2003 Cirrus SR22 vs 2000 Mooney M20R Ovation 2 Honest Comparison

Maybe 7th grade...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AWACSEng said:
An asterisk (*) is another way of expressing multiplication (x). Not really a flying thing, more of a 3rd grade math thing.
Click to expand...

In defense, I know what an asterisk is when it comes to math equations. When gsengle explained what the 6 meant I said thank you because that it what I was looking for. The value of 6. You may be good at math but reading comprehension is not one of your strong points.
 
I realize you probably really don't give a fece but I've flown both and can tell you right now I'd go with the Cirrus. In a heartbeat.
 
Art VanDelay said:
I realize you probably really don't give a fece but I've flown both and can tell you right now I'd go with the Cirrus. In a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

Really? How come? Don't worry about the wolves that will attack you from either side but give me an honest assessment pros and cons on each side.
 
FloridaPilot said:
In defense, I know what an asterisk is when it comes to math equations. When gsengle explained what the 6 meant I said thank you because that it what I was looking for. The value of 6. You may be good at math but reading comprehension is not one of your strong points.
Click to expand...

Meh, I comprehend well enough to recognize when someone is too lazy to look up an answer, such as when you asked what 107gal of fuel weighed. But, since you're the OP for this thread and VERY new to aviation, you obviously haven't learned to do research for yourself and will gladly have others do the work for you. (And with the way this thread is spiraling, if I were you and your money, I'd take the Cirrus. That way, when you decide to no do the research required for flight planning and execution, you can just pull the red handle instead of turning you and your pax into a smoking hole.) Good luck!
 
I don't have the time to read all the responses but as a person who just ordered a 2017 SR22 I wanted to share some insight into the Cirrus.
This may sound contrary to the fact that I absolutely LOVE the Cirrus I just bought but it is not the same plane that you have listed. Do some research on the model that you are looking at. The extra 200 pounds of useful load were not added until the G5 so make sure you research the useful load of this particular aircraft and that it meets your mission.

second, do some research on the flaps. The new G5 can lower flaps at 150KTS. I have heard that these older models the Vfe speeds are significantly lower and it can be a challenge to slow that thing down in the pattern. It is obviously done by many pilots all over the world but many people I have talked to said they wouldn't feel comfortable with how hard they are to slow down in the pattern.

Last, I did not recall what the year of this model was but if you are comparing to the cost of the money, remember that you will have a chute repack coming up. So if landing gear maintenance and other things are of concern, don't forget about the chute repack and the line cutters that will need to be replaced.

Again, I love the Cirrus that I just ordered, but it is a completely different plane than the one you showed and that would make it a much more difficult decision to me.
 
AWACSEng said:
Meh, I comprehend well enough to recognize when someone is too lazy to look up an answer, such as when you asked what 107gal of fuel weighed. But, since you're the OP for this thread and VERY new to aviation, you obviously haven't learned to do research for yourself and will gladly have others do the work for you. (And with the way this thread is spiraling, if I were you and your money, I'd take the Cirrus. That way, when you decide to no do the research required for flight planning and execution, you can just pull the red handle instead of turning you and your pax into a smoking hole.) Good luck!
Click to expand...

Thank you and good luck to you as well. I don't know who you are and you do not know me but I would never want a person and his airplane to turn into a smoking hole or even mention that to someone, words are powerful. No matter how experienced you are that can still happen to ANYBODY. So if you want to mention that to me that is fine, I'm a man I can handle it but I wont wish that upon someone else not even my worst enemy.
 
FloridaPilot said:
In defense, I know what an asterisk is when it comes to math equations. When gsengle explained what the 6 meant I said thank you because that it what I was looking for. The value of 6. You may be good at math but reading comprehension is not one of your strong points.
Click to expand...

