mindset of the particular demographic each appeals to, and age is not the determinant,

The perspectives on handling qualities between airplane types are interesting. But I find I can't find enough difference in any of the types I've hand flown including aerobatic, Bonanza, P and C types, to conclude what's a "pilots" airplane or smooth, etc.

I need more starch wing experience to detect one airplane feels better than another. perhaps the rigging hasn't been that good on some of the examples?

I suppose it's relative. From my perspective as a Helo guy, when you move the controls a little bit or a lot, on any of the fixed wing machines, you have to wait before something happens.

If you take an older Bonanza and add all the FIKI, Turbo, Avionics and get the airplane well sorted you are talking very close to the price of a newish Cirrus.

I suspect there are many plane buyers (and will be more in the future) that mainly fly to avoid the airlines and to conduct business.

If you take an older Bonanza and add all the FIKI, Turbo, Avionics and get the airplane well sorted you are talking very close to the price of a newish Cirrus.

If you take an older Bonanza and add all the FIKI, Turbo, Avionics and get the airplane well sorted you are talking very close to the price of a newish Cirrus.

Hell if it will. $800k for a new Bo with TKS and Turbo. 5 Years from now it will be under $500k. Cirrus is no better.

Take an old Bonanza with a tired engine for $100k and spend $200k upgrading it is now $300k. You will be lucky to see $150k 5 years later (if you fly it) and you still have an old airframe to deal with.

A 2008-2009 Cirrus is probably the sweet spot for the best combination of capability, performance, safety, and price. The major depreciation has already happened. Same goes for a G36 if you do not need the chute.

In an ongoing thread regarding pilot's conversion to the Cirrus, there has been an active volley from both sides regarding Cirri's long suits and short comings, if any.

I think the reluctance to "buy in" is based on a very pronounced demographic shift in this web site, the buying pattern of the newer proponents of Cirrus and their creative use of the tax code to make purchase price and depreciation almost irrelevant.

Many members joined 5 - 8 years ago and had purchased their "once in lifetime" dream machine, a Beech Bonanza in the halcyon days when Beech was king and the buy in fairly significant. It took about $150 K (+/- 10 - 20%) to get a nice example and then "personalize" it from there. The Cirrus initially was not particularly well received by experienced pilots, had a perception of plastic flimsiness and a chute that was reputed to avoid rigorous certification standards. That didn't make it a bad machine, just not the equal of Beech. Now obviously much of that has been refuted or corrected, but to some the perception remains.

At about the same time as the financial meltdown, Cirrus' product improved, the pilot demographic morphed into the younger tech savvy individualist (this group is very well represented within BT and perhaps dominant) and some of the older Bonanza owners were looking to move on with their life as their flying days wound down.

If there is any doubt about this generational division look at the group of 33/35 owners who were former military/airline/old line corporate/GA who have said they'll never own a Cirrus . . . and why would they? In their mind they own the best 4 place GA aircraft and have survived 30 - 40 - 50 years without a chute. Then compare with the newer BT member who is a younger successful entrepreneur that really buys into technology as a method to improve the life experience.

As can be expected, the supply of really good used airplanes suddenly became very competitive and 'most' of that competition came from that danged plastic airplane.

So what we end up with is a few "old dinosaurs" flying their mil-spec high quality Bonanzas
being replaced with an airplane who's best quality is "it has a chute".

It does make for some interesting reading.

Cheers from London