New 2020 G6 Cirrus

asicer said:
Perhaps a situation such as "I wonder if my partner ran down the TKS/oxygen on their flight and if so should I call ahead for a top off?".
Click to expand...

What? It doesn't make the phone call for you? I guess that will be G7
 
Genius marketing by Cirrus. With a product that last for decades the best way to sell more is continuous upgrade. People in this income level don't care if it's value added or just a neat trick. Only second hand owners add their own oil and gas anyway.
 
On the color schemes it looks like they took a page out of the 1970 dodge catalog.. scat pack... which is very cool stuff.. exciting and bold and fun... gotta love that...
 
Last edited:
Grum.Man said:
Genius marketing by Cirrus. With a product that last for decades the best way to sell more is continuous upgrade. People in this income level don't care if it's value added or just a neat trick. Only second hand owners add their own oil and gas anyway.
Click to expand...
Get to know "some people in this income level" and you'll find that it ain't always so.
 
Regardless of what one thinks of the plane, that is a really well done marketing video. If only Mooney had put some serious effort into something at least partially that good.
 
I'll put it this way and I am not faulting anyone for this, if I was in a position to do it I would fall right in line.

There are probably around 20 Cirrus models at my airport. 17 of those are handled by a management business on the field that covers inspections, cleaning, maintenance, fueling, pilot resources, hangar and positioning etc. There is another that is owned by the on site Maintenance business, the other 2 are older models that are privately owned and maintained.
 
Grum.Man said:
I already do. Maybe I should have said "most" instead of implying "all".
Click to expand...
At least in the crowd that I know, there aren't many like that (there is one, however, whose sound system is constantly changing, depending on what is 'hot' in the hi-fi market. We're talking seriously high-end stuff. I cannot tell the difference in sound, but I do know that the speakers cost twice as much as my Ford Flex Limited EB. He, of course, claims that the new setup is far superior to the old ...)
 
eman1200 said:
ooooooh, 4 new colors, exciting!


The app is gimmicky, although cool, I guess. But are you still not gonna visually check your oil? Are you not gonna check fuel because your app said you have plenty?
Click to expand...

Of course I am going to. But if I see that anything is low, I can ask the FBO to fill it up for me before I get there and check it once I am there, so I am not waiting around.
 
It would be nice if the app could tell you all your database statuses, upcoming maintenance a/d's in relation to time. That is probably their end game. Of course you should still check everything but it's nice to be able to see your fluids quantity so you can call ahead for services.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
The Cessna TT has better feel. It’s fun to fly. Fast than the citrus as well. To bad Cessna sucked at marketing and then that whole Mexico thing ...
Click to expand...

you are forgetting what i think is one of the most important key factors, useful load. the SR22 series useful load is significantly higher than the Cessna TTx ever was. Id sacrifice 20-25 knots in highspeed cruise (235ish v 210ish) any day to be able to take that much more useful load. Thats partially what led to me going with a 182 was the carrying capacity. I agree the TTx is definitely from a hand flying perspective, amazing and I loved flying it, but all things considered id go with the cirrus over the ttx. The Cirrus is truly in my opinion a great going places plane

I agree, who doesn't know their fuel level at home etc, but it doesn't change the fact that its just nice and quite simply cool to have those extra things. It's nice to see a manufacturer just moving forward and constantly making changes, and even minor improvements, rather than sitting stagnant with very few design or software changes over 20+ years like most other manufacturers.

Also curious on the 4-blade prop performance, I'd guess better climb, but curious to see what it does to cruise and fuel burn numbers....they aren't wrong though, does look good.
 
JustinD said:
you are forgetting what i think is one of the most important key factors, useful load. the SR22 series useful load is significantly higher than the Cessna TTx ever was. Id sacrifice 20-25 knots in highspeed cruise (235ish v 210ish) any day to be able to take that much more useful load. Thats partially what led to me going with a 182 was the carrying capacity. I agree the TTx is definitely from a hand flying perspective, amazing and I loved flying it, but all things considered id go with the cirrus over the ttx. The Cirrus is truly in my opinion a great going places plane

I agree, who doesn't know their fuel level at home etc, but it doesn't change the fact that its just nice and quite simply cool to have those extra things. It's nice to see a manufacturer just moving forward and constantly making changes, and even minor improvements, rather than sitting stagnant with very few design or software changes over 20+ years like most other manufacturers.

Also curious on the 4-blade prop performance, I'd guess better climb, but curious to see what it does to cruise and fuel burn numbers....they aren't wrong though, does look good.
Click to expand...
If you share your airplane, checking the fuel from home would be nice.
 