Do you know what 6 means as related to fuel? How many hours do you have? Have you soloed? Have you done any cross country flights? Done any cross country planning?
 
mulligan said:
I don't have the time to read all the responses but as a person who just ordered a 2017 SR22 I wanted to share some insight into the Cirrus.
This may sound contrary to the fact that I absolutely LOVE the Cirrus I just bought but it is not the same plane that you have listed. Do some research on the model that you are looking at. The extra 200 pounds of useful load were not added until the G5 so make sure you research the useful load of this particular aircraft and that it meets your mission.

second, do some research on the flaps. The new G5 can lower flaps at 150KTS. I have heard that these older models the Vfe speeds are significantly lower and it can be a challenge to slow that thing down in the pattern. It is obviously done by many pilots all over the world but many people I have talked to said they wouldn't feel comfortable with how hard they are to slow down in the pattern.

Last, I did not recall what the year of this model was but if you are comparing to the cost of the money, remember that you will have a chute repack coming up. So if landing gear maintenance and other things are of concern, don't forget about the chute repack and the line cutters that will need to be replaced.

Again, I love the Cirrus that I just ordered, but it is a completely different plane than the one you showed and that would make it a much more difficult decision to me.
Click to expand...

G5 is amazing and I have read the specs on it. Lowering the flaps at 150kts is amazing but alas it's way over my budget for an airplane. I hope you enjoy it and lets see some photos once completed if I do decide to buy a Cirrus hopefully I will see you at one of the COPA meetings.

I heard the same thing about Mooneys with being tough to slow down, with proper planning and practice that shouldn't be a problem.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
Here I thought you were a pilot's pilot?.....no? :confused:
Click to expand...

I've flown Pipers, Cessnas and an ultralight, flying is flying doesn't matter how I get there.

mscard88 said:
Do you know what 6 means as related to fuel? How many hours do you have? Have you soloed? Have you done any cross country flights? Done any cross country planning?
Click to expand...

Yes, I know what 6 means...scroll up, 51 Hours, Yes and Yes
 
Art VanDelay said:
I realize you probably really don't give a fece but I've flown both and can tell you right now I'd go with the Cirrus. In a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

You've flown an Acclaim?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
mscard88 said:
Wow. That's what I thought. Thanks.
Click to expand...

mscard88 said:
No, but you don't think something is lacking?
Click to expand...

And this is part of why General Aviation is in the state that it is. I'm a newbie, I never said in any of my posts I was an expert or perfect. I ask a lot of questions I've been though many CFI's that bolted to the airlines so I can't ask them anymore. I get on here to ask questions or at least get different perspectives. I like to do that because I learn something every time, even from the bickering. Don't be afraid of the low time pilot who strives to learn something new everyday, be afraid of the person who thinks they can't learn anymore and think they already know. Those are the ones that are most dangerous.
 
But you've done XC planning, and flown XCs, but don't know how much a gallon of fuel weighs? I'm a CFI and I just find that unbelievable. Even if you supposedly can't ask your CFI there are plenty of free FAA books online. But if you want to blame others carry on.
 
Last edited:
wayne said:
It's a useful thing to know, but some planes can carry so much fuel that they only have enough payload left for a small lightweight pilot. How often will you really be able to fly 6-8 hours with four people with no one needing to stop for a bathroom break? Of course once you've loaded it up with people and luggage it can't carry a full load of fuel and still be in W&B.

Fortunately with just you and your wife you guys should be able to carry quite a bit of fuel in either of these planes, short of carrying a large amount of luggage. We tend to fly 2:30-3 hour legs. We've flown 4 hr legs, but that's a long time to sit in the seat. Look at how long you'll fly without stopping, realistically, and estimate the fuel needed plus reserves and see what payload that leaves remaining.

As an example, the SR22 I was flying a year ago it had 624 lbs of payload with full fuel. That left us ~75 lbs for luggage with the four of us in the plane. But, if we only had the tanks to tabs (47 gal instead of 81 gal) we would have 204 lbs more payload, or 828 lbs of payload before we got in it. With 47 gals I could fly ~3 hours and still have reserves, which is about 480 nm (winds, climb time, and such could make it less).

