2003 Cirrus SR22 vs 2000 Mooney M20R Ovation 2 Honest Comparison

FloridaPilot

FloridaPilot

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
2,456
Location
Florida
Display Name
Display name:
FloridaStudentPilot
Both Airplanes are around the same price to purchase but I'm sure cost of ownership isn't. I would like to know what are your pros and cons with both airplanes. I haven't flown either airplane but I have sat in both and they are very comfortable inside unlike Pipers in my experience. I'm going to try out the Cirrus December 10th. I don't know any Mooney guys yet but I will probably in the future.

If you own either airplane, what are the annuals like? How much? Are parts hard to come by? What are you doing in fuel burn on average?

Cirrus

https://www.aso.com/listings/spec/V...l=True&pagingNo=1&searchId=27600739&dealerid=

Mooney

https://www.aso.com/listings/spec/ViewAd.aspx?id=167253&fAdvId=22085
 
One thing I can say about Cirrus is that I just joined COPA and the forums are pretty awesome. I just wish other brands would follow suit. They have extensive training, trips, newsletters and good overall people on the site. I just joined Mooney space today so i will see how that works out.
 
FloridaPilot said:
I just wish other brands would follow suit. They have extensive training, trips, newsletters and good overall people on the site.
Click to expand...

They're out there. I'm a member of a C150/152 and a C172 forum for instance, Bonanza has a great forum. GTS! (that's google that shet)
 
FloridaPilot said:
Both Airplanes are around the same price to purchase but I'm sure cost of ownership isn't. I would like to know what are your pros and cons with both airplanes. I haven't flown either airplane but I have sat in both and they are very comfortable inside unlike Pipers in my experience. I'm going to try out the Cirrus December 10th. I don't know any Mooney guys yet but I will probably in the future.

If you own either airplane, what are the annuals like? How much? Are parts hard to come by? What are you doing in fuel burn on average?

Cirrus

https://www.aso.com/listings/spec/V...l=True&pagingNo=1&searchId=27600739&dealerid=

Mooney

https://www.aso.com/listings/spec/ViewAd.aspx?id=167253&fAdvId=22085
Click to expand...

I'm no Mooney expert but that is a ROUGH example. Looks great on the outside but it hasn't been through in annual in 4-5 years...which means it hasn't flown in 4-5 years!

I know they are both high time engines but the Cirrus looks like a much better value using the examples provided.
 
Retractable gear will always be on your mind. If it isn't the consequences are pretty bad. I prefer Lycoming engines.
 
I'm not a fan of single engine planes so I have no dog in this hunt, but like neilw2, I would want a pretty detailed explanation as to why the Mooney has not been in an annual in over 4 years.
 
mscard88 said:
They're out there. I'm a member of a C150/152 and a C172 forum for instance, Bonanza has a great forum. GTS! (that's google that shet)
Click to expand...

I have, that is why I joined Mooney space. I'm also on the Bonanza site as well you have to get permission to join. So far IMO (COPA) is the best because they have a lot of programs to make you a better pilot (CPPP comes to mind right away). That is part of why the accident rates has dropped considerably. I'm not a Cirrus fan, (For the record) but I like how they are taking the club experience a step further compared to other brands. I'm hoping that other organizations follow suit and if they are correct me if I'm wrong.

neilw2 said:
I'm no Mooney expert but that is a ROUGH example. Looks great on the outside but it hasn't been through in annual in 4-5 years...which means it hasn't flown in 4-5 years!

I know they are both high time engines but the Cirrus looks like a much better value using the examples provided.
Click to expand...

I haven't purchased an airplane yet but wouldn't you get a complete inspection and whatever you find discount the asking price based on the work that needs to be done?

coloradobluesky said:
Retractable gear will always be on your mind. If it isn't the consequences are pretty bad. I prefer Lycoming engines.
Click to expand...

That is true,it HAS to be in the back of your mind but if you want to learn how to fly in faster airplanes (250 knots and up) 99% of them are retractable!

Lycoming vs Continental is totally debatable but it really comes down to how well you take care of your engine after new. Are you leaning correctly, Annual maintenance..etc
 
MooneySpace is a great resource, but it's only a fan club. But it's a great site with a lot if good information.

