Pick a Cirrus Beater

dell30rb

dell30rb

Final Approach
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
7,148
Location
Raleigh NC
Display Name
Display name:
Ren
My dad is a 1,000 something hour private pilot, but has not been current since he sold his 172RG in 1996. He's been flying with me some and wants to get back into flying.

He really likes the new Cirrus airplanes, and wants something along those lines. (FAST, nice interior, cool avionics) However he is a bit dismayed by the safety record (I explained to him that by taking extra training he could offset this). I don't really like the cirrus airplanes either, so that is why I am starting this thread.

I have seen some great restorations and refits of some older aircraft (the AOPA featured "vegas viper" comes to mind, a restored comanche) and just wanted to hear some opinions about some older aircraft that might be able to fit the bill.

Requirements would be something like:

Single engine
150kts cruise (or better)
under 14gph
4.5 hours fuel or more with 4 170lb pax
Glass panel (maybe steam gauges and a new touchscreen in-panel GPS)
Nice leather interior
Good looking paint
Low time or newly overhauled motor

Total budget = price of a mid time used cirrus, about 200k

What can we come up with here? I'm thinking a mooney or maybe even bonanza would probably fit the bill. Not sure buy a 182RG may work nicely as well. The idea is to pick an older airplane and restore/refit it to like new condition. The budget should allow for all the work to be done by reputable shops. A 1970's or 1980's aircraft with a complete refit and zero time motor would probably be less maintenance cost than buying a mid time used cirrus as well.

If anyone has links and or pics of old airplanes that have had major work done it would be appreciated!
 
Last edited:
Tell your dad that he should try and correlate the Cirrus accidents with the experience level of the pilots flying them into accidents.

For an experience conservative pilot the Cirrus is a great airplane. Like any other it has it's unique features.

For alternatives, both the Bonanaza and the Mooney are great, but be sure you fit comfortably into the Mooney. Some folks (like me at 6'3/210) love it and others don't.
 
Why not a Diamond DA40? It has many of the characteristics of a Cirrus although a little slower but with an exceptional safety record. Very fun to fly and has an exceptional view. The newer ones cruise around 150 on a little over 10 GPH. The 2007 and older models go for around $200,000 or less. Unfortunately the useful load is below what was specified.

Only Diamond's DA40 and DA42 had better overall accident rates -- dramatically so in the case of the DA40, whose overall rate is 1.19, a little more than a sixth of the GA average.
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Cirrus_Safety_Record_Average_205914-1.html

There is a free Diamond forum for more information.
http://www.diamondaviators.net/forum/
 
I'm suspicious of your wish list. After 15 years of no plane, why is he suddenly hot-to-trot and where is he suddenly going that will require all the out-size performance stuff that's on your list?

dell30rb said:
My dad is a 1,000 something hour private pilot, but has not been current since he sold his 172RG in 1996. He's been flying with me some and wants to get back into flying.

He really likes the new Cirrus airplanes, and wants something along those lines. (FAST, nice interior, cool avionics) However he is a bit dismayed by the safety record (I explained to him that by taking extra training he could offset this). I don't really like the cirrus airplanes either, so that is why I am starting this thread.

I have seen some great restorations and refits of some older aircraft (the AOPA featured "vegas viper" comes to mind, a restored comanche) and just wanted to hear some opinions about some older aircraft that might be able to fit the bill.

Requirements would be something like:

Single engine
150kts cruise (or better)
under 14gph
4.5 hours fuel or more with 4 170lb pax
Glass panel (maybe steam gauges and a new touchscreen in-panel GPS)
Nice leather interior
Good looking paint
Low time or newly overhauled motor

Total budget = price of a mid time used cirrus, about 200k

What can we come up with here? I'm thinking a mooney or maybe even bonanza would probably fit the bill. Not sure buy a 182RG may work nicely as well. The idea is to pick an older airplane and restore/refit it to like new condition. The budget should allow for all the work to be done by reputable shops. A 1970's or 1980's aircraft with a complete refit and zero time motor would probably be less maintenance cost than buying a mid time used cirrus as well.

If anyone has links and or pics of old airplanes that have had major work done it would be appreciated!
Click to expand...
 
He does like the diamond da-40 but says the interior is a bit "spartan"

I like them and if he does decide to buy a newer airplane he is definitely considering the diamond.
 
If the pilot behind the stick is trained properly, the Cirrus is a great airplane. It's a joy to fly and flies pretty fast for the relatively low fuel burn. VFR into IMC is not a Cirrus specific problem. It's a pilot problem. Some of them just happen to be flying a Cirrus.