Big tanks means you can put in a lot of fuel if you aren't carrying a lot of people or luggage, but you can carry less if you need to carry more people or stuff. It's flexibility. What's important is how much fuel can you carry after you put in your normal, or even heavy, load? Can you carry enough fuel to go far enough?

For two people and luggage either of these models should work.
Click to expand...

Hmmm . . . My carbureted 1970 Mooney M20-C will take my wife and I, with bags stacked to the ceiling in the back seat and baggage area, further than 480 nm. Furthest WV to the NC coast is 385 nm, I never landed going either direction with less than 2 hours' fuel. Yes, I was under gross, within W&B limits; my WV base was 3000' feet long with trees at both ends, the beach was a 3500' grass strip with a healthy displacement at one end due to lines from an adjoining power substation.

On the downside, though, my plane only goes ~148 KTAS.
 
mscard88 said:
But you've done XC planning, and flown XCs, but don't know how much a gallon of fuel weighs? I'm a CFI and I just find that unbelievable. Even if you supposedly can't ask your CFI there are plenty of free FAA books online. But if you want to blame others carry on.
Click to expand...

I will conclude with this:

I'm not blaming anyone you are grasping at straws here. I never said it was anyone's fault but my own. I'm responsible for my own actions. That is why I learn everyday! I really forgot that is why I asked the question. Lazy thinking?...guilty as charged could I have looked it up?..yep. I don't fly for a living like you do so I don't have that knowledge off the top of my head so you have the advantage in this. Now if you were to ask me about Real Estate I'd bet I can give you faster more accurate responses because I do that everyday. If the tables were turned and you didn't know something about Real Estate that I knew I would politely tell you, not beat on my chest to point out to the world what you don't know. Why would I do it this way? Because I realize that we all have something to contribute in this world,
 
Cmon people why does every thread on POA end like this. Be nice to each other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'm retired, don't fly for a living and really don't fly much at all anymore.
 
Last edited:
op: get the cirrus. Trust me. you'll be happy
 
Op: anything but Cirrus, especially Mooney, trust me, you'll be happy.

(See, anyone can say trust me)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This thread reminds me of the joke about running in the special Olympics.....
 
gsengle said:
Op: anything but Cirrus, especially Mooney, trust me, you'll be happy.

(See, anyone can say trust me)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Another hater:)

Look OP get what makes you feel good. As i mentioned I've flown both. I'd be happy owning the Mooney but I'll take the SR22 over it. You guys are too much
 
Hater? That's the best ya got? :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FloridaPilot said:
Both Airplanes are around the same price to purchase but I'm sure cost of ownership isn't. I would like to know what are your pros and cons with both airplanes. I haven't flown either airplane but I have sat in both and they are very comfortable inside unlike Pipers in my experience. I'm going to try out the Cirrus December 10th. I don't know any Mooney guys yet but I will probably in the future.

If you own either airplane, what are the annuals like? How much? Are parts hard to come by? What are you doing in fuel burn on average?

Cirrus

https://www.aso.com/listings/spec/V...l=True&pagingNo=1&searchId=27600739&dealerid=

Mooney

https://www.aso.com/listings/spec/ViewAd.aspx?id=167253&fAdvId=22085
Click to expand...

On the Cirrus, note that it has a Forced Airmotive supercharger. That system has not found widespread acceptance in the market.

Both aircraft are manufacturer supported so parts should not be an issue. Mooney had stopped building planes for about 5 years and there was limited support for airframe parts, but from what I understand they are back in production at this moment. It is unusual that you would need airframe parts unless you bend something. The things that wear out are standard harware pieces which are independent from the respective manufacturer.

As for maintenance expenses, you are going to spend a little bit extra every year to maintain the retract landing gear. There are some rubber donuts that need replacing and eventually every mechanical gear will need something or the other replaced. The Cirrus otoh has scheduled chute repacks and replacements of the cable-cutter. Those costs are quite predictable as the shops have now settled into a routine and know what is involved in the different generations of planes. A 2003 should already have received its repack.