The Mooney Aircraft Pilots Assn (MAPA) is the real deal, complete with annual dues, magazine, insurance offers, Homecoming, Factory connections and periodic Pilot Proficiency Program that moves regularly around the country providing both ground instruction and flight time with CFI / CFII in your own Mooney.

www.mooneypilots.com

Lots of good information, but it's an old fashioned, email-based system rather than a forum. I'd love to have an R, but the C fits my budget and my needs.
 
Hank S said:
MooneySpace is a great resource, but it's only a fan club. But it's a great site with a lot if good information.

The Mooney Aircraft Pilots Assn (MAPA) is the real deal, complete with annual dues, magazine, insurance offers, Homecoming, Factory connections and periodic Pilot Proficiency Program that moves regularly around the country providing both ground instruction and flight time with CFI / CFII in your own Mooney.

www.mooneypilots.com

Lots of good information, but it's an old fashioned, email-based system rather than a forum. I'd love to have an R, but the C fits my budget and my needs.
Click to expand...

That is EXACTLY what I needed. I will give it a try.....Thank you!
 
I saw one M20R that had a 26# payload with full fuel, anti-ice etc - so not even the pilot could sit in the airplane with full fuel . . .

That type of loading issue is common with the Ovation -

Cirrus is a little better on loading but iirc is a 2.5 person airplane with full fuel.

Depends what you are using it for - range, speed or payload - pick any two.

The only 2 single engine piston airplanes that had all three were the Comanche and the early Bonanzas - maybe the early - mid production 210. . . .
 
Easy, m20r, it's a plane built for real pilots, not a safe space for doctors and other soft shoed intellectual types.
 
I might build a composite plane, but I wouldn't buy one...
 
comanchepilot said:
I saw one M20R that had a 26# payload with full fuel, anti-ice etc - so not even the pilot could sit in the airplane with full fuel . . .

That type of loading issue is common with the Ovation -

Cirrus is a little better on loading but iirc is a 2.5 person airplane with full fuel.

Depends what you are using it for - range, speed or payload - pick any two.

The only 2 single engine piston airplanes that had all three were the Comanche and the early Bonanzas - maybe the early - mid production 210. . . .
Click to expand...

How much does full fuel weigh in a Mooney?
 
OkieAviator said:
I might build a composite plane, but I wouldn't buy one...
Click to expand...

Heck yeah, short razor thin wings, swing your drag up, and biggest engine and prop you can shoe horn into the cowl.
 
Keep looking. Or understand that you will be spending quite a bit more for either of those two in the near future.

What are your needs?

I'd say the SR22, but that can vary based upon your needs. Wider cabin, two doors, and yes, the chute. The SR22 can glide to an airport, if in range, just like the Mooney, but you have the chute when that's not a good option. I flew a 2002 model SR22 with a little over 1,100 lbs of useful load. We flew it on trips with the four of us on a regular basis; two are my daughters that are now in college.
 
wayne said:
Keep looking. Or understand that you will be spending quite a bit more for either of those two in the near future.

What are your needs?

I'd say the SR22, but that can vary based upon your needs. Wider cabin, two doors, and yes, the chute. The SR22 can glide to an airport, if in range, just like the Mooney, but you have the chute when that's not a good option. I flew a 2002 model SR22 with a little over 1,100 lbs of useful load. We flew it on trips with the four of us on a regular basis; two are my daughters that are now in college.
Click to expand...

My wife and I with some bags 600-1000nm trips
 
FloridaPilot said:
One thing I can say about Cirrus is that I just joined COPA and the forums are pretty awesome. I just wish other brands would follow suit. They have extensive training, trips, newsletters and good overall people on the site. I just joined Mooney space today so i will see how that works out.
Click to expand...

Mooneyspace is pretty awesome too, and we have a great organization in MAPA that does type training all over the country every month or two.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
comanchepilot said:
I saw one M20R that had a 26# payload with full fuel, anti-ice etc - so not even the pilot could sit in the airplane with full fuel . . .

That type of loading issue is common with the Ovation -

Cirrus is a little better on loading but iirc is a 2.5 person airplane with full fuel.

Depends what you are using it for - range, speed or payload - pick any two.

The only 2 single engine piston airplanes that had all three were the Comanche and the early Bonanzas - maybe the early - mid production 210. . . .
Click to expand...

