Pick a Cirrus Beater

jhausch said:
Did you rule out AB-EXP?

RV-10 maybe?
Click to expand...

Actually no, I was thinking RV-10 as well. However I don't know how open mom would be to the idea of flying in anything that said "experimental" on it. Irrational fear, I know. I'll at least suggest that to him.
 
I owned two of them for 26 years, 7,000+ hours. Owned many others too, including Mooney, Bonanza, Comanche, various twins. T-210 was the Missus' hands-down favorite.
dell30rb said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
dell30rb said:
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.
Click to expand...
Maintenance will not be the same. Quite different airplanes. Chute costs on the cirrus will drive up long term costs but the retracts on a 210 will hit you every year.

Plus cirrus are very easy to work on compared to cessnas. Inspections are easier, repairs are easy to make etc. Not to mention the aging aircraft bit.

Consider both, both are fine planes.
 
wabower said:
I owned two of them for 26 years, 7,000+ hours. Owned many others too, including Mooney, Bonanza, Comanche, various twins. T-210 was the Missus' hands-down favorite.
Click to expand...

T210 would be my upgrade if my mission included more traveling.
 
Skylane81E said:
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.
Click to expand...

The aspen evolution 1500 package is retail $17.5k for two screens with their sat weather reciever. Add $3k for install?

I figure the cost of the RG is offset by the cirrus parachute and the number of mechanics who are able to work on cessna vs cirrus. Fortunately he never had issues with his RG over 5 years but I know its a cost that should be anticipated.
 
Gear costs annual MX on 210 are of little consequence insofar as big picture is concerned. Jack & swing (do wheels, brakes, bearings at the same time) pull a few floor panels to check lines, lube, service power pack.

Skylane81E said:
Maintenance will not be the same. Quite different airplanes. Chute costs on the cirrus will drive up long term costs but the retracts on a 210 will hit you every year.

Plus cirrus are very easy to work on compared to cessnas. Inspections are easier, repairs are easy to make etc. Not to mention the aging aircraft bit.

Consider both, both are fine planes.
Click to expand...
 
Skylane81E said:
Maintenance will not be the same. Quite different airplanes. Chute costs on the cirrus will drive up long term costs but the retracts on a 210 will hit you every year.

Plus cirrus are very easy to work on compared to cessnas. Inspections are easier, repairs are easy to make etc. Not to mention the aging aircraft bit.

Consider both, both are fine planes.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Maintenance is probably the only reason he would be concerned about a 210. He flew a complex airplane for years so I don't think he is worried about retractable gear, constant speed prop etc... or its size. I don't think he would go for a turbo aircraft however.
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
The aspen evolution 1500 package is retail $17.5k for two screens with their sat weather reciever. Add $3k for install?

I figure the cost of the RG is offset by the cirrus parachute and the number of mechanics who are able to work on cessna vs cirrus. Fortunately he never had issues with his RG over 5 years but I know its a cost that should be anticipated.
Click to expand...

Don't know, but I was just told 20 for one screen:dunno:

I haven't really been looking to hard so that's all I have to go on.
 
Skylane81E said:
Don't know, but I was just told 20 for one screen:dunno:

I haven't really been looking to hard so that's all I have to go on.
Click to expand...

You can get the basic 1 screen aspen for 6k IIRC
 
dell30rb said:
Thanks.

Maintenance is probably the only reason he would be concerned about a 210. He flew a complex airplane for years so I don't think he is worried about retractable gear, constant speed prop etc... or its size.
Click to expand...

Yeah, big thing is parts costs when something wears out.

Proper maintenance will help keep things in good shape and last longer. As he had a cutlass he probably understands the importance of picking a mechanic familiar with the cessna retracts.
 
dell30rb said:
With that screen, their basic MFD and a sat weather box its something like 13.5k

Really not bad at all. It would probably cost almost that much to replace the whole 6 pack with new components, and buy a portable garmin gps with xm wx

http://www.aspenavionics.com/index.php/products/pricing/
Click to expand...

Hmm, really need to get a different shops opinion, id like to have an IFR set up and use my electric gyro for back up...

Anyway /threadjack
 
I want an electric backup, Aspen PFD, a nice STEC, and flint wingtip tanks. If I had 20k, all of that could be mine, too!
 
dell30rb said:
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.
Click to expand...

