Cirrus v. Bonanza

txnightster

txnightster

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
108
Location
Dallas, TX
Display Name
Display name:
Bill D.
I can see you flexing your fingers so you can bang out a quick response!! Let me first describe the opportunity and then you can fire away.

Good friend and I are on the road to become co-owners in an airplane. He and I have been and continue to partners in several hobbies and it has been very positive experience for both parties.

Qualifications: 500hr+ pilots with instrument rating/HP/Complex.

Age: 30's

Where we differ in this endeavor is the use of the airplane.

Pilot #1 works in the GA industry and travels within the region visiting his dealer network and the end user (GA Pilots) The airplane must be attractive, a common certified make/model, and reliable enough to use for business. He also flies for fun with his family. After a few years of renting 172's he is ready for a change.

Pilot #2 What brought about the change in my flying requirements is the arrival of my son last year. My wife isn't too excited about the prospect of putting him in a rental plane with the exception of a Cirrus. The cost to rent and the hassle involved in scheduling the Cirrus has completely turned me off.

Our family is 250+ miles away in an area that isn't convenient to a major airport so we flew to seem them quite often. We also fly several trips for vacation and I have business 300+ miles away that requires me to come by once per quarter. The past year we have been burning the road up and I'm really missing my time in the airplane!! Flying myself around the pattern just isn't enough to satiate my habit and quite frankly I miss flying with my wife.

Common questions we have received:

1st question "how did you narrow it down to only Bo's and Cirrus?"
They are very common, we both have experience in each and an efficient travelling plane for our type of flying.

2nd question, "can you afford to purchase, maintain and fly them?"
Yes, we have both waited over 5 years to buy an airplane so we aren't jumping in blind

3rd question, "will you both get adequate use of the airplane?"
We both plan ahead while remaining flexible. This has proven true on each of the cars, boats, etc. that we share. When there is a conflict we hash it out and move on. We have learned that most issues have been avoided by simply planning ahead and making your intentions known. Wish I could do a better job of this in my marriage! :)

4th question, "what's your budget"
Budget including acquisition costs is 100K-150K

5th question, "why don't each of you go buy your own plane"
Through work Pilot #1 gets access to items that I would otherwise not be able to afford. Pilot #1 also has space in a hangar that could help offset fixed expenses

Changing market for used aircraft:
With Cirrus aircraft appearing in our single piston budget they are very attractive. Despite all the positives for a Bonanza it's hard to ignore the comfort and appeal of an airplane that was built in the past 20 years.

Can someone check my thinking and tell me why we shouldn't only consider a Cirrus SR-20/22?

If there is another thread that answers my questions feel free to pass it along. I don't have thin skin so fire away with your ideas and punch some holes in my thinking. That's the whole reason for going through the exercise.

Thanks for your feedback.
Bill D.
 
Last edited:
V35A TC Bonanza owner here.....

IMHO, both are fine aircraft.

If you must have "new" technologies....the Cirrus glass panel and chute are preferable.

From a cost to own, aesthetics, performance.....either would fit the bill and be an equal choice in my book.

Now...if you meant BE-36....that's really not a "real" Bonanza in my opinion. :D
 
Last edited:
Couple of other considerations:

1) Have your wives expressed a preference for one vs the other? That's usually a BIG consideration. :yes:

2) How long do you intend to keep the plane? A few years with plans to step up to something higher performance, or is this a potential "forever" airplane?

Bonanza prices haven't really recovered very well from the price drop during the financial crisis. Cirrus prices seem to have held up much better, moving more with age and time on the planes.

At a cursory high level the Bo will likely tie up less money to purchase and cost more to maintain and the Cirrus will be the opposite.
 
Last edited:
Check, if the budget would allow I would definitely choose a BE-36 or Barron.

Aztec, thanks for the questions.
1. Yes, both wives prefer newer everything. My generation uses things and then throws them away. If newer is available we always choose it even if it isn't the best option.

2. Fly it for ten years. Looking for an airplane with an engine nearing TBO so we can put hours on a fresh engine.

I completely agree with your comment about purchase and maintenance costs for each prospective model. The cirrus is expensive to maintain but at least the costs are known as apposed to being a surprise.
 
