Passed Checkride!!! Now deciding between Renting DA40 G1000 or Cirrus SR20 G6

R

Renesh Kumaresan

Pre-Flight
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
59
Display Name
Display name:
Turb0123
Hey guys! Recently passed my checkride. I’ve been training for three years (I was only flying once a month initially). I got checked out in a G1000 172 the day after. I was debating the DA40 G1000 vs SR20 perspective plus. I only need to do 1-2 hrs of checkout in the DA40, but for the cirrus I need to do 4-10. I’ve done discovery flights in both, and I like both. The Cirrus has A/C which isn’t too much of a concern for me. The Cirrus is also more expensive 275$ wet vs 165$ wet for the diamond. The diamond is more of a sportier seating position which I like. The cirrus feels cooler to fly because it’s much bigger. I think they’re equally as fast, but I know the diamond climbs better in higher density altitudes. The cirrus has more legroom but not a concern for me. The parachute is a nice thing to have, but also isn’t a selling point to me.

I don’t like the fact that you need to get a “type rating” for the cirrus, but I very much like cirrus as they have a better arrangement of the g1000 with a keypad and such. I think passenger comfort is a little better in the Cirrus.

I’m planning to do some cross country to Nevada, San Diego, Catalina and some others this year. I feel like I would fly the diamond more. I think I’m mainly comparing looks in deciding to rent the aircraft.

Whew, now that you read my paragraphs of comments just to see I’m comparing looks, which do you think is better to fly.

also, I’m going to do my instrument training after a couple months but when I do, I’ll probably do it in an analog Cessna 172, the price is almost the same as g1000 but it’s easier for me to go from analog to glass than vice versa.
 
I like the Cirrus. The SR20 G6 is pretty fast the older ones are no slouches. For the G6 20 you need a high power endorsement, so make sure you get it with a check out if that's what you choose. Keep in mind that you need to leave fuel behind usually to fill those seats in a 20, so legs can get pretty short, especially with IFR minimums. Something to keep in mind. I haven't flown the 40 so I can't help there.
 
There’s no bonanza’s available for rent near me in SoCal. One more thing that I’ve noticed is, the SR20 G6 has an aft cg when loaded with 4 people (with pilot of course), more so for the ones with composite props. I’m most likely going to do two other people not including me and as much fuel when I fly.
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
bonanza’s
Click to expand...
it's a cool looking plane, other than that it's a narrower less comfortable cabin with added complexity and pilot workload. I will never understand the obsession with them
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
There’s no bonanza’s available for rent near me in SoCal .
Click to expand...

Sorry. I assumed you were discussing a purchase rather than a rental. Congrats on your recent certificate; your perseverence is admirable. If I could offer a humble suggestion to you as a renter, it would be to seek-out a rarely-flown (but exquisitely maintained) Bo that needs regular exercise and TLC. A non-equity partnership (rental, for all practical purposes) benefits the owner and you; but it's a special relationship, and not readily obvious. Bos are "easy" to fly (as in "viceless"), but the performance, quality, and versatility will make any pilot smile ear-to-ear in short order. Insurance requirements are worth the trouble and expense. Good luck, RK.
 
^the little table thing is cool though, and they do fight real nice, and the double doors on the back are nice as well, beautiful ramp presents, I give them that!
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
type rating
Click to expand...
Hey sorry, I missed this part of your post. You don't need a type rating, it's ASEL. Cirrus pushes hard on the transition course, but it's not something you legally need

It's a worthwhile program though, you'll learn the edges of the envelope, get very familiar with avionics, etc. I wish all planes offered something similar. Coming from a PA28, Archer, DA20/40.. to really anything like a Bonanza, Mooney, etc., is a pretty big difference and pilots would benefit from a standardized checkout program

While completely legal, I can't imagine doing a complex endorsement in a 182 and then buying an Ovation and flying that.
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
I’m planning to do some cross country to Nevada, San Diego, Catalina and some others this year. I feel like I would fly the diamond more. I think I’m mainly comparing looks in deciding to rent the aircraft.
Click to expand...
If poking around the local area is going to be a significant part of your flying, you'll probably like the Diamond better. Cirrus is more of a "go places" kind of ride. If there's anyone that would like to a wear a skirt or dress while flying then the Diamond's center stick might be an issue, hence the Cirrus side stick becomes an advantage. If you are going to be carrying people in the back seats then the rear doors on the Diamond will be a big plus.

