Cirrus vs A36

Salty said:
I said if it’s deployed and catches on fire. Then I’d be wishing I kept flying.
Click to expand...
Yeah, good point. There are situations where you may not want to pull it, but then that comes back to the person behind the controls. Still a good resource to have in your bag.

At the end of the day though, the biggest safety factor in any airplane is the pilot
 
DavidWhite said:
@RudyP Is about 14’ tall and he flies a Cirrus
Click to expand...

Haha. Not quite but I am 6’6” so cabin comfort (or lack thereof) is a big deal to me.

It’s obviously subjective but I’m surprised that Stephen Shore and son found it cramped. Did you guys have the seat set all the way back? Which dimension felt cramped (head, leg, shoulder room, width?)

I find my Cirrus to be much more comfortable that almost any other GA plane and I have flown 2000 nm in my Cirrus in a day which I would definitely not do in a Bonanza!

By the way, metalcloud is also 6’6” and owns a Cirrus too.
 
I've flown a Great Lakes, RV8, Pitts S-2C and I must admit that the one plane I am still most excited to fly one day is a Cirrus. Lol.
 
CC268 said:
I've flown a Great Lakes, RV8, Pitts S-2C and I must admit that the one plane I am still most excited to fly one day is a Cirrus. Lol.
Click to expand...

That's like saying you're excited about the prospect of flying a PA-28 after you've been flying a Cessna 180. :p
 
GRG55 said:
That's like saying you're excited about the prospect of flying a PA-28 after you've been flying a Cessna 180. :p
Click to expand...

Haha...I guess so. I've sat in a few new Cirrus (or maybe the correct term is Cirri), but never flown in one. I've never really flown in an airplane with an autopilot, glass panel, etc (although I guess the RV8 I flew did have a Dynon panel, but I was sitting in the back). They just look like a fun plane to travel in. Certainly better than droning at 100 knots in the Cherokee lol.
 
CC268 said:
Haha...I guess so. I've sat in a few new Cirrus (or maybe the correct term is Cirri), but never flown in one...They just look like a fun plane to travel in. Certainly better than droning at 100 knots in the Cherokee lol.
Click to expand...

We have used AMUs for a long time.
With inflation and all, I wonder if it's time for ACUs...Aviation Cherokee Units. In other words how many Cherokee equivalents does it take to buy and fly a go-faster Cirrus? :D

My Aztec goes 65 knots faster than my first Cherokee. Uses nearly 3 times the fuel to do it.
 
CC268 said:
I've flown a Great Lakes, RV8, Pitts S-2C and I must admit that the one plane I am still most excited to fly one day is a Cirrus. Lol.
Click to expand...
o_O
How in the hell did you get a medical with such an obvious psychological issue?



:D
 
mscard88 said:
Heck I have one! :biggrin:

And look at you! :yikes:
Click to expand...

Yeah but you were grandfathered in from the time before they were required.

As for me, I’m going BasicMed next time before they find out how loony I really am. I think I’ve just been lucky up til now.
 
RudyP said:
Haha. Not quite but I am 6’6” so cabin comfort (or lack thereof) is a big deal to me.

It’s obviously subjective but I’m surprised that Stephen Shore and son found it cramped. Did you guys have the seat set all the way back? Which dimension felt cramped (head, leg, shoulder room, width?)

I find my Cirrus to be much more comfortable that almost any other GA plane and I have flown 2000 nm in my Cirrus in a day which I would definitely not do in a Bonanza!

By the way, metalcloud is also 6’6” and owns a Cirrus too.
Click to expand...

What Rudy said. Cirrus is very roomy and comfortable for me.
 
GRG55 said:
Maybe Mooneys hold greater appeal to gregarious pilots. :D
Click to expand...

LOL.

But seriously, Mooney pilots 1) tend to like flying more than others and 2) fly a lot of IFR and FF. Plus, with the economy of those planes, they can afford to fly more than Bo and Cirrus pilots :p
 
N1120A said:
LOL.

But seriously, Mooney pilots 1) tend to like flying more than others and 2) fly a lot of IFR and FF. Plus, with the economy of those planes, they can afford to fly more than Bo and Cirrus pilots :p
Click to expand...
Yes. No one climbs into a Mooney unless they love to fly ! I file 155 and burn 9 gph...

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
Joegoersch said:
Yes. No one climbs into a Mooney unless they love to fly ! I file 155 and burn 9 gph...
Click to expand...

That is probably part of it. Once you fold and roll yourself into a Mooney and then stretch out with all that legroom, its too much bother to squeeze out again, so just keep flying...
 