GRG55 said:
At a cursory high level the Bo will likely tie up less money to purchase and cost more to maintain and the Cirrus will be the opposite.
Click to expand...


From what I've read, Cirrus are expensive to maintain, Mike Busch makes a living trying to keep those expenses down.
 
teejayevans said:
From what I've read, Cirrus are expensive to maintain, Mike Busch makes a living trying to keep those expenses down.
Click to expand...

I think Mike Busch makes a living trying to keep expenses down on every type of airplane his customers own.

"Expensive" is a relative matter. The Cirrus does not have the complexity of retractable gear and all the systems, avionics, etc will be newer, so perhaps more reliable. The SR20 engine should be less expensive than the 6-cyl Continental in a Bonanza.

The chute needs periodic repacks I believe, and if any of those lovely glass instruments fail it will likely be more expensive than repairing the tried and true steam gauges in most Bonanzas.

I expect the insurance on a Cirrus might be more expensive as well, despite the chute. As I understand if the chute is deployed the airframe is an automatic write off as the shrouds are glassed in and tear out the gel coat.
 
Last edited:
what engine is in the SR-20? ....isn't it a six cylinder?...IO-360-ES?
IO-360-AF1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Checkout_my_Six said:
what engine is in the SR-20? ....isn't it a six cylinder?...IO-360-ES?
IO-360-AF1.jpg
Click to expand...

Yes, you are correct. My mistake. It's a Continental IO-360 200 hp, but it is 6 cylinders, not a 4-banger a la Lycoming.

Given that one has to maintain a 6-cyl, I would think one would want to seriously consider the SR22 or SR22T instead as it considerably expands the capability and utility of the Cirrus airframe.
 
Last edited:
Reasons to consider Bonanza over SR22. I would not buy a 20 if you can afford a 22.

If you can use the extra space, you should be able to find a normally aspirated A36 in your budget.

If you want to go fast, you can buy a Turbo V35B Bonanza which should turn 205-215 ktas in the upper teens. You should be able to find a loaded one in that price range.
 
Last edited:
txnightster said:
My wife isn't too excited about the prospect of putting him in a rental plane with the exception of a Cirrus.
Click to expand...

If the wife is open/excited about the Cirrus and not the Bo, I vote Cirrus.
 
100-150 is at the low end for acquisition of a SR22 and a generous budget for a V-tail. The SR22 you can get for 135 is going to be a steam gauge or earlier Avidyne model which may run into a supportability issue one of these days. Any way you can borrow a bit of money to get to the $250 range ? Your partner is using it as a business tool, after taxes a slightly greater investment in the tool may not change the bottom line.
 
weilke said:
100-150 is at the low end for acquisition of a SR22 and a generous budget for a V-tail. The SR22 you can get for 135 is going to be a steam gauge or earlier Avidyne model which may run into a supportability issue one of these days. Any way you can borrow a bit of money to get to the $250 range ? Your partner is using it as a business tool, after taxes a slightly greater investment in the tool may not change the bottom line.
Click to expand...


No, not interested in borrowing $ for this endeavor.

The 90-110 range on the Bonanza has yielded a good selection its just that in person they haven't looked as nice in person as hoped.
 
Last edited:
So your actual budget is already 80k higher. Kind of a unique situation.
Is his employer going to retain ownership of the avionics ? What liabilities does this potentially create for you?
 
Will shoot you a PM to discuss the details and yes it is unique.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Get the Cirrus and don't look back. Once you have the Cirrus, you will thank me, unless you need more seats. btw. Almost any make/model can eat a pocket book. I owned a Cessna that gobbled up $48K the first year I had it. So far with the SR22T Cirrus my costs have been "normal". There are lots of guys with low operating costs with Cirrus. Join the cirruspilots.org site and see what they have to say.
 
I'd get an A36 if you're looking at those. Your wife will have easy access to kid in back. This will also be good when kid 2 comes along. Ideally find one with a 550.
 