Tantalum said:
While completely legal, I can't imagine doing a complex endorsement in a 182...
Click to expand...
You meant R182, right? ;)
 
I know there’s no legal type rating from the FAA. That’s why I put it in quotation marks. But many flight schools with cirrus push that you need 10 hrs of transition before and then some others claim you only need three. I meant the transition training.
 
asicer said:
You meant R182, right?
Click to expand...
Yes, for some reason I always assume they're all RG (I know most aren't though). This might go back 15-20 years to my flight sim days when I'd pick the 182 because I thought it was cool that the gear came up!
 
Cirrus will pay for up to three days of training even if you buy used. Something to think about if insurance requires some time in type.
 
asicer said:
If poking around the local area is going to be a significant part of your flying, you'll probably like the Diamond better. Cirrus is more of a "go places" kind of ride.
Click to expand...
Actually.. this is a great point. I recently did a few flights in an Archer III.. and while no where near the machine to a modern Cirrus (especially turbo) there was something to be said for the simplicity of it.. did a few landings at Fallbrook http://www.airnav.com/airport/L18 and the Archer was, in my respects, an easier plane to fly.. this is after having maybe 100 hrs in the last 3 years in an Archer vs about 300 in Cirrus

But to that point, I still think the Cirri is easier to fly than something like an Arrow or 182RG, simply because no gear, blue knob, cowl flaps, etc
 
PaulS said:
I like the Cirrus. The SR20 G6 is pretty fast the older ones are no slouches. For the G6 20 you need a high power endorsement, so make sure you get it with a check out if that's what you choose. Keep in mind that you need to leave fuel behind usually to fill those seats in a 20, so legs can get pretty short, especially with IFR minimums. Something to keep in mind. I haven't flown the 40 so I can't help there.
Click to expand...
Have you ever flown for with 4 people including yourself of course. Fuel cutdown in the limits of weight. How was the handling with CG at the aft limit. EF92F548-7DDA-494F-99C1-BDB8DF925F28.png
Pretty much like this. I’ve flown three and full fuel in 172N and near gross weight in a C172SP.

I’m more concerned of the CG more than the weight.
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
4 people
Click to expand...
hey, I've had four people in a 22 and had to be very careful about fuel to be within legal limits. In my opinion I thought the plane handled better, that tends to be true though with an aft CG. The only real difference I felt was during landing, back pressure in the flare is different however I actually thought this helped give me a smoother touch down
 
Tantalum said:
hey, I've had four people in a 22 and had to be very careful about fuel to be within legal limits. In my opinion I thought the plane handled better, that tends to be true though with an aft CG. The only real difference I felt was during landing, back pressure in the flare is different however I actually thought this helped give me a smoother touch down
Click to expand...
So in the 22 you have a better useful load obviously. But would you say your CG was loaded similar to the image I posted. I figured during my transition training I’ll bring two people I plan to fly, put them in the backseat and practice with the instructor.
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
So in the 22 you have a better useful load obviously. But would you say your CG was loaded similar to the image I posted. I figured during my transition training I’ll bring two people I plan to fly, put them in the backseat and practice with the instructor.
Click to expand...
yes, it looked similar, I use a spreadsheet supplied by Cirrus not the one in foreflight but it was basically at the rear upper limit

the turbo tends to be nose heavy, so you might have even lighter control pressures during the flare, something to be aware of

Aerodynamically the 20 and 22 (of same "g" series) are nearly, if not totally, identical
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
So in the 22 you have a better useful load obviously. But would you say your CG was loaded similar to the image I posted. I figured during my transition training I’ll bring two people I plan to fly, put them in the backseat and practice with the instructor.
Click to expand...

I've flown an older 20 with at it's weight limit, and it flew fine, the only issue I saw is a slower climb. Landing wasn't any different from what I felt. You have to be real careful with fuel and range planning. Not much of an issue for VFR, just make sure you have reserves. IFR it can really limit your legs. As always it depends on how large you are and how large your passengers are, but stay with the envelope and you are fine.
 
When I was shopping for my first plane I had the DA40 on my short list. I flew one, and loved the way it flew. But, it just didn't have the useful load I needed. If I remember it's really a 3 person plane.
 