GRG55 said:
Nobody will accuse you of being a man of few words Nate. Maybe you should have a Mooney too? :D
Click to expand...

caea63a65f32f4d766962b5d4de0b313.jpeg
 
It's somewhat surprising that there don't seem to be that many accident reports of Mooneys running out of fuel. It's easier to just keep flying, run out of fuel and be extracted by emergency crews than it is to climb over copilot seat and get out the usual way !!! Maybe that because it's just too uncomfortable to sit in for six hours ???
 
Joegoersch said:
Yes. No one climbs into a Mooney unless they love to fly ! I file 155 and burn 9 gph...

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
yup....then there are those who want +195 kts and are willing to burn more gas. o_Osig.JPG
 
CC268 said:
Haha...I guess so. I've sat in a few new Cirrus (or maybe the correct term is Cirri), but never flown in one.
Click to expand...
Once you do, you'll realize it's just another airplane. Good points and bad points. Among the 89 different models of single engine aircraft in my logbook, Cirrus is not in my top 10 in terms of flying enjoyment. That is not to say they're not good airplanes to fly or to own, only that when it comes to enjoyment, the Cirrus does not inspire me in the slightest to look back and smile when I walk away from it at the end of a flight.
 
I think pilots flock to Mooneys because they're a big bang for the buck. Bo's are more to acquire and maintain, and Cirri are more to acquire, don't know and the care and feeding. What makes Mooneys special is they go fast on not all that much gas. At the fuel burn I'm used to I have something like 6 hours of duration in my Mooney, I can't hold it that long without a bottle, and that's just undignified.

That last was supposed to be a joke. I fly for enjoyment, and flying for 6 hours isn't at all enjoyable.

That said, V-tailed Bo's are one of the prettiest airplanes in the GA fleet. Cirri are nice too, no doubts. Haven't flown one, but I bet they're a joy in the air.
 
One of my good friends here in Nola had a Cirrus22. He was always asking me why I got my Bonanza36 instead of a Cirrus. I told him I wanted to take two adult couples and all our gear and go somewhere. He said he could do that too but cruising 12 knots faster (my old engine was H U R T I N).

We planned a trip together; 4 couples in 2 airplanes to the Bahamas. I loaded all our gear (and a little bit of his) in my Bonanza, the Cirrus was taking off out of Lakefront New Olreans (KNEW) as we started the Bonanza engine. We had an air-to-air frequency so we could talk to them during the flight. He sped away towards Florida. Since his useful load was several hundred pounds less than mine he'd need a fuel stop enroute to Ft. Pierce, FL (KFPR). We were about 50 miles behind him when he entered the pattern for his fuel stop.

We kept going, landed at KFPR with plenty of fuel. We were just about to finish our lunch when the 4 from the Cirrus arrived. My buddy sat down next to me and says "ok, now I see why you wanted a Bonanza.... also, can I put more stuff in your plane?" I told him I'd think about it. :D

Cirrus is a great plane for a lot of uses. It doesn't fit the bill for me or my family. The Chute is a nice feature if used correctly.

My buddy that had that Cirrus? He flies a Baron now...
 
Last edited:
The Cirri are a diverse group. The old normally aspirated ones had good useful load, the later GW increased ones also have good useful loads. The Tricked out G3's, though, were heavy. I had a really nice G3 Turbo, FIKI, but remember one trip to Seattle. Due to headwinds I needed full fuel, and due to weather needed full TKS. With just me, fuel, TKS and a light overnight bag I took off at GW. But you can find some that are able to carry more. The later Bo's are pretty heavy too. Need to see the weight and balance for the particular aircraft before making much in the way of assumptions.
 
EvilEagle said:
One of my good friends here in Nola had a Cirrus22. He was always asking me why I got my Bonanza36 instead of a Cirrus.

...

Since his useful load was several hundred pounds less than mine he'd need a fuel stop enroute to Ft. Pierce, FL (KFPR). We were about 50 miles behind him when he entered the pattern.
Click to expand...

Yep, all depends upon the particular planes, but it would be hard, if not impossible, to find a SR22 with a higher useful load than an A36. I flew a 2002 model SR22 with just over 1,100 lbs of useful load, and I've seen newer models with even higher, with the new 3,600 lb max gross weight. I've also seen them in the G2 and G3 series in the low 900 lbs too. :(

Same applies for the A36 models too, except their low useful load range is around the high end for a SR22. Plus the A36 will have a lot more room for stuff in a four person set-up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top