You were probably looking at a Porsche PFM Mooney converted to an Ovation not a real Ovation. They have terrible useful loads. There are only a few around.

Most Ovations have around 950 or more useful load.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have flown both. I would certainly own a Mooney. I have owned two Cirrus. The Cirrus to me is more comfortable on longer trips. I average 350 hours per year. With 1100 pounds useful ive had three adults and two children in the G5 SR22 with half tanks - no luggage other than jackets as we flew to memphis in the winter.
 
I own a 96 Ovation with 950 useful load, closer to 1000 when TKS tank is low.

I flight plan 175 at 13gph. Would be faster but it's a FIKI bird and I like to throttle back a little, fly LOP and not have to stop for fuel. Plenty of Ovations go 190. I've gone nonstop western ma to Orlando no problem. 1000nm legs are doable. 90gallons of fuel can be loaded, if you want to go that far. Or put on 50 and still go 600nm with 700lbs of load. Or carry 35 and carry four real adults 250nm. C&G range is wide.

Annuals after I got initial things the way I want em have been 2000 or under. Insurance has been reasonable, but I have a good amount of retract time. You'll want to compare to Cirrus quotes, they aren't particularly cheap to insure, is my impression.

Parts are no problem and anecdotally seem better than Beechcraft prices. Very few ADs. Generally seem easy to work on. Very high build quality. They've been built for so long many of the bugs are worked out.

Love the way it flies, steady in turbulence, can handle a lot of wind. Very stable. Pushrod controls mean very precise control feel - no slop. And you feel it all - in contrast to the one thing I really dislike on a Cirrus, the bungee trim system.

Landing em requires paying attention, and slowing them down is hard. There is a reason for the speedbrakes.

Best in class fuel economy and glide ratio to match. No chute but also no repack costs.

I would add this airplane has dual batteries dual alternators, an emergency electrical bus, and a backup vacuum pump. It's really a grown up personal airliner kind of airplane. And early Ovations can be had under 200k

Ask all the questions you want!

Ps the tail isn't backward. Ask yourself, do you want a rudder that gains or loses effective surface area at higher angles of attack? Swept tails on piston airplanes are all marketing. Or just look at the trailing edge of aerobatic airplane tails, or the trailing edge of the rudder on a P51 Mustang...

945c690858b19fdbe2266ea346d5cd8f.jpg


b6fc5ee92e361f08e74aaef9bbceb393.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
EminiTrader said:
I have flown both. I would certainly own a Mooney. I have owned two Cirrus. The Cirrus to me is more comfortable on longer trips. I average 350 hours per year. With 1100 pounds useful ive had three adults and two children in the G5 SR22 with half tanks - no luggage other than jackets as we flew to memphis in the winter.
Click to expand...

Why do you say the Cirrus is more comfortable is it because of the seating? I've sat in both airplanes and I didn't have a problem with comfort they were both about the same.

gsengle said:
I own a 96 Ovation with 950 useful load, closer to 1000 when TKS tank is low.

I flight plan 175 at 13gph. Would be faster but it's a FIKI bird and I like to throttle back a little, fly LOP and not have to stop for fuel. Plenty of Ovations go 190. I've gone nonstop western ma to Orlando no problem. 1000nm legs are doable. 90gallons of fuel can be loaded, if you want to go that far. Or put on 50 and still go 600nm with 700lbs of load. Or carry 35 and carry four real adults 250nm. C&G range is wide.

Annuals after I got initial things the way I want em have been 2000 or under. Insurance has been reasonable, but I have a good amount of retract time. You'll want to compare to Cirrus quotes, they aren't particularly cheap to insure, is my impression.

Parts are no problem and anecdotally seem better than Beechcraft prices. Very few ADs. Generally seem easy to work on. Very high build quality. They've been built for so long many of the bugs are worked out.

Love the way it flies, steady in turbulence, can handle a lot of wind. Very stable. Pushrod controls mean very precise control feel - no slop. And you feel it all - in contrast to the one thing I really dislike on a Cirrus, the bungee trim system.

Landing em requires paying attention, and slowing them down is hard. There is a reason for the speedbrakes.

Best in class fuel economy and glide ratio to match. No chute but also no repack costs.