The January 2012 issue of The Aviation Consumer magazine (http://www.aviationconsumer.com/) has a timely safety review article on the Cirrus as it compares to comparable airplanes that you may want to read (a truly modest investment of dollars.) It includes a discussion of many factors, including the theory of risk homeostasis. Bottom line is that the safety record of the Cirrus has been average - but could have been superb had more pilots deployed the parachute. It appears to be a cultural or ingrained habit to spend too much time trying to save the situation.

According to the article "If just one-third of the fatal accidents had been CAPS saves instead, the Cirrus fatal rate would be well below the GA average, thus delivering the level of safety many thought that Cirrus promised in the first place." The chute is not a passive safety device - so without pilot training and conditioning in its use, it appears it is unable to live up to market expectations.
 
I have an idea of what avionics cost, engine overhauls and paint, but can someone give me a ball park price for an interior upgrade on a 182 or 210? Adding Leather seat covers, side panels and maybe some sound insulation.
 
wabower said:
The second-row seats in the 210 are the most comfortable ride in any GA single.
Click to expand...
Not dissin' 210's by any means, but I'm guessing you haven't been a pax in the back of too many PA32s???

For pax comfort and easy in/out, I'd take the back of a PA32 with club seating over a 210.
 
wabower said:
And because Bo's don't have an auto-burn function when they crash.
Click to expand...

According to the January 2012 Aviation Consumer article:

  • The Cirrus SR22 has a 16% rate of post-crash fire.
  • The Columbia has a 14% rate.
  • Mooney M20s, the Cirrus SR20, and Cessna 182 all come in between 11 or 12%.
  • The DA40 has no history of self-ignited post-crash fires. (Diamond informed the writers of the article that one DA40 did suffer a fire after striking powerlines, but the accident isn't in the NTSB database.)
Bonanza's weren't included in the article, but it is unlikely they would fair better than the Mooneys or 182. The SR20 and SR22 collectively do not have a statistically meaningful predilection to post-crash fires than other popular comparable models.
 
Skylane81E said:
Check out artex.
Click to expand...

I used the airtex carpet, it is OK especially for the price. For the wall panels, I ordered some kydex sheets and worked with my A&P to organize ordering the materials, had a local high end car modification shop sew the vinyl and came out with nicer, lighter panels for about 30% of the airtex cost, I probably have 30 more hours in it than an Airtex job. If I was OP and was considering a drop off/pickup leather job on a 182, I'd allocate 10K for it and be happy with anything less.
 
I don't think there are any back seats I haven't ridden in other than Bellanca's, and 210's win every time. Seats are normal seating configuration for adults (cushion height) with adjustable seat-back angle. Headroom is much better, no shin-kicking contest in foot-well, wing always overhead.

Fearless Tower said:
Not dissin' 210's by any means, but I'm guessing you haven't been a pax in the back of too many PA32s???

For pax comfort and easy in/out, I'd take the back of a PA32 with club seating over a 210.
Click to expand...
 
bartmc said:
I used the airtex carpet, it is OK especially for the price. For the wall panels, I ordered some kydex sheets and worked with my A&P to organize ordering the materials, had a local high end car modification shop sew the vinyl and came out with nicer, lighter panels for about 30% of the airtex cost, I probably have 30 more hours in it than an Airtex job. If I was OP and was considering a drop off/pickup leather job on a 182, I'd allocate 10K for it and be happy with anything less.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

http://www.controller.com/listingsd...YLANE/1978-CESSNA-R182RG-SKYLANE/1223611.htm?

^ This would make a great candidate for an avionics upgrade. The paint and interior look fine as-is. Figure about 25k for an aspen panel and some other odds and ends... come out at just over 100K invested.
 
jesse said:
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.
Click to expand...

Bah, more FUD. That's just playing the "let's make up random accident scenarios in which the Cirrus will burn" game. There are 100 accident scenarios that I could make up that are WAY more likely to happen in which the chute would be useful. I'm not saying that the tendency to burn wouldn't bother me if I owned one...but I wouldn't want the engine to quit at 200 AGL in a Bonanza any more than I would a Cirrus.
 
There is no Part 23 solution for the engine failure in the first 1,000 feet. Even in a twin, conservatively loaded, everything is going to have to work out perfectly for you to bring it around and land.

Chute? It's got low altitude limitations, too.
Fire? Not how I want to go.....
 
Ref: Upgrading a 210.

