by the way, Im not opinioniated at all

I flew a demo SR22 GTS Turbo out in Duluth; the sales rep for my buddy was convinced that i would trade in my Bo on one.

I loved it, it was great. the seemless integration of avionics and aircraft, sit awareness on an approach, etc. i couldnt complain about anything - except; it was not metal, and i needed 6 seats. otherwise, I believe that cirrus will bring in tons of people to GA, and then they will all get smart and buy a BEECH.

Let me add my Cirrus story.

Since I wanted to be "responsible" with my next purchase, I thought I should be more open minded and look closer at a Cirrus TN. I emailed for a brochure. The local salesman called me within days and sold me on a test flight, which we booked for two days after.

I had responded to their pretty magazine ad that was titled, "Cure for the common cold". Within 24 hours, I caught the worst cold in my entire life. I cancelled the flight and I never heard out of the Cirrus guy again!

John, aren't the NA SR22s several knots faster than an IO-550 powered A36? Seems it would stand to reason the TN versions would carry over that same speed advantage, no?

I guess I should've added "The Rest of the Story" (to quote that late, great aviator, Paul Harvey).

I'm now looking at moving up to a twin, solely because it's easier to handle my growing family. (Acknowledgements to those who believe an A-36 is almost as good for that mission as the BE-58, but in this case "almost" doesn't work.) I've considered a variety of alternatives including the SR-22G3 (not enough range, not big enough and not enough payload, on top of the things I noted above), the DA-42 (don't even need to go into it), the DA-50 (a pipe dream even before the DA-42 engine fiasco), the Piper twins (sounds like a couple of hotties but on closer inspection they turned out to be pigs with lipstick) and the Cessna 340 and 414 (old, expensive to maintain and won't fit in a normal hangar).

So at this point my search has narrowed to a BE-58, and my wife firmly and fully agrees, having flown in both a 58P and a couple of straight 58s (as well as a B55 and a couple of the models mentioned above). Nothing else has the combination of range, speed, payload, comfort, quality and desirable flying characteristics. If it were just the two of us, I wouldn't even be thinking about another airplane -- I love our Columbia, and I won't pick up more than about 10-12 knots running a Baron LOP, for twice the cost. But as soon as I can get a decent offer on the Columbia, count me as a 58 owner. Kudos and congrats to those of you who got it right the first time.

I want to share a Cirrus story too!

I have a couple handfuls of hours in a SR20 and SR22. Within the last year, my wife and I toyed with the idea of getting into one of those Cirrus fractionals that Jason was in. We flew the plane, etc. and my wife came away saying that she really liked the inside--particularly because she wasn't intimidated by it like she is in the Baron. She felt like she didn't need special permission to change the temperature controls in the Cirrus cockpit because they were on her side and functioned just like any car system. She also liked having a door that opened and closed more like a car door--albeit upwardly. For a host of reasons, our quest kind of fizzled out and we didn't pursue it much farther.

Fast forward to now, she and I are discussing getting into a new-to-us plane. It turns out that, in her opinion, we really need 6 seats (I agree) so the four seats in the Cirrus won't cut it, and, if we have 6 seats, she absolutely wants cargo doors ala the Baron 58. So, from her non-piloting point of view, she loves how simple the Cirrus interior and ergonomics are, but thinks they lack the room we will need in coming years.

Personally, for grins, I've looked at SR22s recently on the used market and, as mentioned above, I'm shocked at the depreciation these planes experience. I know that planes in general are no longer (if they ever were) good investments, but I also don't want to see the value plummet like they do in the Cirrus line.

Comments like those above about fit and finish, and also longevity also give me pause about buying in to an SR22.

Interestingly though, I find them fun to fly and like the clean glass panel layout, center console, and side stick. That is a winning combination for many younger, newer pilots. I don't write Cirrusessess off completely, but I do take more of a wait and see approach to them.

As for us, with the need to carry 6 and have easy access to those seats, the Bonanza looks to be the best fit. Go figure.

Wow, interesting! I had always heard 180-185 true for NA SR22s. Thanks for the clarification

I forgot to clarilfy a critical point. This story occured BEFORE I bought my Bo. I haven't lifted a single pointy finger anywhere even close to a telephone to dial a competitive aircraft company since I made my Beech decision.

Cessna 400 and 350 fuselages are being cured and assembled in Chihuahua Mexico, then shipped to Wichita. I bet that this will be controversial...

A little of a thread hijack...but first, to stay on topic, Cirrus marketing was and is superb. Much, much more competent than columbia. add more financial backing and not having the negative connotation of an evolved homebuilt...and viola...better sales.

And my sales story...when we were getting tready to TN the F33 we thought we would look at Cirri to see if that might make better sense. SWMBO and met with a rep in Wetumpka and went for a ride in a new TN AC G3. Lovely, and the AC was great. AS we climbed out the guy said: "She climbs a little slow because we have nearly full fuel and therefore are a bit overweight. I, said, sitting in the left seat: "Whaaat? Didn't we do a w&b check?" He said..." in this airplane you just need to make a couple of math errors...everyone flys them overgross."

We went back, landed and never looked back.

Nice airplane, but can't carry me and a handkerchief.
Jim

What a great story, Jim.

In order to get any utility out of the plane, you have to put your certificate at risk.

Wow! If that fact gets out, it would cause a stir. It's pretty hard to sell plastic as the new, high tech solution when it's hand made in a 3rd world factory. They'll have a good time with that one. Perception is reality!

I don't think Cessna is being particularly secretive that they're doing the composite layup on a place most known for producing small, annoying dogs. Bottom line: it's a Cessna. What that means is that you'll get Cessna mentality behind the plane's evolution in the future. Take a look at a 1979 C-172 alongside a 2009 C-172 and you get a pretty good sense for what that means. As to the newer, post-acquisition "Corvalises" (their spelling is about as good as their marketing these days), they've "streamlined" (read: cheapened) the painting process, uglified the colors, mucked up the name, and raised the price by about 20%. Other than that, it's the same airplane. And lest I sound too negative about the Cessna/CAM acquisition, I would say that it's a strong improvement in exactly one respect: the old company was broke and the new one isn't.

***Edit. I should say one thing clearly: I love our Columbia, and again, were it not for our growing family, I'd stick with it until the wings wore off. Would I buy it again? Given what I knew at the time, absolutely. Given subsequent events? Not on your life.

I know a lot of people at Cessna and I like a lot of them, but....

There is one big obsticle that Cessna has. I've seen it happen almost every time in non-aviation companies, so why wouldn't it be the same?

If you're the up and coming star in the organization, you get promoted from piston products to a more promising position in the turbine division. When you screw up, you get demoted back to pistons. As good as you can possibly do, you'll never find yourself in the spotlight until you move. It doesn't lead to inovation and long lasting leadership.

How can you have a market leading piston division when it's the hind tit?

Has anyone mentioned price? The Columbia/Cessna is quite a bit more than a Cirrus isn't it?

If you don't like the looks of the nosewheel pick up a Lancair IV.

I built a Lancair and at the time some of the pieces were being manufactured somewhere like Puerto Rico IIRC.

Embraers are manufactured in Brazil, another "third world country"

Bombardier has a big manufacturing facility in Queretaro Mexico

Boeing is in China....

Globalization..............