I've only flown an SR22 twice, and it was comfortable, but this ad makes me appreciate the Lancair even more. Better speed, climb, and range at 1/3 the fuel burn. We've had AGL on the G3XT screen for years. If you introduce a new prop and you only talk about "ramp appeal" does that mean it's not faster or more efficient?

Yes, we should make fun of the Alcantara (the faux suede best known from the Microsoft Surface) and key fobs (don't know why keyless entry isn't in the new app, like Tesla,) but on the upside: Someone is going to be able to buy a used Cirrus for a seriously reduced price in a few years if they don't mind the "Volt" color.

Those Cirrus grapes are sour. ~
 
Cogito said:
I've only flown an SR22 twice, and it was comfortable, but this ad makes me appreciate the Lancair even more. Better speed, climb, and range at 1/3 the fuel burn. We've had AGL on the G3XT screen for years. If you introduce a new prop and you only talk about "ramp appeal" does that mean it's not faster or more efficient?

Yes, we should make fun of the Alcantara (the faux suede best known from the Microsoft Surface) and key fobs (don't know why keyless entry isn't in the new app, like Tesla,) but on the upside: Someone is going to be able to buy a used Cirrus for a seriously reduced price in a few years if they don't mind the "Volt" color.

Those Cirrus grapes are sour. ~
Click to expand...

With no knowledge of the subject, any chance it's any smoother being inherently balanced as well as some minor increase in ground clearance?
 
steingar said:
There is one and only one thing I dislike about the Cirrus.

My aircraft is 50 years old. Its going strong. Yes, it can be very expensive to maintain, but there are no regular maintenance items that aren't found on any other GA airplane. When the Cirrus get as old (and valueless) as my aircraft, they'll likely be scrapped. No matter what, you have to pay for that chute repack every 10 years. Right now I think its $15K, and that will likely rise in the future. I doubt anyone is going to pay that for a vintage airframe that isn't worth that much. Eventually they'll all be scrapped well before their time. That I don't like.
Click to expand...
Definitely valid points, unfortunately composites don't cosmetically last very long baking in the sun, however many of the G3 and later models are better at that, and the airframe is built to last 12,000 hrs.. if you fly 100 hrs per year the plane will last 120 years.. if you fly 200 hrs per year, then 60 years.. and if you're putting 400 hrs on it per year you're still looking at 30 years. I doubt outside of the training fleet most privately owned Mooney, Bo, Cirrus, Lancair are flying that long.. I mode the mode is 50-120 hrs.. they *should* last

-the chute.. true, but that's an assumed evil when you buy one of these, and, for better or worse, is one of the primary reasons many people do buy this plane. Spread out over the cost of 10 years I'm pretty sure feeding a second engine on a twin will cost at least as much as the chute repack, and likely result in more headaches with twice the oil changes, and in general twice the likelihood of some engine issue to contend with

Ravioli said:
What? It doesn't make the phone call for you? I guess that will be G7
Click to expand...
You speak in jest, however, with the Garmin autoland making radio calls for you on the latest Piper and Vision Jet this might very well only be a matter of time. "Okay Cirrus, start the engine" .. "I'm sorry Dave, but I can't do that. You are over max gross and will jeopardize the mission"

Fallsrider said:
If only Mooney had put some serious effort into something at least partially that good.
Click to expand...
There *is* a market for the Mooney.. but many people I talk to around airports and FBOs don't even know they're still in business (I'm talking pre-Nov 2019 temporary closing). I know many cringe at it, but the reality is that the people you want to sell planes to are in the 25-45 age group, most of these folks are on social media, etc. Creating a Mooney equivalent of #CirrusLife and all the stuff that goes along with it would have been a great way to keep selling the plane. Apple and Tesla are good examples of this. Most people who buy a Macbook will never do more with than check email surf the web.. something a $400 Walmart Acer could do.. but they spend $2G+ on Macbooks thanks to marketing

Grum.Man said:
It would be nice if the app could tell you all your database statuses
Click to expand...
YES! Hopefully that's coming.. I wonder how much of this is Cirrus proprietary and how much is through Garmin.. and what the likelihood is of seeing this in other AC
 
MtnMarcus said:
Funny she talks about the 4 blade prop in the context of ramp appeal but makes no reference to what it does for performance?? I love the plane though and would definitely own one if I needed it.
Click to expand...

I bought a 3 blade Hartzell prop for my 182P. The factory rep said if they made a 5 blade, that's all they would sell. He said Ramp appeal was the primary decision factor for many.
 
