I don't need verification, Burns! Really - just curious. For all I knew, you may have been buying a Cub.

No I leave those 15 page diatribes to you guys . . .

Since no one has postulated as to why there is such a disconnect between the two groups, I thought I'd try a little intellect as opposed to emotion . . . and we all know intellect doesn't sell nearly as well as emotion.

Super late to the thread and I try my best to stay away from these and the twin vs single debate, but the title of the thread sucked me in.

Arlen, you asked a question and my answer is very simple. It's Beechtalk, not airplane talk, not cirrus talk its Beechtalk. I came here four five years ago to discuss Beechcraft and learn more about them, flying them, taking care of them, and meeting other beech owners. So yes I get annoyed with the rest. When they rename it planetalk, I will move on.

Maybe the same govt that just threw out the redskins name can force this to be airplane talk. Later. :deadhorse: And yes it's a dead horse. I knew I should not have opened the thread.

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.

Frankly I don't see this at all. For example I'm 56 and own a Cirrus. But I owned TWO Bonanza's before that. I have owned other brands as well and will undoubtedly own more. Probably not another Beech unless the B18 temptation overwhelms me or Beech comes out with a SETP in the next couple of years. As far as I can tell there is no demographic shift here causing BT members to by Cirrus.

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. This is obviously your perception which doesn't square up with reality very well from what I've seen of a lot of people who have flown Cirrus for years. Interestingly, when I was getting back into flying it was suggested to me to buy a Bonanza as a Cirrus was "too much airplane" for the inexperienced pilot. 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 I really, really wish this were true then we wouldn't be facing the ultimate demise of GA through lack of pilots. This is clearly not correct.(this group is very well represented within BT and perhaps dominant) I simply don't see how anyone who reads BT regularly could come to this conclusionand 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? Who are these people? Yes, there have been a couple that might fit this description in some of the Cirrus hating threads/posts but I don't think this is an accurate comment eitherIn 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. Again, I wish this were the case but the Cirrus pilots who haven't been run off seem to be old farts like myself by and large

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. I get this plastic business. When I was into boats, big boats, I couldn't understand why anyone would buy a "plastic" boat when they could have wood or steel. Of course most people were already living in the 20th century and I was the purist holding out for a return to materials that weren't coming back.

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. This may be the only thing you wrote I agree with. Which is ok with me. I often like people I don't agree with and hope we can have a beer and argue endlessly sometime. Just got back from London where it rained incessantly. I hope you're having a great time and better weather!

Cheers from London

Super late to the thread and I try my best to stay away from these and the twin vs single debate, but the title of the thread sucked me in.

Arlen, you asked a question and my answer is very simple. It's Beechtalk, not airplane talk, not cirrus talk its Beechtalk. I came here four five years ago to discuss Beechcraft and learn more about them, flying them, taking care of them, and meeting other beech owners. So yes I get annoyed with the rest. When they rename it planetalk, I will move on.
.

Burns - you buy the Cirrus primarily for the chute. If you are happy with the V35 not having a chute then I agree that it would not make much sense to trade when you have one as nice as yours. I love flying my old V35, but with my family getting bigger and only one son really liking to fly the V35 is not enough airplane. A cirrus would not be much better either as both are weak on useful and the V35 was always at the aft limit. For me, it made sense to get a fast 2-place instead of going slow in the V and paying crazy amounts for parts and having to deal with legacy autopilots, etc.

For all our sakes we better hope that a fuel becomes available soon to replace 100LL and it's price is something we can afford as a community. GA piston planes will not survive at all unless the whole community can afford to fly. We need the numbers in order to make volume pricing practical.

Barn doors are great. I just did 4,000NM in the Baron loaded up. All good!

Barn doors are great. I just did 4,000NM in the Baron loaded up. All good!

Cirrus are clown planes and will not recover from a stall!!