JasonM said:
Get the Cirrus and don't look back. Once you have the Cirrus, you will thank me, unless you need more seats. btw. Almost any make/model can eat a pocket book. I owned a Cessna that gobbled up $48K the first year I had it. So far with the SR22T Cirrus my costs have been "normal". There are lots of guys with low operating costs with Cirrus. Join the cirruspilots.org site and see what they have to say.
Click to expand...
P210???
 
txnightster said:
No, not interested in borrowing $ for this endeavor.

The avionics will be replaced through my partners employer. It's essentially a flying showroom and training platform. The SR-22 steam would be replaced and then the "center stack" would be replaced. Would make for a nice IFR platform :)

Same plan applies if a bonanza is purchased. Remove old equipment and replace with new.

The 90-110 range on the Bonanza has yielded a good selection its just that the few we have traveled to see haven't looked as nice in person as hoped. On the other hand we looked at a 125K Cirrus that showed really well.
Click to expand...

Based on your posts looks like you plan to refurbish the mechanicals (new engine) and avionics (new panel) regardless.

That means the decision is strictly airframe preference. Probably comes down to just a few factors:
- climb on the wing vs the club seating access Ted mentioned;
- paint and interior condition (unless you plan to spring for that too);
- value of the engine and panel upgrades after installation in the airframe - do you get more of your investment back if you pour all that money into a Cirrus vs an A36; :dunno:
- your preference for how the airplane flies (I seem to be surrounded by Bonanza owner fanatics at my airport and nobody will ever convince a one of them that a Cirrus is a "nicer" plane to fly - but everyone has their belief system).
- last but not least, the wife factor that's come up on a few earlier posts. :yes:
 
If you are already committed to redoing the avionics and engine, find a timed out A36 with old avionics. Should be in the low 100's. That will be the most airframe you can buy. The Cirrus is nice, but with your budget you can put a very plush, new interior in the plane. It will be more comfortable than the Cirrus, no doubt.

Is the overhaul "free" too? If not I would look for one closer to the upper end of your budget with a recent engine/prop overhaul and new interior.
 
Last edited:
Ren, the engine work would come out of our pockets. Ideally find something with less than 500 hours until TBO and then overhaul when necessary.

Based on everyone's feedback I'm going to look again at the A36 market.

The wife factor weighs heavily so we will jump in a few more planes before she makes her mind up.
 
I have a A36TC (well, a part of it). I know that I can never ever allow my wife to fly in a Cirrus.
 
I owned a Cirrus SR22 for about 4 years, got my CSIP and remain active on COPA.

They're nice planes.

But to be honest, the Bonanza has one large plus in its column - its durability and longevity have been demonstrated. There are Bonanzas built in the 1940's and 1950's that are still flying.

Nothing specific, but there are design and build decisions by Cirrus that may give rise to doubts as to their long-term durability.

But to be fair, maybe whether or not a given airframe will last 60 or 70 years going forward is not a huge concern to many!

Oh, and Cirrus owners constantly gripe about the high cost of parts. Then again, they're not exactly giving away Bonanza parts either.

In any case, they're both fine planes.
 
Last edited:
FastEddieB said:
But to be honest, the Bonanza has one large plus in its column - its durability and longevity have been demonstrated. There are Bonanzas built in the 1940's and 1950's that are still flying.
Click to expand...

The 50s era Bos that are still flying had multiples of their original purchase price invested in maintenance and upgrades.

There are first generation balsa/fiberglass gliders still flying. Granted, they see neither the hours nor the outside storage that most powered GA aircraft experience, still , I see no reason why a well maintained and preserved composite plane couldn't reach the same age as an aluminum plane. It's not like a Bo left outside unattended won't corrode.
 
Do you plan on getting a T-hangar? SR22's don't fit in most T-hangars. Cirrus are nice, the 6 point harness is clutch for smoothness in the 6-9 I've flown in. I've had equal number of good/bad experiences with Cirrus and Bo's although insurance is more (typically) for Cirrus. I haven't seen many low time 22's in the 100-150 range but you do have a lot of Bo's in that range.

