BeechTalk - BT - Why buy Bonanza instead of G1 Cirrus SR22

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 07:46

This opinion won’t be popular here but...

Yah we paid $2200 for line cutters at a service center. That higher # is not accurate.

Truthfully I have a v-35tc and a sr22 that I manage and have unfettered access to. I won’t fly the bonanza anymore other than occasional local flights on perfect vfr days.

I’ve experience 2 piston engine failures in pistons in last 5000 hrs. One in a single one in a twin. The chute makes the difference for me. If we are talking similar money I’m all in on the cirrus even though the bonanza is a nicer flying plane.

I believe a lot of the bonanzas fandom crowd would actually agree if they looked past their undying love for a plane model they own, fly, and have committed significant emotional and financial attachment to (which is completely normal). Notice there aren’t too many people who recommend the Bo who don’t own one....

Even the chute isn’t that appealing, but it’s an option. I had some oil pressure fluctuations in the cirrus due to an erroneous sensor. Where I fly in the Adirondacks there are not many places one could make a successful engine out landing, and to be honest I didn’t really love the idea of going down under the chute either at the time. But it was a hell of a lot more appealing than ditching the BO!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 09:29

Six of one, half dozen of the other.

If you need the hauling room/seats or useful load of the older A36 planes, then that one wins due to your needs. No SR22 seats 6 and those that seat 5 don't seat 5 adults and as a parent I wouldn't want three kids together for long in that back seat even if it were in a car; too many fights amongst siblings.

For an F33 or other four-seater Bo they are more comparable. The performance is pretty much the same. Mostly it comes down to personal preferences at that point.

I chose a SR22. I really like the two doors. I makes loading people much easier. Only thing easier was the big barn doors on the Baron 58 I used to fly. The side yoke really opens up the cockpit in the front seats. My wife loves not having a yoke in front of her. The Baron had the throw-over yoke, so that helped her as well. If my wife and family like to fly in the plane then I get to fly more.

The doors on the 2006 SR22 I bought into (co-ownership) close just like any new car. That older Baron and many other older planes (Pipers and Cessnas too) it can be a struggle to get them to close well. I make sure to tell other pilots to "just close the door, no slamming needed".

The SR22 cabin is 7" wider than the F33. That makes a big difference. I flew to a lunch get-together with two other guys last weekend. Both commented on how our shoulders didn't touch in the front seats. They also commented on how roomy it was in the back seat; now there was only one in the back seats, so.... They also liked that they could just close the door and it was latched; one flew 172s and the other has a Grumman Yankee. It is enough wider that there is storage space, plus hobbs/flight meters and headset jacks in the center armrest in the SR22.

At the end of the day though, F33 and many other four-seater Beech planes are very similar in capabilities to the SR22. There are different costs for each and it certainly looks like the SR22 is a bit more expensive to buy and operate.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 10:07

Username Protected wrote:

Six of one, half dozen of the other.

If you need the hauling room/seats or useful load of the older A36 planes, then that one wins due to your needs. No SR22 seats 6 and those that seat 5 don't seat 5 adults and as a parent I wouldn't want three kids together for long in that back seat even if it were in a car; too many fights amongst siblings.

For an F33 or other four-seater Bo they are more comparable. The performance is pretty much the same. Mostly it comes down to personal preferences at that point.

I chose a SR22. I really like the two doors. I makes loading people much easier. Only thing easier was the big barn doors on the Baron 58 I used to fly. The side yoke really opens up the cockpit in the front seats. My wife loves not having a yoke in front of her. The Baron had the throw-over yoke, so that helped her as well. If my wife and family like to fly in the plane then I get to fly more.

The doors on the 2006 SR22 I bought into (co-ownership) close just like any new car. That older Baron and many other older planes (Pipers and Cessnas too) it can be a struggle to get them to close well. I make sure to tell other pilots to "just close the door, no slamming needed".

The SR22 cabin is 7" wider than the F33. That makes a big difference. I flew to a lunch get-together with two other guys last weekend. Both commented on how our shoulders didn't touch in the front seats. They also commented on how roomy it was in the back seat; now there was only one in the back seats, so.... They also liked that they could just close the door and it was latched; one flew 172s and the other has a Grumman Yankee. It is enough wider that there is storage space, plus hobbs/flight meters and headset jacks in the center armrest in the SR22.

At the end of the day though, F33 and many other four-seater Beech planes are very similar in capabilities to the SR22. There are different costs for each and it certainly looks like the SR22 is a bit more expensive to buy and operate.

Good to hear you finally found a plane.... :bud:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 11:38

I went through this exact process three years ago, even having a G2 under contract at one point. What eventually turned me against the cirrus was the avionics in the early ones are, based on many reports, flaky and not easily upgradeable. With the bonanza I can have whatever I wanted, not with the cirrus. Granted my attraction to the cirrus was the chute and it took a lot to put me back in the beech fold, but carefully studying the early cirrus, reading pilot experiences with the plane, plus my prior experience with beech, put me in a a36 at the time. As mentioned earlier in the thread, if I was buying new, I’d get a cirrus, earlier planes within my budget, mid 200s, Beechcraft. Either one your behind a Continental, so there is that.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 12:06

The Cirrus airframe is life-limited to something like 12,000 hours. Probably won't be an issue for most owners, but an early one that was kept busy could get close enough that it would be a concern.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 12:06

Username Protected wrote:

This opinion won’t be popular here but...