NordicDave said:
I bought a 3 blade Hartzell prop for my 182P. The factory rep said if they made a 5 blade, that's all they would sell. He said Ramp appeal was the primary decision factor for many.
Click to expand...
I can’t count the blades when it’s spinning, and I keep it in a hangar so few see it when it’s not.
 
Wish I had that kind of money - I'd manage to spend it on something a lot more fun than a Cirrus.
 
Grum.Man said:
Genius marketing by Cirrus. With a product that last for decades the best way to sell more is continuous upgrade. People in this income level don't care if it's value added or just a neat trick. Only second hand owners add their own oil and gas anyway.
Click to expand...

Usually those buyers are using the airplane for the business tax benefits, and time their upgrades based on tax depreciation schedules.
 
steingar said:
There is one and only one thing I dislike about the Cirrus.

My aircraft is 50 years old. Its going strong. Yes, it can be very expensive to maintain, but there are no regular maintenance items that aren't found on any other GA airplane. When the Cirrus get as old (and valueless) as my aircraft, they'll likely be scrapped. No matter what, you have to pay for that chute repack every 10 years. Right now I think its $15K, and that will likely rise in the future. I doubt anyone is going to pay that for a vintage airframe that isn't worth that much. Eventually they'll all be scrapped well before their time. That I don't like.
Click to expand...

Interesting point, and not one I can come up with a descent counter for.

Tim
 
Tantalum said:
You speak in jest, however, with the Garmin autoland making radio calls for you on the latest Piper and Vision Jet this might very well only be a matter of time. "Okay Cirrus, start the engine" .. "I'm sorry Dave, but I can't do that. You are over max gross and will jeopardize the mission"
Click to expand...

Nah, Garmin will respond. "I'm sorry Dave, but I can't do that. You are over max gross; please contact -1-800-JENNY-CRAIG"

Tim
 
steingar said:
There is one and only one thing I dislike about the Cirrus.

My aircraft is 50 years old. Its going strong. Yes, it can be very expensive to maintain, but there are no regular maintenance items that aren't found on any other GA airplane. When the Cirrus get as old (and valueless) as my aircraft, they'll likely be scrapped. No matter what, you have to pay for that chute repack every 10 years. Right now I think its $15K, and that will likely rise in the future. I doubt anyone is going to pay that for a vintage airframe that isn't worth that much. Eventually they'll all be scrapped well before their time. That I don't like.
Click to expand...

Thinking about the legacy jet STCs for low-utilization (Bacon, etc), I'm betting someone will come up with an STC to disable the chute if/when that becomes a problem.

Then the existence of such an STC can re-ignite all of those "Cirrus wasn't properly spin-tested, nyah" threads that are so enjoyable. :D
 
I actually think someone will come up with an "extended warranty" type deal that is pro-rated based on the life left in the chute. The money could be made by those buying an airplane and then selling it before the chute expires. They get all that money for doing basically nothing. Then the next person to buy that plane has a higher warranty cost.
 
MtnMarcus said:
Funny she talks about the 4 blade prop in the context of ramp appeal but makes no reference to what it does for performance??
Click to expand...
yep, a lot of that is superficial stuff for sure....the app, the key fob, that little extra sumthin' in the interior finishes....
... wait, a key fob? what for?

3 in the green said:
I'm no Cirrus fan (my biggest issue is their fuel tank design vs. say, the DA40)
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar...educate me...what do you mean?

I don't know.... it struck me while I was watching that the vast majority of the features and benefits she outlines are very superficial stuff.... nice for sure though.
....but I ended it thinking, "wow, I wish I were richer than I am... and I sure do wish Cirrus would make a high wing 5 place version of that!"
 
I bet Mooney saw this new bird and said “crap, we have to shutdown again”.
 
Brad W said:
high wing 5 place version
Click to expand...
The Extra 400 is the droid you are looking for, fast, 6 seat, high wing

I doubt Cirrus will do any thing as far as more seats or pressurization for the piston SR lineup, they're trying to push people who want that stuff into the jet..
 
Tantalum said:
The Extra 400 is the droid you are looking for, fast, 6 seat, high wing

I doubt Cirrus will do any thing as far as more seats or pressurization for the piston SR lineup, they're trying to push people who want that stuff into the jet..
Click to expand...
I like all planes, but man that thing is fugly.
 
