Refurb an old plane or buy new? Opinions welcome!

[StraightnLevel]

What price do you expect you could get for the Bo after all your desired upgrades?

I'm guessing it would be about half what I would have in it - probably a loss of around $150K if I had to sell it the day after it was completed.

- If you think whichever path you choose will result in your "forever" airplane (like you'll have it for at least the next twenty years), buy new.

That's where I run into the brick wall of financial reality. An Epic or TBM would really be the best fit for my use....but I can't swing that much $$$ by myself. I'm still in the "poor" category among aviation enthusiasts.

- For the mission profile you've stated, a partnership probably won't work very well and might be hard to unload if you're not happy with it.

Yes, that thought had occurred to me. The fellow who started the Epic partnership discussion understands my needs, but I have my doubts that I can find 3 other guys that would tolerate me having "the plane" out of state as much as I would be using it. The reality is that I probably fly more hours and longer distances than most people who get into fractional ownership. [Since January 2024 I've racked up 280 hours, so around 150 hours/year.] That would be a good deal for me, but a pretty poor deal for anyone else I'm in a group buy with. That said....????

- Give some thought to how and when your mission might change. Are you 5 years from retirement or 20? The plane that satisfies your commuting needs today might be excessive (and costly) when that's no longer necessary. If you're on the glide path to retirement, it might make sense to hang onto the Bo and then later get something that better suits your retirement lifestyle.

That's actually what's driving the search.

In theory, I could retire "early" in less than a year. In reality, my current position has a lot of runway, and my company is on a great growth trajectory that could keep me active for another decade. I need to be able to travel more and control my schedule better than commercial flight allows, however, if I am to manage my life outside of the office effectively. The Bo has already made life easier - being able to hop in the plane early on Saturday morning and fly 4 states away in a few hours to see kids and grandkids makes a HUGE difference in quality of life.

As for retirement, well, the mission won't change a whole lot. The only real difference would be trading the Houston office location for a beach house somewhere...and that still involves flying reasonably long cross country distances.

Naturally, one option is the one you mention of keeping the Bo for now with the intent of trading up in a few years (and maybe I could go up to an Epic or TBM), but honestly I'd prefer to get into my "forever" plane ASAP and spend the rest of my time flying it instead of learning a new platform every few years.

 

[TCABM]

….Option 2: Assume I buy a new SR22T or DA50RG for $1.3M. Street value the day after I buy it is $1.0M, so I'm out $300K....but I have a nice, shiny, new plane with all the latest toys, a much higher WAF, and presumably a much higher dispatch rate. So, my net is $150K worse, but the benefits are clearly there in return for the larger cost...

Unless you depreciate it (even then, after the schedule is exhausted), you’re out $150K in year 1, another $150K in year 2, etc. while paying interest on the principal. I sense a bias towards new when the math hasn’t been done yet.

As for dispatch rates, there’s not much different between new and well maintained. Weather DGAF if it’s a new Cirrus or a vintage Bo, neither do mags or tires, nor does that Continental six-cylinder.

You’ve presented a binary choice when, in fact, there are shades of gray. That big 550 for example; are the burn rates worth the speed increase or does the O-470 at $60K for an exchane pencil out equivalently? A used GTN650XI does 95% of the things a a GTN750 can do.

Dynon with IFD or G3X instead of GI275s may well be even money or less. The thing you’re missing is what’s unobtanium for you J35? I don’t think your J35 was hit by the ruddervator skin problem, but that was unsolvable at any price until recently. Now, it’s a $7K in parts problem.

Meanwhile, Perspective+ locks you into the avionics package for life, and those LRUs are replaceable for a reason. Until they aren’t.

 

[Half Fast]

I'm guess it would be about half what I would have in it - probably a loss of around $150K if I had to sell it the day after it was completed.

The depreciation wallop on a new Cirrus will probably be worse than that, but you can run numbers as well as anyone.

I'm still in the "poor" category among aviation enthusiasts.

Speaking for the "po" category, it's still fun at any level.