You'll burn between 12 and 17gph in both aircraft depending on how fast you want to go. How many extra knots the smaller fuselage and retract gear on the Mooney buys you is a question of religious conviction. It is discussed with a fervor usually reserved for things like abortion or bathroom use. Unless every flight you do is max range, it is probably going to make little difference to your overall math.

Note that the Cirrus is listed with 'Garmin 430' GPS units and not '430W'. That's possibly an oversight and one or both GPS may have already been upgraded. Also note, the plane is not ADS-B compliant so you would have to budget and upgrade on that within the next 3 years. The Cirrus is equipped with the 'inadevertent' icing protection. Later models were available with a package that allows flight into known icing, that system is more extensive, has a bigger tank and covers larger portions of the wing.
 
FloridaPilot said:
Really? How come? Don't worry about the wolves that will attack you from either side but give me an honest assessment pros and cons on each side.
Click to expand...

The Cirrus makes night and over water cross countries possible. I just plain would not do those with my family onboard in the Mooney.
 
weilke said:
On the Cirrus, note that it has a Forced Airmotive supercharger. That system has not found widespread acceptance in the market.

Both aircraft are manufacturer supported so parts should not be an issue. Mooney had stopped building planes for about 5 years and there was limited support for airframe parts, but from what I understand they are back in production at this moment. It is unusual that you would need airframe parts unless you bend something. The things that wear out are standard harware pieces which are independent from the respective manufacturer.

As for maintenance expenses, you are going to spend a little bit extra every year to maintain the retract landing gear. There are some rubber donuts that need replacing and eventually every mechanical gear will need something or the other replaced. The Cirrus otoh has scheduled chute repacks and replacements of the cable-cutter. Those costs are quite predictable as the shops have now settled into a routine and know what is involved in the different generations of planes. A 2003 should already have received its repack.

You'll burn between 12 and 17gph in both aircraft depending on how fast you want to go. How many extra knots the smaller fuselage and retract gear on the Mooney buys you is a question of religious conviction. It is discussed with a fervor usually reserved for things like abortion or bathroom use. Unless every flight you do is max range, it is probably going to make little difference to your overall math.

Note that the Cirrus is listed with 'Garmin 430' GPS units and not '430W'. That's possibly an oversight and one or both GPS may have already been upgraded. Also note, the plane is not ADS-B compliant so you would have to budget and upgrade on that within the next 3 years. The Cirrus is equipped with the 'inadevertent' icing protection. Later models were available with a package that allows flight into known icing, that system is more extensive, has a bigger tank and covers larger portions of the wing.
Click to expand...

Thank you, really good information. If I were to consider A Mooney are prop strikes common because of the shorter landing gear? I go through quite a bit of bargains and the damage history has it in there or the damage category is not even listed. Would a thorough pre buy come up with the issue if it happened?

The Cirrus parachute repack and the landing gear maintenance are probably going to be about the same price down the road, (To repack is anywhere from 11k-15k every ten years) but the issue is do I trust the person that sold me the airplane when they said they did it three years ago or should I repack right away?
 
The prop question you should be asking on the Mooney site not here. Short gear doesn't cause prop strikes, go look at the geometry and think about it. Badly botched landings or gear up landings do.

Disagree on landing gear maintenance heavily. Repack is 15k, or $1000 a year. Go check the fixed prices of annuals for both, they are not really different and some places the Mooney is cheaper despite the gear. Ditto on insurance, surprisingly many have found the insurance is higher on the Cirrus despite the gear difference. Remember pulling the chute often totals the plane, which is expensive for the insurance company...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FloridaPilot said:
Thank you, really good information. If I were to consider A Mooney are prop strikes common because of the shorter landing gear? I go through quite a bit of bargains and the damage history has it in there or the damage category is not even listed. Would a thorough pre buy come up with the issue if it happened?
Click to expand...

