From your mouth to HBC's ear. I say that because as we've discussed here many times if they would just release a factory turbo, FIKI, tip tank, G36 with the higher useful load they'd be in tall cotton. I am ignorant about the aircraft business, but can it really be that hard?

Lacking the will to do the me too stuff, it's hard to even consider the possibility of true innovation.

Thats as far as I got too! I might as well been sitting on a 2X6 with my knees in my face. Look closely at the fit and finish as well on a plane that has a little time on it.

Is there a reason it has to be taken to Cirrus Service Center as opposed to a local A&P?

The Comanche was possibly the best airplane Piper ever built. It's a shame that they killed production after their plant flooded. With 40 more years of continuous production improvements, it could have provided serious competition to the Bonanza AND the CIrrus.

I have a fair amount of time in a Comanche 250 and can certainly echo this statement. It's rock solid, fast, great useful load, relatively roomy and a wonderful cross country machine. I remember seeing an article in AOPA (I think) about someone who greatly modernized a Comanche with leather interior, top-notch avionics and lots of beautiful finishing touches. It was gorgeous and makes you wonder how nice a modern day Comanche would have been...

Edit...I found a copy of the article. He dubbed the airplane the Vegas Viper. Would you pay $250K to have a decked out Comanche like this?

http://www.aeroresourcesinc.com/store_/images/classifieds/452-1.pdf

My F33A

Useful load 1328 lbs, 3400 lbs max wt.
Cabin payload with 5 hours (80 gal)total fuel, 868 lbs
No gullwing doors that stick up in the air
No plastic to crack or break
43 years old & still going strong, Cirrus?
No chute replacement, very expensive
Want it to look new with a new engine? Let's say 80k (looks pretty good now)
New glass panel, 60-70k
Want AC, 18k
Flys better, looks a lot better, cost a lot less
How much did that Cirrus depreciate in the last 2 years?
You get to turn around and take one more look on the way to the FBO

2013 Chevrolet Suburban.
New car smell for real
ALL the bells and whistles
Large Navigation screen
6 250lbers no problem.
Flys in ANY weather including SLD
Huge interior volume and plush leather seating
Useful load about 10,000lb. with full fuel
Only cruises about 60 Knots but handles turbulence like you wouldn't believe
Gets 16 NMPG
Very low cost of ownership
I can by 20 Brand new for the cost of a Cirrus

I agree why would anyone want a Cirrus.

I have a fair amount of time in a Comanche 250 and can certainly echo this statement. It's rock solid, fast, great useful load, relatively roomy and a wonderful cross country machine. I remember seeing an article in AOPA (I think) about someone who greatly modernized a Comanche with leather interior, top-notch avionics and lots of beautiful finishing touches. It was gorgeous and makes you wonder how nice a modern day Comanche would have been...

Edit...I found a copy of the article. He dubbed the airplane the Vegas Viper. Would you pay $250K to have a decked out Comanche like this?

http://www.aeroresourcesinc.com/store_/images/classifieds/452-1.pdf

I watched the video on their website and was not impressed. The only difference was their UL increase. They just to acknowledge their FIKI, Garmin Perspective, Flex Seating, everything they already have.

And to add.....the Vegas Viper is BEAUTIFUL

I'm delighted that a Chinese company is doing well building planes in America for worldwide consumption.

The Cirrus is a great airplane and flies very well. If you don't believe me go fly one. Quiet, responsive, easy to fly, fairly benign flight characteristics, fast, economical with liquid gold (I mean, of course, Avgas), technically sophisticated and on and on.

Every single one of us here should be grateful for their success. They are one of the few reasons new pilots are learning to fly GA airplanes.

Yes, their seats are not comfy and they can't haul 4 people and go anywhere. They depreciate and cost a lot to fix and won't last as long as a B52. Big deal.

Great airplane. Great innovation. Great company.

We can't complain about them having turned a chinese company if not enough forward looking US investors could be found to make a competitive bid.

A company going to the chinese is not necessarily the end of it. When IBM sold their consumer computing to Lenovo (the company that was producing them for IBM already), a lot of people saw the end of the brand. Now, 7 years later they are still the provider of one of the best Laptops in the market. I am about to order another one.

Upping the useful load is hardly anything revolutionary, the 49 Bonanza was a different plane than the 1978 V-tail. Still glad they did it, looks like it required quite some engineering and certification effort. Those 200lbs UL (assuming they got the CG right), were really what the plane was missing.

So is it a higher gross weight or they made it lighter or a combination of both to get more useful load ?
There is not much competition out there.
The Cessna Corvalis as been out of production for what 3 years?
Beech is not very innovative with the Bo.

Nice aircraft , go Cirrus

Now bring out a JetA powered Cirrus.

They actually announced a couple of months ago that it is available again (their demonstrator was painted in some sort of WW1 Dazzle scheme and all over the journal covers). But they have nixed the NA version, their useful load isn't too great either and the FIKI TKS is still some time off.

I love my 2006 SR22 GTS at a fraction of the price of a G5!