In theory, I could retire "early" in less than a year. In reality, my current position has a lot of runway, and my company is on a great growth trajectory that could keep me active for another decade.

A bit off topic, and take this FWIW, but...

Several very wise people who retired ahead of me advised me to bail as soon as I could. The most senior engineer I've worked with, a man I respect greatly, told me "Get out as soon as you can. I waited much too long." Another put it this way: "Working longer might get me more money, but it can't give me more time. I have enough money, but not enough years left. I want to enjoy my family."

I pulled the ripcord at 59 and it was the best business decision I ever made. Zero regrets.

As for retirement, well, the mission won't change a whole lot. The only real difference would be trading the Houston office location for a beach house somewhere...and that still involves flying reasonably long cross country distances.

I think you'll find the time constraints of the mission will ease quite a bit. When you're retired, it won't matter so much whether you fly to the beach house today, or wait a couple of days for better weather. And you won't care as much whether the flight takes 4 hours or 6; in fact, you might enjoy flying slower, maybe making a sightseeing detour or stop along the way, etc. Extra freedom to do those things is one of the best parts of retirement.

 

[Lowflynjack]

I always like the guys who say old planes are going to have problems. ALL planes can and will have problems!

I like old planes that someone else has fixed up. I have a 1959 Cessna 182 that I bought with a freshly overhauled engine, newer paint and interior. It has an autopilot and a Garmin 430, which are old, but they work. It's fast, hauls a load, and is a good looking plane. A new 182 averages $600K. I bought mine for $120K. I've flown it 400 hours had very few issues and they were minor, so in the end, I would have spent a lot more money to get about the same amount of airplane. I could upgrade my panel and still sell it for a profit.

The big key is, someone else made the upgrades. Buying one and fixing it up to this standard would have cost me a lot more money, but still less than a new one.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Who is shipping new planes with a non-WAAS panel?

They are not. But I think the point is about future-proofing. Remember that a non-WAAS G1000 with a KAP 140 autopilot was the state of the art at one point. Which actually leads to an example.

My club has a Diamond DA40 with a non-WAAS G1000 and a KAP 140. As mentioned, that one is technically upgradable to something else that is STC approved but, for the sake of the example, lets say the G1000 is part of the type certificate, like with a G36. Basically, it cant be upgraded. No updates authorized by the airframe manufacturer. Buy one of those 2005 models and WYSIWYG.

Compare that with a pre-glass DA40 that's four years older. Pull out the vacuum instruments and pop in a pair of G5s or GI275s or even a G3X (or two) and a GTNxi and you have the newer G1000 beat (although you can't add a GFC autopilot), even if you get an Nxi G1000.

 

[N1230k]

From the guy that has been there, done that and barely has the t-shirt left: I moved up from a Ce-177 to a SR-20, 20 years ago.

THE GOOD: Have you ever been on the ramp, saw a plane you just needed to go look? I don't mean you merely "wanted" or was "curious enough to walk over" but one you just felt compelled to see, hoping the pilot is not in a hurry and will offer a climb-aboard. Now, try to imagine being that pilot/owner. That is what owning a new modern, got all the toys-gadgets-tech feels like! I was proud, family felt safe, the wife agreed to go places, warranty was great, insurance gave a break on insurance, but it was offset by cost of repack on the chute, line cutters, etc.

But . . . there is no such thing as a free lunch.

THE BAD: I think no matter what you own, annuals will be a horror but do know, new gear does not insulate you from FAA mandated changes. For me, the FAA announced ADS-B after I bought a TAA. While the FAA touted ADS-B would provide weather and traffic in the cockpit, I already had weather and traffic in the cockpit. But to fly I had to buy new navigators, new antennas (that means body work and paint on a Cirrus), plus new transponder, and to top it off, the MFD required a $6K software patch to make it all work. All told, over $40K (in 2018 dollars) which was about 25% of the plane's hull value before ADS-B and it did not add a single dollar to the plane's actual resale value.

Would I do it again? Yes. Grown kids, a divorce, and a mission change convinced me to sell the Cirrus and now I am simply happy with my Luscombe, and memories of when I was "that pilot" on the ramp.