If we are talking similar money I’m all in on the cirrus even though the bonanza is a nicer flying plane.

I believe a lot of the bonanzas fandom crowd would actually agree if they looked past their undying love for a plane model they own, fly, and have committed significant emotional and financial attachment to (which is completely normal). Notice there aren’t too many people who recommend the Bo who don’t own one....

Mike, two reactions. First, that undying love for the Bo you speak of is solidly grounded in many compelling tangible factors, like the "nicer flying" comment you made above (which in fairness is a subjective thing some Cirrus pilots might disagree with), as well as many others, such as its amazing build quality, speed and efficiency, and in the case of the A36, barn doors and loading utility.

In other words, it's an emotional attachment based on a strong foundation of stuff that is both real and matters, a lot. We're not just smitten because of a brand name or what others think. When I read comments like yours, I can't help but think you mean to imply we're all just smitten for shallow reasons.

You fly one, you own one, you fall in love. Because she makes you love her and is an amazing partner. The love comes after the meeting and initial courtship. Not before. It's why we always say "go fly one, then decide". There's good reasons the plane has engendered such high praise, passion and owner loyalty for decades.

Second point, it's a two way street. There's lots of "fandom" and "undying love" for the SR. I don't know if it rivals the Bonanza. I'd guess not, but I don't know. But that's ok. If you love your plane, and can explain why so others can contemplate ownership, it's all good.

I know this much. You'll never hear a Bo owner respond to the question of why he/she loves the plane with the answer "I'm not sure. Just because". We know why. The list is long and real. And if that why isn't appealing to someone as a plane owner, that's cool. Lots of different fish in the sea!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 13:47

Disclaimer: I've never flown a Cirrus and I love my Bo so this is just opinion/observation.
But the fact that the prices are similar for planes around 30 years apart in age should tell you something about quality and desirability.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 13:59

I'll be the first person to say the SR doesn't compete with the A36. If the extra utility is needed then there is no comparing, its apples and oranges. If you want to compare something to the A36 you will use the Piper Matrix/Malibu, Cessna 206, Piper Saratoga, Cherokee 6, maybe a 210.

A comparison to the SR is the 33/36 Bonanzas.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 14:06

Username Protected wrote:

Disclaimer: I've never flown a Cirrus and I love my Bo so this is just opinion/observation.
But the fact that the prices are similar for planes around 30 years apart in age should tell you something about quality and desirability.

That is one of the things I noticed in my quest back in March when I bought my low hour SR22. 2005 690 hours TTSN. It was decked out with all the Avidyne goodies under warranty plus the L3 ESI 500 backup, DFC90, IFD 540/440, air Conditioning, etc. There was not a scratch on her....to speak of.....kept in a climate controlled environment and has TKS and modern appeal. I was comparing it price wise with several thousand hour airframes with 6 pack avionics and old 530/430 radios and mid time engines. Forget the chute...but for the features I was getting with the modern glass panel, digital autopilot, TKS, low time it just seemed to be a better value at the time I was looking. It has been said over many times the G2 Cirrus SR22 might be the best value in GA. But if you are a family of 5 it ain't gonna work..and I think people have caught on to that fairly quickly because even from last year the I bought my plane it has gone up in value. A g2 will not stay on the market long.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 14:13

Username Protected wrote:

Disclaimer: I've never flown a Cirrus and I love my Bo so this is just opinion/observation.
But the fact that the prices are similar for planes around 30 years apart in age should tell you something about quality and desirability.

UHHH supply and demand..... They have built what, 6000 of these in less than 2 decades...

They innovate, tell me the difference between a 1984 A36 and a 2004 A36? There isn't, because Beech quit the innovation stuff decades ago.. Look at the difference between a 2001 and a 2019 Cirrus... Innovation forces depreciation.

A36s are not in the same category as the SR, the 33 is.. The most expensive 33 costs what 200ish, out of the 180+ SR22s for sale less than a dozen are under 200...

So for the same money, you can buy the worst SR or the best 33 Bonanza. The avionics might be pretty comparable as well as the useful load... that should tell you something lol...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 14:49

All of which makes the early Cirrus a poor buy from a practicality standpoint.
Not arguing the lack of innovation at Beech and not arguing the success of Cirrus. They're definitely doing a lot right.
But for this case the Bo is the better choice financially and you probably get more UL also.
New Bo vs. new Cirrus may be a different story but you've underscored the fact and the reason that the Cirrus depreciates almost as fast as a luxury car. Some folks don't care about that though.
All just my opinion though.

Edit to add I am only considering the F33 in my comparison. Agreed A36 is a different league.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 14:51

Username Protected wrote:

All of which makes the early Cirrus a poor buy from a practicality standpoint.
Not arguing the lack of innovation at Beech and not arguing the success of Cirrus. They're definitely doing a lot right.
But for this case the Bo is the better choice financially and you probably get more UL also.
New Bo vs. new Cirrus may be a different story but you've underscored the fact and the reason that the Cirrus depreciates almost as fast as a luxury car. Some folks don't care about that though.
All just my opinion though.