It's important to find a competent and proficient Cirrus instructor. They don't have to be CSIP unless your insurance requires it but Cirrus time is a must. I didn't really get comfortable in the plane until I had about 15-20 hours in type.

The Mooney is a fun ride but sort of a squeeze for 4 people @ 170#. I ran the numbers for the model 231 I fly and we can carry 49 gal with 4 adults on board. That's about just under 4.5 hours or 3.5 hours with IFR reserves (+ alternate). The Bonanza burns a little more but may be a bit more comfortable for 4 adults.
 
A nice 210 or BO matches those requirements pretty well.
 
dell30rb said:
He does like the diamond da-40 but says the interior is a bit "spartan"

I like them and if he does decide to buy a newer airplane he is definitely considering the diamond.
Click to expand...
Throw sheepskin covers over the seats and he shouldn't care. It is a great airplane in spite of the interior.
 
And put a sack over your head so you don't have to look at that ugly sumbitch.

Gary F said:
Throw sheepskin covers over the seats and he shouldn't care. It is a great airplane in spite of the interior.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
I'm suspicious of your wish list. After 15 years of no plane, why is he suddenly hot-to-trot and where is he suddenly going that will require all the out-size performance stuff that's on your list?
Click to expand...

After taking several long cross countries with me in a 110knot warrior, (our ground speed was 60kts for nearly an hour crossing the Appalachian mountains to visit my brother in nashville last week) he wants something fast.

He wants something that can make a 400nm cross country trip in comfort and ease. My younger brother just moved to Nashville, TN. And my dad is originally from northern ohio where most of his family still lives, including grandma who is getting old and beginning to have health problems, i'm sure he wants to make more frequent visits as she is not gonna be around too much longer.

He likes gadgets (he runs a software company) so he is interested in a plane with recent avionics.

He wants a nice interior - probably mostly to make mom happy. (if momma aint happy, aint nobody happy)
 
In which case be sure you get good air-conditioning. Mamas are much happier when they're cool. Sounds like you have some good opportunities for GA trips.

dell30rb said:
After taking several long cross countries with me in a 110knot warrior, (our ground speed was 60kts for nearly an hour crossing the Appalachian mountains to visit my brother in nashville last week) he wants something fast.

He wants something that can make a 400nm cross country trip in comfort and ease. My younger brother just moved to Nashville, TN. And my dad is originally from northern ohio where most of his family still lives, including grandma who is getting old and beginning to have health problems, i'm sure he wants to make more frequent visits as she is not gonna be around too much longer.

He likes gadgets (he runs a software company) so he is interested in a plane with recent avionics.

He wants a nice interior - probably mostly to make mom happy. (if momma aint happy, aint nobody happy)
Click to expand...
 
Skylane81E said:
Your dad sounds like a Cirrus poster child to me...
Click to expand...

Well, i'd like to think not, since he flew spam cans for over 1000 hours. Gliders as well. I thought the poster child was a wealthy executive who buys a cirrus as a very green pilot.

If he does buy a cirrus I'll make sure he gets good instruction. I know just the guy, my primary and instrument instructor is current in an SR-22 and has given over 6000 hours of dual instruction.
 
Last edited:
wabower said:
And put a sack over your head so you don't have to look at that ugly sumbitch.
Click to expand...
Really. I guess that you are conditioned to appreciate non-aerodynamic spam cans. To each his (or her) own.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Agreed. I would also throw a Non-turbo Lance or Saratoga in there for consideration.
Click to expand...

The 210 might be a good candidate for the reason that mama would be happier if she did not have to climb on the wing to get in the cockpit.

A non-turbo one of these might be nice as well. Any idea what cruise you could expect at 75% power with a fresh engine, properly rigged and maybe some easy speed mods? (flap gap, or whatever)

http://www.pristineairplanes.com/listing-1979+Cessna+Turbo+182RG-100.html
 
dell30rb said:
Well, i'd like to think not, since he flew spam cans for over 1000 hours. Gliders as well. I thought the poster child was a wealthy executive who buys a cirrus as a very green pilot.

If he does buy a cirrus I'll make sure he gets good instruction. I know just the guy, my primary and instrument instructor is current in an SR-22 and has given over 6000 hours of dual instruction.
Click to expand...

I don't know. Seems to me like you need to get over your bias. I think your dad would really enjoy flying a Cirrus. Why steer him away from something that he would enjoy flying?

Anti-Cirrus sentiments run deep around here...but they're great airplanes. If flown by competent pilots, they're as safe as anything out there. If flown by morons, they'll kill people. Seems the same can be said about anything with wings.

Thirty years ago people were talking about these fancy Bonanzas and their rich hot-shot pilots flying them into the ground. Those same people now recommend the Bonanza as a nice stable platform. The only reason is because they can afford them now...
 