Salty said:
I like all planes, but man that thing is fugly.
Click to expand...
Yes.. there is not one single angle it looks nice from. Remarkably ugly.. and they only sold a tiny amount of them too, I think only 28.. and around 24 still flying.. too bad though, it's got some pretty good performance specs:

2,100 nm
1,400 fpm initial climb rate
188 ktas cruise
1,254 useful (so not a true 6 seater, but a comfortable 4 place).. and if you fly with partial fuel you are more flexible
25K ceiling
2,100 nm range

Apparently the liquid cooled Conti had a pathetic TBO and was a disaster to maintain, and was the main reason for it's paltry sales figures (no idea if that's true, just what I've heard)

Honestly though, at the end of the day it's just ugly.. you don't walk up to it and think "damn, I want that"
 
JustinD said:
you are forgetting what i think is one of the most important key factors, useful load. the SR22 series useful load is significantly higher than the Cessna TTx ever was. Id sacrifice 20-25 knots in highspeed cruise (235ish v 210ish) any day to be able to take that much more useful load. Thats partially what led to me going with a 182 was the carrying capacity. I agree the TTx is definitely from a hand flying perspective, amazing and I loved flying it, but all things considered id go with the cirrus over the ttx. The Cirrus is truly in my opinion a great going places plane

I agree, who doesn't know their fuel level at home etc, but it doesn't change the fact that its just nice and quite simply cool to have those extra things. It's nice to see a manufacturer just moving forward and constantly making changes, and even minor improvements, rather than sitting stagnant with very few design or software changes over 20+ years like most other manufacturers.

Also curious on the 4-blade prop performance, I'd guess better climb, but curious to see what it does to cruise and fuel burn numbers....they aren't wrong though, does look good.
Click to expand...
It depends on your mission. I did not say the TT was a better airplane. Just faster with better handling. The better handling part is subjective. Someone else could fly both and come to the opposite conclusion and we would both be correct. The faster part is not. Which one is “better” depends on the individual.

I think a Cessna 185 is better than both of them put together.
 
Tantalum said:
The Extra 400 is the droid you are looking for, fast, 6 seat, high wing

I doubt Cirrus will do any thing as far as more seats or pressurization for the piston SR lineup, they're trying to push people who want that stuff into the jet..
Click to expand...


CESSNA P210 (and T210 non pressurized) were made in significant quantities, in piston the new vitatoe 550 makes it a really good option and the ultimate expression is the silver eagle with the rolls Royce m250-B17F/2 engine.

both are pressurized, (not T210) retractable gear and will out perform a cirrus sr22T... in every category....

and I like the cirrus...the cirrus is the ergonomics king..I don’t think you can find a new, more comfortable and modern ergonomic friendly plane for the dollar than the cirrus
 
Last edited:
Cirrus just needs to go the route of the Commander, a "both" option on the fuel dial for a low wing. Auto land could come to the Diamond before Cirrus given that their engines already are Fadec. I welcome all the new tech.
 
wheaties said:
Cirrus just needs to go the route of the Commander, a "both" option on the fuel dial for a low wing. Auto land could come to the Diamond before Cirrus given that their engines already are Fadec. I welcome all the new tech.
Click to expand...

Perhaps an auto switching feature like the TBM has?
 
-9F on oil temp... better get some preheat on that!
 
I saw the video and it further reinforced why Cirrus has taken over the new SEL piston market. I have never flown in one and maybe never will, but I recognize a good business plan and product when I see one.

The future is not 50-70 year old pilots - it is young, up and coming (future rich) pilots. Textron (Beech) is the "Harley Davidson" of piston airplanes. Cirrus does not want to be that.
 
Stephen Shore said:
The future is not 50-70 year old pilots - it is young, up and coming (future rich) pilots.
Click to expand...
Absolutely! If you geezers can't afford one by now then you'll likely never will. Millennials, once their employer IPO's, will be looking for someplace to put their windfall.
 
I just don't understand why so many people here, and many pilots, abhor any kind of tech improvements, and rather than find solutions, look for all the reasons why something shouldn't or "can't" be done. It's not just Cirrus, but people hated glass, composites, etc.

It's this mindset that "why should you have it better?! You need to suffer as much as I did and fly IMC approaches down to minimums with nothing more than an ADF!" - it's a very peculiar and not very mature way of looking at the world, wanting yours and future generations to suffer as much as yours did
 
asicer said:
Absolutely! If you geezers can't afford one by now then you'll likely never will. Millennials, once their employer IPO's, will be looking for someplace to put their windfall.
Click to expand...
Meh. That may be the future of Cirrus, but certainly not the future of the plurality of recreational piston aviation.

IMO, the future of the hobby is EAB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top