I would add this airplane has dual batteries dual alternators, an emergency electrical bus, and a backup vacuum pump. It's really a grown up personal airliner kind of airplane. And early Ovations can be had under 200k

Ask all the questions you want!

Ps the tail isn't backward. Ask yourself, do you want a rudder that gains or loses effective surface area at higher angles of attack? Swept tails on piston airplanes are all marketing. Or just look at the trailing edge of aerobatic airplane tails, or the trailing edge of the rudder on a P51 Mustang...

945c690858b19fdbe2266ea346d5cd8f.jpg


b6fc5ee92e361f08e74aaef9bbceb393.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Beautiful bird you have there. I will add you!

Does Mooney have a buzzer go off when you hit a certain low airspeed to lower the gear?

How experienced were you when you purchased? Did you have a lower level Mooney before the Ovation?

Are there service centers out there that work exclusively on Mooney's

(Some of these questions I will ask on Mooneyspace)

Thanks Again!
 
FloridaPilot said:
My wife and I with some bags 600-1000nm trips
Click to expand...

Either works great for you.

Those two you quoted will have big bills coming in not too long. The Mooney sitting around for 4+ years with zero flying is not a good thing. There will be issues from that, maybe small, maybe not so small. The SR22 has a lot of time on the engine.

I still say the SR22 has a slight advantage. Not a big one, a slight one. It's much easier to enter and exit. Loading luggage is also easier. You won't ever forget to lower the gear. The avionics are really nice. The MFD is a big situational help in IMC. Get one with EMax as it helps run LOP and see what's going on in the engine if things aren't going well. The chute is a good back-up, as much as it's maligned. My 1st plan in an engine failure is to land at an airport, and I had one of the two 430's set to Nearest Airport at all times in the SR22. But the chute does give another option and an answer to the non-pilot passengers question, "What happens if you pass out / have a heart-attack?".

I've flown a M20J, but not a M20R. Mooneys are nice planes. It would also be a good fit for your needs.
 
Yes it will complain at you if you get slow with flaps down and gear is up. I always drop gear before any flaps so I never get to hear it. Frankly I don't know how you could land this airplane gear up because they are hard to slow down, and would be impossible gear up. I don't know how you couldn't notice.

I had prob 500 hours when I bought her, and had owned an Arrow (1981 T tailed normally aspirated - loved it) that I got my instrument rating in for maybe 3 years before the Mooney. Frankly I upgraded because I got a flight in a Mooney, saw how it flew, and the arrow was just too SLOW and sloppy after that.

Now I go from New England to Florida for example in an afternoon. The Arrow would take all day assuming I got up early.

Do get type specific transition training, they are so much faster that it takes a while to not be totally behind the airplane. Plus in the case of an R, now you're looking at cool things that have a learning curve like a flight director with attitude based autopilot (awesome).

Yes there is a network of Mooney Service Centers. (MSC) But these birds aren't hard to find qualified people to work in, they did make like 11,000 of them.

Also check out this - huge asset to the community.

http://www.mapasafety.com/proficiency

I'll leave you with this. These Mooney's, especially the new ones (M20R, S, M, TN) are personal airliners. They are refined professional machines. They mean business and are extremely capable. Get a flight in an Ovation or other long body, and you'll see what I mean. To me a Cirrus still feels a bit more "consumer grade". Don't get me wrong they are plush and the new ones have a ton of capability, but somehow for me they aren't the same. I also do not like the bungee trim system (learn about how the Mooney system works, super clever and efficient) which leaves you with diminished control feel. Not sure if this contributes to low and slow accidents...

Besides for me, if the gear don't come up it's a toy ;)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
FloridaPilot said:
...Are there service centers out there that work exclusively on Mooney's...
Click to expand...

Just a thought for you, don't look for a "service center" or a FBO, look for a APIA who knows the type, hire the man not the marquee above a door.

Having a individual will save you money, will deliver more constant work and most of all will take personal ownership over the work.

I don't have a mooney, but I do have a odd type 300hp complex IFR plane, I have a guy who does my annuals or any heavy Mx, I wouldn't do it any other way.