Last edited:
And because Bo's don't have an auto-burn function when they crash.

jason said:
I don't know. Seems to me like you need to get over your bias. Anti-Cirrus sentiments run deep around here...but they're great airplanes. If flown by competent pilots, they're as safe as anything out there. If flown by morons, they'll kill people. Seems the same can be said about anything with wings.

Thirty years ago people were talking about these fancy Bonanzas and their rich hot-shot pilots flying them into the ground. Those same people now recommend the Bonanza as a nice stable platform. The only reason is because they can afford them now...
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
And because Bo's don't have an auto-burn function when they crash.
Click to expand...

More FUD being spread. If you don't want to burn...pull the chute when you get yourself into trouble. Better yet...don't get into trouble.
 
Last edited:
I get about 155 kts out of a non turbo 182RG I rent @ rental power. I'm not sure how "fresh" the engine is, but I do know that a new three blade prop was added fairly recently.

The interior, however, is nothing to write home about.. ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Another great theory that's not born out in practice.

jason said:
More FUD being spread. If you don't want to burn...pull the chute when you get yourself into trouble. Better yet...don't get into trouble.
Click to expand...
 
jason said:
I don't know. Seems to me like you need to get over your bias. Anti-Cirrus sentiments run deep around here...but they're great airplanes. If flown by competent pilots, they're as safe as anything out there. If flown by morons, they'll kill people. Seems the same can be said about anything with wings.

Thirty years ago people were talking about these fancy Bonanzas and their rich hot-shot pilots flying them into the ground. Those same people now recommend the Bonanza as a nice stable platform. The only reason is because they can afford them now...
Click to expand...

I can definitely understand that, and I do think the cirri are nice aircraft. Would love to fly one. However, for the amount of money, i'd much rather have something else.

The cirrus also has a 130lb baggage weight limitation. I've seen mom pack a 70 pound bag for a 4 night trip. This could be a real problem.

Most trips will be with two or three people, 400nm or less. However its conceivable we would fly to nashville, pick up my brother, and go to ohio to visit grandma. This could be done as all of us are under 170lbs, leaving a good chance of packing in 4 hours of fuel and having some room for luggage.
 
Last edited:
Is mom a good long-distance traveler in little planes? No reason I can think of to pay for more range than she can or will tolerate.

dell30rb said:
I can definitely understand that, and I do think the cirri are nice aircraft. Would love to fly one. However, for the amount of money, i'd much rather have something else.

The cirrus also has a 130lb baggage weight limitation. I've seen mom pack a 70 pound bag for a 4 night trip. This could be a real problem.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Is mom a good long-distance traveler in little planes? No reason I can think of to pay for more range than she can or will tolerate.
Click to expand...

You hit the nail on the head there, I don't think she can make it more than 2-3 hours. Which is why I put 4.5 hours of fuel in the original post... 3 hours with 1.5 hours reserve is pretty generous when flying with mom. However my dad brother and I will likely take a few trips without mom and it would be nice if the plane could hold around 5 hours of fuel with full tanks. Dad's last airplane had 66 gallon tanks and a 180hp motor with a constant speed prop so he is a bit spoiled in the endurance department.
 
Last edited:
As a profressional buyer rep for airplanes, I'm always looking for the best way to quantify want vs. need, and to force the buyer to do his own hard-number analysis or provide the information so I can do it for him. I don't really care what he wants to do, I just want him to quantify it so that we are on the same page from the get-go and to eliminate the "moving target syndrome" that is prevalent when people start looking at airplanes with the predictable temporary insanity that accompanies such activities.

After 20-some years and several hundred planes, the simplest method is also the best method. Prepare a simple destination/frequency spreadsheet of the trips you can reasonably expect to make within the next year and another column for the next five years. It's harder than it sounds, and doesn't get any easier when we review the list for credibility. Three trips to the Bahamas? How many times have you been there during the past 10 years? What has changed that makes you think you'll go three times next year?

In your case, how long will gramma continue to live on the tundra? If she moves or dies, how many of those trips will evaporate? Will plane need change without those trips?

Insert the mileage number for each round trip and total the mileage estimate at the bottom of the page. Using that information, you can convert the trip to hours using block times for whatever airplane you choose, and also determine which trips feasible as non-stops.

If you force yourself to complete this exercise, and also force yourself to omit the whims (oh, if we have the plane we'll probably go to OSH, Vegas or the other B/S trips that are often thrown onto the list as filler) you will at least have a record of what you were thinking when you bought the plane, and be one step ahead of the herd insofar as logical thinking is concerned, if in fact that is possible when airplane purchases are concerned.