 

[Hang 4]

Another thought, why not buy a used Cirrus? Get the chute, avionics you want etc. I don't know the used market well, but there seem to be a bunch of decent ones in the $600k.

 

[StraightnLevel]

Unless you depreciate it (even then, after the schedule is exhausted), you’re out $150K in year 1, another $150K in year 2, etc. while paying interest on the principal. I sense a bias towards new when the math hasn’t been done yet.

The bias is my wife's bias towards something with BRS/CAPS. That ain't happening in the Bo, no matter how much I upgrade everything.

As for dispatch rates, there’s not much different between new and well maintained. Weather DGAF if it’s a new Cirrus or a vintage Bo, neither do mags or tires, nor does that Continental six-cylinder.

Agreed, though I think that there is something to be said for having everything at 0 time. All of those various scheduled maintenance items and ADs for the older models add up both in AOG time and cost. That said, if I keep the plane 10 years and maintain my 150-hour pace I'll burn through most of the TBO of a new engine, regardless of platform.

That big 550 for example; are the burn rates worth the speed increase or does the O-470 at $60K for an exchane pencil out equivalently? A used GTN650XI does 95% of the things a a GTN750 can do.

Well, I don't really care that much about the fuel consumption. In comparison to total cost it's not THAT much of a factor, especially when viewed as MPG vs. GPH. Yes, I could put in another IO-470 and there's nothing really wrong with that, but if I'm already spending the $$$ for the remove/replace work and already paying for the rebuild, upgrading to the larger lump is really a small cost increase.

Same holds for the avionics. I could scrape down and do everything as cheaply as possible, but why? Every cycle of electronics being removed and replaced increases the likelihood of future problems, so I really don't see used avionics as being any sort of a bargain if the plan is to keep the plane for many years. Similar to the engine, if I'm already breaking everything out and adding AHRS, ADSB-In and all of the autopilot servos, the difference between a used GNS and the newest, most current is a small addition to the total.

 

[StraightnLevel]

Another thought, why not buy a used Cirrus? Get the chute, avionics you want etc. I don't know the used market well, but there seem to be a bunch of decent ones in the $600k.

I can't make those numbers work. $300K for my V-tail with all new engine, paint, avionics and interior, or $600K for an older Cirrus with a used 1,000+ hour engine, 10+-year-old paint and interior, and 10+-year old avionics? Not seeing it. I can't imagine that there's enough reliability difference with a 10-12 year old Cirrus to make it any better in terms of dispatch rate than a completely re-worked V-Tail.

That's effectively paying a bit more than $300K for TKS and CAPS.

Pardon Our Interruption

Pardon Our Interruption

 

[hindsight2020]

Your borrowing hurts my labor value,whereas capexing an already depreciated asset is deflationary (your existing cash goes poof, which helps mine). So my vote is refurbish the old one, do not finance a new one.

 

[StraightnLevel]

Your borrowing hurts my labor value,whereas capexing an already depreciated asset is deflationary (your existing cash goes poof, which helps mine). So my vote is refurbish the old one, do not finance a new one.

Well, while I see your point, the reality is that I'm at a point in life where I'm not taking out any more debt. If I can't pay cash, I can't afford it.

In short, all of my cash is going "poof" one way or another. If I don't do it, my wife will.

 

[TCABM]

….That's effectively paying a bit more than $300K for TKS and CAPS….

If you can swing the new, get it. I’d suggest joining COPA first, if you haven’t already. At least there you’ll get relevant info from actual owners.

My ST-2x time is small although we have a strong sales and service center at 5C1 and I nearly bought into a G3 partnership but they had a time in type min I couldn’t swing.

 

[Kitch]

and presumably a much higher dispatch rate.

Presumably is the operative word in that sentence. There's a guy on diamond aviators board that shelled out 1.7 for a new DA62 that launched an engine at 85TT he's looking at 8-12 months to get an engine from Diamond.

- the "cool factor" isn't a differentiator.

The cool factor always matters deep down inside...