Prop strikes are the result of bad technique. Early Cirrus had a prop-strike problem through a combination of low prop clearance with a springy nose-gear and less than optimal training. The training has been improved and the landing gear has grown a couple of inches taller in later models (not sure when, G2, G3..). Neither a long-body Mooney nor an early Cirrus are aircraft suitable for ham-fisted operation.

A prop strike would typically show up in the maintenance records with a untimely engine overhaul and/or prop replacement. If you look through the records and at a couple of hundred hours, it got a new engine and prop, it is worth digging to find out whether someone pranged it on the nosegear (applies for all aircraft). There is no legal requirement to document the incident itself in the logs, you may have to infer from whatever repairs were made.

The Cirrus parachute repack and the landing gear maintenance are probably going to be about the same price down the road, (To repack is anywhere from 11k-15k every ten years) but the issue is do I trust the person that sold me the airplane when they said they did it three years ago or should I repack right away?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. The repack was done by a qualified shop and it was documented in the aircrafts maintenance record. It would be nuts to redo it 'just because'.

You may have read past it, but this plane is a one-of (or maybe one of 20) with this after-market supercharger installation. The folks who sold this modification made all kinds of optimistic claims on what it would do, I have not seen much independent testing that could confirm their claims to be true. If I was looking for my first plane, I would stay away from a plane with a system that is entirely unknown to 99% of airframe and powerplant mechanics.

I suggest you keep accumulating some experience in different aircraft and when it comes to buy, you avail yourself of the services of an agent who is familiar with the aircraft you intend to buy. Lots of shiny pictures on controller or trade-a-plane, if you dont know what you are looking at you can waste a lot of energy on pursuing aircraft that have significant issues.
 
Last edited:
FloridaPilot said:
I will conclude with this:

I'm not blaming anyone you are grasping at straws here. I never said it was anyone's fault but my own. I'm responsible for my own actions. That is why I learn everyday! I really forgot that is why I asked the question. Lazy thinking?...guilty as charged could I have looked it up?..yep. I don't fly for a living like you do so I don't have that knowledge off the top of my head so you have the advantage in this. Now if you were to ask me about Real Estate I'd bet I can give you faster more accurate responses because I do that everyday. If the tables were turned and you didn't know something about Real Estate that I knew I would politely tell you, not beat on my chest to point out to the world what you don't know. Why would I do it this way? Because I realize that we all have something to contribute in this world,
Click to expand...

[begin derailment]
I've read most of this thread partly because I love learning about all of the different airframes out there and real life experiences of their owners. I do roll my eyes at how most threads here turn out (albeit not as bad as the ahem red board). You can make a point and still be respectful; many choose not to be so. Others, like yourself, and myself, and even more seasoned guys, are always eager to learn and enjoy gleaning from the experiences of others, and I respect your post above in that light.

That said, 6 lbs/100LL gallon is knowledge that you MUST have at the top of your head! Rhetorically, how do you do your W&B? Honestly, I hate hate hate piling on here - and I never do this - but this is pre-solo stuff, my friend...a point being, it makes some of us wonder what other critical knowledge that you need to know off the top of your head simply just to stay alive when the ish hits the fan. On that note, many of the critical/chest-thumping/seemingly harsh responses are occasionally well-intentioned, simply because we don't want to read another preventable accident report on one of our own. I try stay humble (well as humble as pilots can be) and I guarantee you mine and some others' responses here are not intended to inflate our own egos but to help, as hard as it may come across. Thanks for understanding.
[carry on]
 
weilke said:
I suggest you keep accumulating some experience in different aircraft and when it comes to buy, you avail yourself of the services of an agent who is familiar with the aircraft you intend to buy. Lots of shiny pictures on controller or trade-a-plane, if you dont know what you are looking at you can waste a lot of energy on pursuing aircraft that have significant issues.
Click to expand...

Agreed. One of the reasons I was disappointed to not make it to Oshkosh this year was missing out on checking out all the planes that are in the range of our "next plane".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top