A
dell30rb said:
You hit the nail on the head there, I don't think she can make it more than 2-3 hours. Which is why I put 4.5 hours of fuel in the original post... 3 hours with 1.5 hours reserve is pretty generous. However my dad brother and I will likely take a few trips without mom and it would be nice if the plane could hold around 5 hours of fuel with full tanks. Dad's last airplane had 66 gallon tanks and a 180hp motor with a constant speed prop so he is a bit spoiled in the endurance department.
Click to expand...
 
dell30rb said:
I can definitely understand that, and I do think the cirri are nice aircraft. Would love to fly one. However, for the amount of money, i'd much rather have something else.
Click to expand...

Price a glass equipped older plane.
 
dell30rb said:
The 210 might be a good candidate for the reason that mama would be happier if she did not have to climb on the wing to get in the cockpit.

A non-turbo one of these might be nice as well. Any idea what cruise you could expect at 75% power with a fresh engine, properly rigged and maybe some easy speed mods? (flap gap, or whatever)

http://www.pristineairplanes.com/listing-1979+Cessna+Turbo+182RG-100.html
Click to expand...

The book says 165TAS at 2500RPM and 22.5MP at 7500' while burning 14.9 gph. The 210 has 6 seats and plenty of room, I'm a fan. I got this out of the POH for the 210
 
jason said:
More FUD being spread. If you don't want to burn...pull the chute when you get yourself into trouble. Better yet...don't get into trouble.
Click to expand...

It can't always be avoided, the chute requires altitude, which is something you may not always have. I'd sure like to know my airframe doesn't have a tendency to fireball when the engine quits at 200 agl on a night departure with no moon out of some rural airport.

I don't mind cirrus and would fly one if it were available but would likely never buy one, the cost benefit equation doesn't add up. The fire issue really is a real problem they should address.
 
Skylane81E said:
Price a glass equipped older plane.
Click to expand...

What is the cost to upgrade to a basic twin screen aspen system? 20k?

A good 210 or 182rg can be had for under $100k. Add 30k for panel and other upgrades and you're still well south of a cirrus.

He might be just fine with a 6 pack and a nice panel mounted touch screen gps.
 
Maintaining the chute can be really expensive in a Cirrus and many older ones will be due for replacement in short order.
 
The second-row seats in the 210 are the most comfortable ride in any GA single. Easy in and out, ample head-room and width, adjustable fore-aft and tilt, big picture window, good heating and ventilation, always in the shade of the wing.
DavidWhite said:
The book says 165TAS at 2500RPM and 22.5MP at 7500' while burning 14.9 gph. The 210 has 6 seats and plenty of room, I'm a fan. I got this out of the POH for the 210
Click to expand...
 
Did you rule out AB-EXP?

RV-10 maybe?
 
dell30rb said:
What is the cost to upgrade to a basic twin screen aspen system? 20k?

A good 210 or 182rg can be had for under $100k. Add 30k for panel and other upgrades and you're still well south of a cirrus.

He might be just fine with a 6 pack and a nice panel mounted touch screen gps.
Click to expand...

Last Aspen I priced was 20k per screen.

Local 22 sold for 120k this past fall.

Don't get me wrong I'm a 210 fan but im not sure they are a fair comparison to a cirrus being a bigger more complicated plane, even a 182rg has that RG thing attached to it and parts for cessna retracts can be spendy as I'm sure your dad knows.
 
Skylane81E said:
Repacking is a 10 year item, does cost a few AMUs
Click to expand...
Don't forget about replacing the line cutters every 6 years, although not as costly as the replacement of rocket and chute still not cheap.
 
wabower said:
The second-row seats in the 210 are the most comfortable ride in any GA single. Easy in and out, ample head-room and width, adjustable fore-aft and tilt, big picture window, good heating and ventilation, always in the shade of the wing.
Click to expand...

That sounds pretty appealing. I have never had a good look at a 210.

It cruises about 10kts slower than the cirrus on the same fuel burn. But its larger inside, comfortable, can haul mom's bags, and mom does not have to climb on the wing to get in and out. Plus it would be less expensive to acquire than a cirrus, i'm guessing maintenance would be about the same on both aircraft?

Plus its a cessna, he has lots of time in cessna's and his 172 ownership was a pleasant experience, he sold it for more than he paid for it and never had any major failures or unexpected repair bills.
 
Gary F said:
Don't forget about replacing the line cutters every 6 years, although not as costly as the replacement of rocket and chute still not cheap.
Click to expand...

Just had that done, wasn't too horribly expensive. Biggest thing is finding folks who can perform the work. We are luck to be 10 min from such a shop. Not everyone is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top