Side note... I'm not trying to pi$$ in your cornflakes. I've been having the same debate in my head for about a year now. Was leaning towards a Diamond even went and got my ME rating only to find out thru investigation the dispatch rate on my 20 year old 206 was higher than most new Diamonds. Not to mention the MX costs down the stretch.

As we like to say around the hangar... good luck with your 1st world problem.

 

[WDD]

Who is shipping new planes with a non-WAAS panel?

Cessna did a few years ago. I’m sure Cirrus did as well. And whatever state of the art panel the plane has when it’s sold as new will be outdated someday.

Point is a newer plane might have the type certificate mandating a certain panel what not be present. You’ll not be able to update if you wanted to.

 

[iamtheari]

Time for my obligatory half-joke: My wife hated my airplane, so I had to get a new one.

I vote for the Cirrus, with the following thoughts (apply grains of salt now, because my total Cirrus experience was a single trip around the pattern, as ballast):

* CAPS gives you a survivable out for some problems that you can't plan for, and some that you should have. For example, if your engine dies because a butterfly sneezed at the crankshaft factory and today is when the metal finally comes from together, you pull the red handle. If you have a cardiac arrest in flight, your passenger pulls the red handle. You should not use CAPS as an excuse to stay in moderate or worse icing conditions, but if you make that mistake your odds of survival are better if the ice cube you trapped yourself inside has a parachute than if it doesn't.

* Smart Glide fills in a little bit of the CAPS gap. If you lose the engine, you hit the red button first and let the plane glide, perhaps toward an airport, while you troubleshoot and/or try to pick a better place to pull the red handle. I'm picturing mountains below and plains just ahead, where pulling the red handle too early would dump you on a mountainside without realistic hope of rescue but waiting might get you to an airport or at least a place where rescuers can more easily reach you.

* Auto Land fills in a bigger CAPS gap. If you have a cardiac arrest in flight, someone hits the magic button and the plane delivers you to a waiting ambulance. Pulling the red handle might deposit you far from medical assistance.

* Single-Engine, Fixed-Gear. Other than climbing on the wing to get in and out, which might require you and your wife to take yoga classes as you age, the things that force retirees to stop flying (or at least stop insuring their flying) are mostly absent.

Taken as a whole, a Cirrus with Auto Land is a plane you can probably keep flying, with full insurance coverage and reasonable peace of mind, for longer into retirement than any other plane.

 

[Lowflynjack]

Grown kids, a divorce, and a mission change convinced me to sell the Cirrus and now I am simply happy with my Luscombe, and memories of when I was "that pilot" on the ramp.

The funny part of that is, I like being "that pilot" in a straight-tail 182, or a Luscombe, or a Pitts. When I see a pilot get out of a Cirrus, I think, "who would spend that kind of money on a fixed-gear, single-engine plane?" I'd be much more likely to come check out your Luscombe!

To be fair, everyone has that thing that makes them feel like they're getting the attention. In my case, my Corvette turned heads and I got a lot of questions about it... mostly from 40 year old men, not the young women I was hoping for, but attention!

 

[StraightnLevel]

There's a guy on diamond aviators board that shelled out 1.7 for a new DA62 that launched an engine at 85TT he's looking at 8-12 months to get an engine from Diamond.

...only to find out thru investigation the dispatch rate on my 20 year old 206 was higher than most new Diamonds

Yikes! That's decidedly not cool. I haven't heard that about the Cirrus' but sounds like I should do some digging.

good luck with your 1st world problem.

Indeed! Life could be a lot worse, right?

 

[N1230k]

The funny part of that is, I like being "that pilot" in a straight-tail 182, or a Luscombe, or a Pitts. When I see a pilot get out of a Cirrus, I think, "who would spend that kind of money on a fixed-gear, single-engine plane?" I'd be much more likely to come check out your Luscombe!

To be fair, everyone has that thing that makes them feel like they're getting the attention. In my case, my Corvette turned heads and I got a lot of questions about it... mostly from 40 year old men, not the young women I was hoping for, but attention!