Sounds like you like the DA40 better, so that’s the choice. Why fight it?:D
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
Sounds like you like the DA40 better, so that’s the choice. Why fight it?:D
Click to expand...
No I actually like the cirrus way more. I just don’t like the transition training, and the place I’m going to rent from does a 3hr/day minimum for multi day rental so in a diamond it’s not much. But it really adds up in the cirrus. Especially if I’m only flying two hours.
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
No I actually like the cirrus way more. I just don’t like the transition training, and the place I’m going to rent from does a 3hr/day minimum for multi day rental so in a diamond it’s not much. But it really adds up in the cirrus. Especially if I’m only flying two hours.
Click to expand...

Yes, 3 hour min is a little much, the place I rent from does the same.
 
PaulS said:
Yes, 3 hour min is a little much, the place I rent from does the same.
Click to expand...
I know one place that requires you to get your own insurance and asks for multi day minimum of 2.6hrs per day. Seems very precisely calculated...
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
I know one place that requires you to get your own insurance and asks for multi day minimum of 2.6hrs per day. Seems very precisely calculated...
Click to expand...
Renesh, I would pick the airplane that I liked best, run it per the POH and you should be happy. Don't be afraid of the check out, it's not a big deal and unless you are an ATP level, or at least very experienced pilot, the extra time will be worth it. You know how to fly, and the Cirrus is a pretty easy airplane to fly if you respect airspeeds. Learning the systems takes time, especially the autopilot. Better to be comfortable with them than to save a few bucks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JEB
PaulS said:
Renesh, I would pick the airplane that I liked best, run it per the POH and you should be happy. Don't be afraid of the check out, it's not a big deal and unless you are an ATP level, or at least very experienced pilot, the extra time will be worth it. You know how to fly, and the Cirrus is a pretty easy airplane to fly if you respect airspeeds. Learning the systems takes time, especially the autopilot. Better to be comfortable with them than to save a few bucks.
Click to expand...
I’m more concerned with the difference in times quoted. 3hrs to 10hrs is huge. People get there MEL in under 10hrs. I just don’t want to be lied to and overcharged.
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
I’m more concerned with the difference in times quoted. 3hrs to 10hrs is huge. People get there MEL in under 10hrs. I just don’t want to be lied to and overcharged.
Click to expand...

The Cirrus syllabus is probably at least 10 hours if you do it all.
 
G1000 C-182. And remember, at Catalina there is half the runway left after the hump. But if you feel like you ain’t going to make it go around immediately, do not hesitate.
 
GBSoren said:
When I was shopping for my first plane I had the DA40 on my short list. I flew one, and loved the way it flew. But, it just didn't have the useful load I needed. If I remember it's really a 3 person plane.
Click to expand...
SR20, the other plane being considered, is even worse. Same or perhaps a little bit less useful load but more fuel burn.
 
Geosync said:
G1000 C-182. And remember, at Catalina there is half the runway left after the hump. But if you feel like you ain’t going to make it go around immediately, do not hesitate.
Click to expand...
There’s a g1000 c182 at a good price near me. But it’s dual only. Seems about right. Pretty expensive and powerful aircraft.
 
GBSoren said:
When I was shopping for my first plane I had the DA40 on my short list. I flew one, and loved the way it flew. But, it just didn't have the useful load I needed. If I remember it's really a 3 person plane.
Click to expand...

This was my experience as well. Also the seats are very uncomfortable for some pilots and the early models are leave more to be desired in this regard. The green house heat in the summer is brutal. On the plus side I really liked the visibility and the sensitivity of the stick with the control rod driven ailerons. Ultimately insurance costs for a composite pushed me to a spam can, and bought a turbo 182P. For me the cost of the total cost of ownership, availability of knowledgeable mechanics everywhere, and useful load was the deciding factors.

The 182 isn't very exotic, but ended up with one and very happy with the decision.
 
Last edited:
3 hr daily min is pretty typical I find
 
Meh, if you can afford a newish DA-40 or a G6 SR-20, paying for insurance and transition training shouldn't be an issue I would think. It's not a bad idea anyway particularly if you are a fresh PPL and have been training in a C172 or something similar. All things being equal, I prefer flying the DA-40 but the new SR-20 with the IO-390 is an impressive aircraft that gives you the ability to carry a load with speed and comfort.
 
Imagine having money


On a serious note, you should fly for 6 months casually in a G1000 172. Then transition to a more advanced aircraft. Better to have learning moments in a slower plane giving you more time.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top