I am not so sure they depreciated as much as you think. The G2s are priced right at 300 and I believe they were right at 400 new. The G2s were not a million bucks like the G6s are. They are holding their own depreciation wise extremely well....all generational models.

The leading source of this information is not you or me however....lonewolf or Aeirista have much more definitive data in regard to depreciation of these aircraft. I have consulted both of them along with Cirrus factory salesforce as well on depreciation of new models.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 14:56

Username Protected wrote:

Strange how you're going to get lots of opinions that are biased by what the owner flies...

Having said that, here's my take my 1971 A36 vs a 1st generation Cirrus (I've flown both).

What I think are the nice things about the Cirrus...
1 - It's nice to fly with the side yoke.
2 - It's interior looks more like the interior on a nice car and that means that passengers without airplane experience are sometimes more at ease if they are nervous flyers.
3 - It has a chute - that gains points with nervous passengers and nervous wives.

The reasons I prefer my A36 over a 1st Gen Cirrus (again this my opinion and people have lots of opinions)...
1 - That chute is an EXPENSIVE thing to re-pack.
Mandatory every 20 years and you have to break into the air frame with a hammer, then repair the scar and paint each time. Cost today is about 20K. Add a $1000 to your yearly costs. I'd rather see the same money go towards improvements on the airplane or in my pocket.
2 - You also have to replace the Line Cutters for the CAPS system every 6 years.
I've heard that is about 6-7K. Add another $1000 per year to your yearly costs.
3 - Even though it's a fixed gear aircraft, insurance on a Cirrus is actually higher than it is on my A36.
Once you have 100 hours in type and if you are IFR rated, insurance is not bad on the A36.
4 - The 1st Gen Cirri definitely do not lift as much weight as my 71 A36.
The A36 is actually able to carry 4 to 6 people. I have a 1347# UL. Take away 480# for fuel and I can put 947# of people and stuff in my plane. With options to upgrade to an IO550 and to add tip tanks, I can get my Gross weight all the way to 4024# That nets me at least another 300# of UL. What SR22 has a UL of 1647#?
What you hear about having to watch your W&B on the short body aircraft (V35s, F33s etc) is true. A36s have much more flexibility in how they are loaded and much less of an issue with CG moving aft as you burn off fuel.
5 - Better options for avionics upgrades.
Check out the posts where I've been showing off my new panel or ask me to brag some more. I really like my new panel!
6 -A36 Rear cargo doors and club seating are really nice -
They make for an easy time loading passengers and baggage. A nice interior in an A36 makes passengers think there are in a "fancy" plane. My wife loves how much stuff she can stuff in the back and then she can still stretch out and relax in back while I fly.
Zero concerns about our Golden Retriever coming along for the ride.
The seats can be reconfigured in a myriad of ways. You can easily put 2 bicycles in the back of an A36 and still leave 2 seats for passengers - or go ahead and put 4 bikes in back. You get the idea.
6- For me, the A36 is nicer to fly in turbulence than an SR22 - but this is maybe a close competition?
7 - A36 is certified in Utility Category. SR22 is Normal Category.
8 - I think you'll find that the cost for an Annual inspection on an SR22 is higher than it is on an A36.

It's true when they say that opinions are like A-Holes. Everybody has one and they usually stink. I might have started yet another Cirrus vs Beechcraft competition. Not my intent at all. Cirrus makes a really nice plane. In my case, I'm glad I went with an A36.

By the way Bruce - you sure have a strange way of spelling "Baley"
:peace:

These costs for chute maintenance are an eye opener for me. Instead of putting a lot of money into a panel upgrade, I've been considering a BRS chute system for my 182. But BRS developed the Cirrus chute system and the same maintenance is required for the 182 system. The chute maintenance is not just a "repack"; the rocket motor is replaced also. At least for the 182, no hacking into the airframe for maintenance is required, as it is accessable in the 182 baggage compartment.

For the Cirrus I wonder if the chute system can be inop and the plane still airworthy if the owner wants to defer the chute repack. It probably is for the 182 as additional equipment not affecting airworthiness.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 15:21

I believe the chute was part of certification on the SR so unlikely it will be airworthy without it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jan 2020, 15:30

Username Protected wrote:

I believe the chute was part of certification on the SR so unlikely it will be airworthy without it.

I think that's right, as I now recall that the Cirrus either did not pass spin certification, or it wasn't required with the chute system. I was a little surprised reading the BRS FAQ's seeing that the ground impact of the BRS is "under 4 's, well within tolerances for spinal compression ", but that could damage a 182 airframe that would total an older 182, but I think that's part of the occupant protection equation, using the airframe to absorb some of the impact. BRS says some of the 182's that used the chute were returned to service.

Edit: Both Cirrus and BRS publish "lives saved" information. So lives saved should result in in less payouts for insurance claims, but is there any premium credit for Cirrus because they have a chute?