I agree with your sentiment. But at the time, the SR-20 just fit my mission profile and Texas is a community property state so I really needed 50% of permission.

As for the younger women . . . . I've never owned a Vette, but I ride a Harley. Unfortunately, similar results.

 

[texasclouds]

Cessna One Ninety Five…do it.

 

[Racerx]

RV10 with the BRS...even though it looks awful.

 

[StraightnLevel]

RV10 with the BRS...even though it looks awful.

I'm only interested in new certified planes.

 

[RockyMtnFlyer]

Here's the rub:

It's a given that nobody makes money by buying an airplane. The real question is which approach loses less, and what are the benefits derived from putting the larger capital chunk into a new plane.

Option 1: Assume I have $50K in my current plane. Add $250K for paint/panel/interior/engine. That's $300K. If street value is $150K, I'm out $150K. 10 years later, that won't really change very much, right?

Option 2: Assume I buy a new SR22T or DA50RG for $1.3M. Street value the day after I buy it is $1.0M, so I'm out $300K....but I have a nice, shiny, new plane with all the latest toys, a much higher WAF, and presumably a much higher dispatch rate. So, my net is $150K worse, but the benefits are clearly there in return for the larger cost.

Then there is the operating cost. My guess is that the new plane is going to cost more than the old Bo for the "warranty required" maintenance at their certified service shop, vs. the shop(s) that I use today. Offsetting that is the fact that the old plane is going to have more unplanned repair items, even having been completely overhauled.

I vote for option 1. I have a $150k check ready.

 

[pfarber]

New AC will cost $400-500K+ and still only have 2-3 year warranty.... so I would not even factor that in.... you'll fly 200-300 hours and have spend 2-3x the cash.

There are two major costs on an airplane, neither is the airframe. Engine then avionics is where the money is.

My opinion is to build the plane you want. I'm sure you could spec out an RV-10, pay someone to build it and have the same performance of an SR-22 for less than half the cost. Lead time on a new Cirrus is about a year... you could have an RV-10 done in that time.

Don't forget once you are in certificated airplane world your options are limited and your costs will only go up.

 

[pfarber]

I'm only interested in new certified planes.

THen you really don't have many options. Cirrus? Diamond? Something from Europe?

 

[Salty]

Old planes are money pits

New planes are money pits with a higher initial investment.

Look at a the first 5 or 10 years of a half dozen regularly used plane’s logbooks and tell me if you really think a new plane is worth it.

 

[StraightnLevel]

Then you really don't have many options. Cirrus? Diamond? Something from Europe?

Pretty much so.

1) I'm about 99.99% certain that my wife would never get into a plane carrying the "experimental" placard.

2) Anything more than a couple of years old doesn't have any cost, speed, reliability or performance advantage over completely restoring my existing plane. At that point, I don't see any advantage to saving a few percent buying a 2023 that isn't configured the way I would want it vs. a new one with exactly the things I spec and a warranty.

3) WAF desire for 'chute limits the field substantially.

That leaves a new SR22[T] or DA50RG as the only viable options within pricing reason. Pipistrel Panthera theoretically looks good, but does it really exist for sale in the US?

The more I look, the more I see why Cirrus sells so many planes, and why Bonanza is still the correct answer to most of these questions.

 

[Bell206]

The real question is which approach loses less, and what are the benefits derived from putting the larger capital chunk into a new plane.

I've found unless the used aircraft in question is in 100% conformity and condition minus normal wear and tear there is no valid comparison to a new aircraft. And when you do compare such an example, the financial and benefit gap tends to narrow. If that makes sense. And especially when you add a BRS, etc into the mix for the comparison.

I'll Call it the "Tinker Factor" which might support upgrading your current plane....maybe.

In my experiences with flipping aircraft and owner assist unless one is an A&P or has a loose arrangement with one, the tinker financial benefits are still limited. To me that would more under a "personal significance" than a 3rd separate factor.

 

[Lindberg]

Unless you depreciate it (even then, after the schedule is exhausted), you’re out $150K in year 1, another $150K in year 2, etc. while paying interest on the principal. I sense a bias towards new when the math hasn’t been done yet.

