Airplanes are like motorcycles. You need 2 or 3.

Great XC machines, IMO. The -20 is a dog and good only for training, though really now that I write that I think the new 215hp generation is supposed to be halfway decent but I don't have time in one. On a hot day and some weight in the older -20s you'll find yourself tightening up on shorter strips, especially with obstacles. Terrible climb performance at high DA/weight.

But yeah, air conditioning is great, it's comfortable, good visibility, and about the easiest aircraft to land. They make a big deal out of the training but you almost have to try and screw up in one, IMO. I think having the chute is great.

On one of my earlier flights I went to pick my clearance in the air and realized, Oh sh*t! I'm left handed, so that was awkward. Not so great for southpaws trying to write and fly at the same time. And the price, too high of an acquisition cost for me.

Scott, I’d also recommend to take a look at useful load for any model you are considering. Full fuel to go any significant distance will considerably limit how many folks you can take along. Full fuel on many models make it often times a two person aircraft. Bonanzas typically out perform the Cirrus with respect to useful load. But as always, this factor is dependent on your personal typical mission profile.

I'm doing my transition training in a G6 SR20 with Perspective+. The flight school clearly recognizes this is a gateway drug. It would be better for me (and my bank account) if it were instead an Avidyne G3....

While Cirrus’s design philosophy goes against the grain — they neither “simplicate” nor “add more lightness” — it’s hard to find a more enthusiastic group of airplane owners.

I wouldn’t want to own one alone because of the acquisition and upgrade costs but, if I have a next airplane, it might be a fraction of an SR-22.

There. I said it out loud.

I agree with your overall analysis, but not this. No statistical study to refer to but anecdotally the lowest price PA-46 I’ve seen (maybe high $300’s, most in the $400’s) is quite a bit more than the the lowest price SR22 I’ve seen (mid to low $200’s), which means a PA46 that is older than an SR22 is still more expensive. Hangar options are limited too. About the only plane I realistically can see moving up to, but would likely need a partner to do it. In the mean time, loving the Cirrus.

With a PA46 you probably want a PA46 specific shop maintaining them. The systems are complex, with some expensive parts. Annuals will typically range from 8-15 AMUS for a piston and that will be similar whether you fly 50 or 200 hrs a year. So fly more hours and hourly costs are lower. But think of a PA46 as a pressurized turbine with a piston engine as opposed as a pressurized piston,and you will better understand why the maintenance is higher. Always told people, if you ignore the ASI and the VSI you and your pax won’t really notice any difference from flying in a Mirage as a same vintage Meridian, M500, M600 or TBM. Just does what those birds do a little slower. But the capability. This is crossing a major named winter storm over the Sierra’s at FL240 in a Mirage in pressurized comfort. It is just a different world with the good and the bad.

I've heard the opinion expressed that they don't make a great $200 hamburger plane, which I can't understand. Any reason why a PA-46 wouldn't be fun for a short flight?

Since I did not like the way Bo handles, I never really looked closely at the UL to perform specific missions. Has anyone built a spreadsheet or chart showing typical UL/range comparing the two?

Tim

I've owned both an Avidyne G3 SR22 (in which I did a new interior and full Avidyne upgrade and got my IR in it), and currently own an M600. Loved the Cirrus, and love the M600. I came very close to pulling the trigger on an M350 but then found a partner and decided to go halves on an M600. But Chuck is correct; other than the ground speed (and I guess the sound at startup!), your pax won't be able to tell the difference between a piston and turbine PA46. Very very comfortable in the back.

We bought our M600 from a guy in Colorado who decided to buy a TBM ... we bumped into them a few months later at Ross Aviation in KSDL and his wife was complaining that the TBM wasn't nearly as comfortable in the back as the PA46 in her opinion. Her husband liked the TBM speed but preferred the M600 simplicity.

In any case, you will love the Cirrus.

Then again, I have a Diamond DA62 on order for late 2022 delivery so don't listen to me, apparently I have "a problem," or so my ex-wives tell me ... but on the other hand, I don't have to listen to them anymore! *laughing*

Cheers

Since I did not like the way Bo handles, I never really looked closely at the UL to perform specific missions. Has anyone built a spreadsheet or chart showing typical UL/range comparing the two?

Tim

The design of the Cirrus electrical system seems excellent for a glass panel aircraft. It is designed for redundancy, with a simple form automatic load shedding.

I wonder how practical (and costly) it is to retrofit an older aircraft to have a similar level of reliability.

Add this to "I did not like the way the Tesla Plaid accelerates" to the list of statements I never thought I'd read.

Add this to "I did not like the way the Tesla Plaid accelerates" to the list of statements I never thought I'd read.

Add this to "I did not like the way the Tesla Plaid accelerates" to the list of statements I never thought I'd read.