I love my 36, mostly because it fits my mission. I fly a lot with 4 adults and bags. My buddy had a SR22; great airplane and the chute is a really nice backup. We took 4 couples to the Bahamas when I still had my old tired engine in the Bo. He was always on my case about why I got a Bo instead of a Cirrus... till this trip. He had to make an additional stop on the first 3 hour leg that I didn't have to because of the <1100# useful load in most 22's. His 22 was about 20 knots faster than my Bo before the new engine, now it's about 3-4 slower. Useful load was the big seller for me, I was originally looking for a 22 when I ended up with my Bo.

If you aren't going to use a t-hangar and you rarely carry 4 adults, the Cirrus is a nice option (assuming you can find a low-time engine and chute repack in your budget). Otherwise I'd go Bo. (and join Beechtalk)
 
weilke said:
...still , I see no reason why a well maintained and preserved composite plane couldn't reach the same age as an aluminum plane.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. We'll see. I'm hopeful.

I was thinking more of smaller details - wing root fairings held on with double-sided tape, GPS antennas Velcro'd to the bottom of the glare shield, cheaping out on connectors - that sort of thing.
 
Personally I'd go Bo. Prefer the knowns of to 550 under the cowl and landing gear that can handle a bit more abuse.

There's no bad decision in either. Just personal preference.
 
FastEddieB said:
Perhaps. We'll see. I'm hopeful.

I was thinking more of smaller details - wing root fairings held on with double-sided tape, GPS antennas Velcro'd to the bottom of the glare shield, cheaping out on connectors - that sort of thing.
Click to expand...

What year was your plane ? I hear the first couple of model years were a bit of a hot-glue and duct tape enterprise and that from the mid 2000s on the fit and finish improved substantially.
 
FastEddieB said:
Mine was a 2003.

Hopefully the breed has improved since then.
Click to expand...

I have looked over and flown a 2006 model and fit & finish were very good. Not 'Beechcraft good', but way ahead of 'Piper good' :wink2: .
 
I have a Bo and luv it. Easy to fly, great airframe, predictable, and great support community. Get the Cirrus. Why do I say this? one word - chute. I have considered selling for the chute. That is a game changer. Why this isn't on every plane in 2016 blows me away. I know the reason,but why the FAA has not said push the regs so these can be installed is beyond me. The chute is hard to walk away from.

Finally Abollishing Aviation looking out for us.
 
Tough decision, and really boils down to preference.
I was faced with a similar decision last year before ending up with my V35B w/IO550. I really wanted to get the SR22 and had a huge pro-con list for both but believe it or not MY WIFE actually convinced me to finally get the V35 and I have no regret :yes:.

She always was attracted to the Vtails at osh and ramps we landed at. and every time I would put her into a cirrus she shrugged her shoulders and said its nice but felt plastic y like a new car.

Dont get me wrong, I was slightly leaning that way regardless of her decision.

The other thing I dont see listed here was landing and takeoff performance I cannot recall off the top of my head numbers but I do know that I can put her down and take off in a lot less runway then my peers who own SR22's (maybe its just technique :goofy:) .

I also dont hesitate to play around in short and grass strips where they wouldn't even think of venturing. :dunno:
 
Sure the chute makes the plane come from together, but since BO's tend to do that on their own periodically, I'd lean towards the big red handle.

That all being said, I'm on a French kick...have you guys considered the Trinidad? You can get some REALLY nice examples in the late 90's early 2000's and have a plane that's both fast and roomy (5' wide cabin)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Which would you feel better about flying on a night x/c ? Which would you feel better about flying over large stretches of water or rough terrain ?
 
I think the Bonanza is a sexy, beautiful airplane. I love the way they fly, and a Bo (especially a V-tail) sitting on the ramp invokes an emotional response - kind of like walking down the street and seeing a vintage sportscar. The Cirrus is a very capable airplane and has some modern features that are certainly attractive. I like the side stick. But to me, it's merely a machine that gets 4 people from A to B. It might as well be a Honda Accord.

Purely subjective, I know. :)
 
My choice was similar, Bo or SR22. Went with the SR22 and love it. Super comfortable, easy to use glass, good speed. I can't think of any other piston plane that I would want to own more than the SR22. Go fly both and see which "fits" you better. We typically go 2 - 5 hour XC and it is really a comfortable cabin. I am 6'-4" and have plenty of room. Flew from KPTK to KJYO in a tad under 2 hours this morning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top