Just my 2¢
 
Oh and one last thought on your comparison. A 2003 Cirrus is, my understanding, very different than the Cirrus SR22 you can buy today. They have evolved a ton. Whereas a 94 or in my case 96 Ovation are essentially unchanged versus say a 2015 Ovation in terms of capability. (Other than avionics and the 310hp stc you should learn about)

I guess what I'm saying is that the Ovation was already a mature design when it came out and they got it right out of the gate. Very few ADs. So there isn't much penalty for buying an older one relative to the Cirrus...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Training is important, and I think Cirrus has the edge there.

There is a network of easy-to-find CSIP instructors available across the country for Cirrus transition training and recurrent training. They hew to standardizations, and they get their own recurrent training, specific to Cirrus.

Recurrent training at the COPA's CPPP events is easily available and very good. Half-day seminars specific to Cirrus are even more frequent, and run by COPA. The factory recognizes the importance of this.

There's a reason that Cirrus accidents have been diminishing, and everyone attributes it to all this effort, at the factory and COPA, focussed on training.

When I was shopping, I also compared Mooney and Cirrus, and the training was a deciding factor for me. A much more important factor than engine manufacturer and such things. Nothing beats staying alive, and for that purpose nothing is better than training, although the chute certainly makes a big difference, too.
 
Mooney for the win!
 
NoHeat said:
Training is important, and I think Cirrus has the edge there.

There is a network of easy-to-find CSIP instructors available across the country for Cirrus transition training and recurrent training. They hew to standardizations, and they get their own recurrent training, specific to Cirrus.

Recurrent training at the COPA's CPPP events is easily available and very good. Half-day seminars specific to Cirrus are even more frequent, and run by COPA. The factory recognizes the importance of this.

There's a reason that Cirrus accidents have been diminishing, and everyone attributes it to all this effort, at the factory and COPA, focussed on training.

When I was shopping, I also compared Mooney and Cirrus, and the training was a deciding factor for me. A much more important factor than engine manufacturer and such things. Nothing beats staying alive, and for that purpose nothing is better than training, although the chute certainly makes a big difference, too.
Click to expand...

Just consider that part of the reason the training appears to be so formalized for Cirrus is because the manufacturer was facing a troubling accident rate, especially for an airframe touted as having all sorts of safety advantages. It's commendable but it was also necessary. And it's not unique to Cirrus.

The Cirrus training has brought the accident rate down to where the Cirrus fleet has good safety numbers. The question for me is that since this training emphasizes not hesitating to pull the chute, and pulling the chute usually totals the plane, what do Cirrus insurance rates look like as a result...

Through MAPA you can find Mooney specific instructors, and there are excellent weekend long recurrent training programs held for Mooney around the country. These programs include ground school and flight training specific to your aircraft, and are an invaluable asset to the Mooney community.

http://www.mapasafety.com/proficiency

Finally, Mooneyspace has matured into an incredible archive and asset to the community. And it's free (donations accepted)

https://mooneyspace.com/

ps there are a ton of modern models to choose from, Js and Ks are awesome too... depending on your experience and price point.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I love it how they can't help themselves but always drag g-d Piper Arrows into these conversations. It's so f**ng disingenuous. This thread has so much socioeconomic dog-whistle narrative it's not even funny.

You know, if I wanted veiled class warfare in my edutainment I'd just subscribe to Flying Magazine. :rolleyes:

Tarheelpilot said:
To the op what is your experience base moving into the new plane?
Click to expand...

eggggzactly.;)
 
gsengle said:
I own a 96 Ovation with 950 useful load, closer to 1000 when TKS tank is low.

I flight plan 175 at 13gph. Would be faster but it's a FIKI bird and I like to throttle back a little, fly LOP and not have to stop for fuel. Plenty of Ovations go 190. I've gone nonstop western ma to Orlando no problem. 1000nm legs are doable. 90gallons of fuel can be loaded, if you want to go that far. Or put on 50 and still go 600nm with 700lbs of load. Or carry 35 and carry four real adults 250nm. C&G range is wide.

Annuals after I got initial things the way I want em have been 2000 or under. Insurance has been reasonable, but I have a good amount of retract time. You'll want to compare to Cirrus quotes, they aren't particularly cheap to insure, is my impression.

Parts are no problem and anecdotally seem better than Beechcraft prices. Very few ADs. Generally seem easy to work on. Very high build quality. They've been built for so long many of the bugs are worked out.