Sounds like a fun project! Don't underestimate the cost of a glass panel installation. You'll also fall into the "might as well" mindset while you're installing all that cool left panel gear; Garmin GNS or GTN GPS (x 2 usually), Transponder with traffic, weather module, Com panel etc. The install of a PFD/MFD involves a lot more than just panel steam guage replacement work. There is a flight data computer, AHARS unit and sensor out on the wing tip that is also installed. Been there done that and... love it!
 
I have no chance to buy a $200k airplane, but I fly Aspen often and I love it (in rental Arrow). The best part is that it uses actual VOR, as opposed to GPS-simulated, L4-affected fake VOR that my other rental has in Garmin. One thing that bothers me though - PFD gets extremely hot. Not sure about the can in the back of the unit, but top of the bezel burns at touch. This cannot be good for electronics. If it's +70C on the outside, the ICs must be roasting in the box.
 
acluffpoa said:
Ref: Upgrading a 210.

Sounds like a fun project! Don't underestimate the cost of a glass panel installation. You'll also fall into the "might as well" mindset while you're installing all that cool left panel gear; Garmin GNS or GTN GPS (x 2 usually), Transponder with traffic, weather module, Com panel etc. The install of a PFD/MFD involves a lot more than just panel steam guage replacement work. There is a flight data computer, AHARS unit and sensor out on the wing tip that is also installed. Been there done that and... love it!
Click to expand...

$13.5k for the aspen mfd, pfd and a sattelite wx box. I think this comes with all required components.

I'm thinking 30k would be more reasonable now as a total avionics solution. That would cover labor, a gps.. might need a radio or transponder

Still you'll come out at just over 100k for an airplane that has a zero time engine, fresh paint and interior, and a sweet panel.
 
dell30rb said:
$13.5k for the aspen mfd, pfd and a sattelite wx box. I think this comes with all required components.

I'm thinking 30k would be more reasonable now as a total avionics solution. That would cover labor, a gps.. might need a radio or transponder

Still you'll come out at just over 100k for an airplane that has a zero time engine, fresh paint and interior, and a sweet panel.
Click to expand...

Throw in a Garmin 330 transponder and hook it up to your GPS of choice (Garmin) and you'll have traffic too.
 
I would get a Bonanza because I like the way they look more than a Cessna 210. :yesnod:
 
You could do a Lancair IV-P. Glass, haul a decent load, get there comfortably and in a hurry. The older ones are around $200k.
 
bigred177 said:
You could do a Lancair IV-P. Glass, haul a decent load, get there comfortably and in a hurry. The older ones are around $200k.
Click to expand...

The IV-P is one of my all time dream planes. I'm not sure how many passengers (such as the OP's mom) would feel in an experimental built by somebody else however. Why Cessna doesn't make these the top of the Corvallis line I'll never know (aside from the Part 23 certification costs)..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
To add to the bonfire...

Cirrus' profit goes to their Chinese owners.

That pretty much kills Cirrus for a lot of us now.
 
denverpilot said:
To add to the bonfire...

Cirrus' profit goes to their Chinese owners.

That pretty much kills Cirrus for a lot of us now.
Click to expand...

What certified plane makers are US owned now?

(I'm not asking that sarcastically.)
 
jason said:
Bah, more FUD. That's just playing the "let's make up random accident scenarios in which the Cirrus will burn" game. There are 100 accident scenarios that I could make up that are WAY more likely to happen in which the chute would be useful. I'm not saying that the tendency to burn wouldn't bother me if I owned one...but I wouldn't want the engine to quit at 200 AGL in a Bonanza any more than I would a Cirrus.
Click to expand...
To some extent -- it all depends on how you look at it. The parachute is truly useful during in-flight breakup situations, mid-airs, control issues, etc. All of those are extremely rare.

Engine failures are certainly rare when it comes to how you kill yourself in an airplane, but in the list of things you have no direct immediate control over, it's about as high as you can get. Several orders of magnitude higher than control rigging or midair.

There are few engine failure where I think you'd be better off pulling the chute in a Cirrus. Only over extremely hostile terrain or perhaps on a really pitch dark night, or in IMC on a LIFR day. The moment you pull the chute you become a passenger and not a pilot. Most of the time I'd much rather just pilot the thing into a field then ride it into some power lines.

So then that leaves you with putting it into a field in a Cirrus most of the time - which is what you'd do in a Bonanza as well. If I were going to do that I'd much rather do it in a Bonanza with shoulder harnesses then a Cirrus. Even better then the Bonanza would be the Diamond IMO.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top