Love the way it flies, steady in turbulence, can handle a lot of wind. Very stable. Pushrod controls mean very precise control feel - no slop. And you feel it all - in contrast to the one thing I really dislike on a Cirrus, the bungee trim system.

Landing em requires paying attention, and slowing them down is hard. There is a reason for the speedbrakes.

Best in class fuel economy and glide ratio to match. No chute but also no repack costs.

I would add this airplane has dual batteries dual alternators, an emergency electrical bus, and a backup vacuum pump. It's really a grown up personal airliner kind of airplane. And early Ovations can be had under 200k

Ask all the questions you want!

Ps the tail isn't backward. Ask yourself, do you want a rudder that gains or loses effective surface area at higher angles of attack? Swept tails on piston airplanes are all marketing. Or just look at the trailing edge of aerobatic airplane tails, or the trailing edge of the rudder on a P51 Mustang...

945c690858b19fdbe2266ea346d5cd8f.jpg


b6fc5ee92e361f08e74aaef9bbceb393.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Wow beautiful airplane...wish I had one like that!
 
wayne said:
Keep looking. Or understand that you will be spending quite a bit more for either of those two in the near future.

What are your needs?

I'd say the SR22, but that can vary based upon your needs. Wider cabin, two doors, and yes, the chute. The SR22 can glide to an airport, if in range, just like the Mooney, but you have the chute when that's not a good option. I flew a 2002 model SR22 with a little over 1,100 lbs of useful load. We flew it on trips with the four of us on a regular basis; two are my daughters that are now in college.
Click to expand...

I didn't mention that I was going to buy either one, I just needed a comparison in costs, advantages and disadvantages in owning either airplane. Parts availability, costs of ownership..etc I want to have an idea what to expect. Like I mentioned before I have been inside a Mooney at Sun and Fun but I have never flown in one so I'm not experienced in them at all but I have an interest that is why I'm asking these questions.

Zhunter said:
I'm pretty sure Premeir in Ft. Lauderdale works on Mooney's
Click to expand...

Most places will try to fix ANY airplane but I would rather go with type experience.

NoHeat said:
Training is important, and I think Cirrus has the edge there.

There is a network of easy-to-find CSIP instructors available across the country for Cirrus transition training and recurrent training. They know standardization, and they get their own recurrent training, specific to Cirrus.

Recurrent training at the COPA's CPPP events is easily available and very good. Half-day seminars specific to Cirrus are even more frequent, and run by COPA. The factory recognizes the importance of this.

There's a reason that Cirrus accidents have been diminishing, and everyone attributes it to all this effort, at the factory and COPA, focussed on training.

When I was shopping, I also compared Mooney and Cirrus, and the training was a deciding factor for me. A much more important factor than engine manufacturer and such things. Nothing beats staying alive, and for that purpose nothing is better than training, although the chute certainly makes a big difference, too.
Click to expand...

I totally agree, but if I'm a pilot who values safety, (Which I do) Could I get constant training in type from a knowledgeable flight instructor? I like the Cirrus too because of CAPS. What most pilots don't understand is something can happen to you outside of your control, (Tower screwed up, another pilot made a mistake, Engine Failure) and that is why CAPS is important. I'm just fighting the idea that I have to pay over 10K for a repack every so often...even if I don't use it.

Tarheelpilot said:
To the op what is your experience base moving into the new plane?
Click to expand...

So far just Pipers and Cessnas but i understand there is a transition that needs to take place and I will do that before getting in type. I'm in no rush!

hindsight2020 said:
I love it how they can't help themselves but always drag g-d Piper Arrows into these conversations. It's so f**ng disingenuous. This thread has so much socioeconomic dog-whistle narrative it's not even funny.

You know, if I wanted veiled class warfare in my edutainment I'd just subscribe to Flying Magazine. :rolleyes:



eggggzactly.;)
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you feel that way, best thing to do is read threads that you in fact DO LIKE.
 
hindsight2020 said:
I love it how they can't help themselves but always drag g-d Piper Arrows into these conversations. It's so f**ng disingenuous. This thread has so much socioeconomic dog-whistle narrative it's not even funny.

You know, if I wanted veiled class warfare in my edutainment I'd just subscribe to Flying Magazine. :rolleyes:



eggggzactly.;)
Click to expand...

Maybe submit one of these?

13181115.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top