Does a new cirrus really appreciate that fast? So a ten-year-old one is worth nothing? Seems unlikely. I bought an older plane, but I sold it for more that I bought it for, and made more than I spent on it, excluding fixed overhead.

 

[TCABM]

Does a new cirrus really appreciate that fast? So a ten-year-old one is worth nothing? Seems unlikely. I bought an older plane, but I sold it for more that I bought it for, and made more than I spent on it, excluding fixed overhead.

COPA say market value depreciation is 6-7% annually. A significant model year change and status of repack (when due) has an impact.

 

[WDD]

That leaves a new SR22[T] or DA50RG as the only viable options within pricing reason.

1) IF you can write a check for a new SR22 T / DA50RG and it doesn't change your financial security
2) And IF you've actually flown a Cirrus / DA50RG demo flight,
3) AND IF WIFE has sat in Cirrus / DA50 RG and approves

then go ahead, write the check, have wife pick color of the plane, order the plane, go to the Cirrus new owner training camp (mandatory) to learn how to fly and land the thing. Or do same with the DA50RG

IMHO - and nothing that wrong with it - I believe you have the "Iwantanewplaneitis". Flying is hobby that will never make financial sense. So at this point don't sweat the cost of upgrading old plane vs cost of new one, depreciation, etc.

 

[Half Fast]

Well, so far you've survived the legacy doctor killer, so why not switch to the modern age doctor killer? At least it's not fork-tailed....

 

[MIFlyer]

1) IF you can write a check for a new SR22 T / DA50RG and it doesn't change your financial security
2) And IF you've actually flown a Cirrus / DA50RG demo flight,
3) AND IF WIFE has sat in Cirrus / DA50 RG and approves

then go ahead, write the check, have wife pick color of the plane, order the plane, go to the Cirrus new owner training camp (mandatory) to learn how to fly and land the thing. Or do same with the DA50RG

IMHO - and nothing that wrong with it - I believe you have the "Iwantanewplaneitis". Flying is hobby that will never make financial sense. So at this point don't sweat the cost of upgrading old plane vs cost of new one, depreciation, etc.

I kind of concur, and it's good for our industry for people to keep buying new piston singles. It's the only way there will be a 15 year old one for sale in 15 years for me to look at if I decide I want to get out of my retract in my late 60's (boy that's scary to say!!!). Honestly, I would probably have a plane built the way I want (and if you have that kind of money, keep flying your plane as is, while you buy one with a steam panel and have it built the way you want over the course of a year), then sell your current plane as is when the new plane is ready and shaken down.

BUT, getting a new plane, without managing all the upgrade work and bug fixes and adding the chute and TKS (both very tough to add to existing airframes) is a good call if you have the money. I think the only thing the OP should really weigh is can they get into a nice, used STP that wouldn't have a chute, but would have great dispatch and reliability while picking up some more speed.

 

[WDD]

I think the question isn’t “new or used” for the OP, but rather “I want a new plane with a parachute, I’ll compare it to a used plane although I’m getting a new one”.

 

[StraightnLevel]

Well, so far you've survived the legacy doctor killer, so why not switch to the modern age doctor killer? At least it's not fork-tailed....

Well, I'm not a doctor, so there's that......

 

[StraightnLevel]

I think the only thing the OP should really weigh is can they get into a nice, used STP that wouldn't have a chute, but would have great dispatch and reliability while picking up some more speed.

This thought had occurred to me, BUT:

SWMBO specifically called out the BRS as the rationale for purchase approval.

This, in turn, means that an upgraded plane that doesn't have BRS is specifically disallowed.

 

[Half Fast]

Have you traded the cost of an upgraded plane plus a divorce against the cost of a new plane?

 

[StraightnLevel]

Have you traded the cost of an upgraded plane plus a divorce against the cost of a new plane?

A divorce would mean I'd need three planes, because she would end up with the nicest one, and the lawyer would take one of the other two.

BTW, if I really wanted to go full-on "doctor killer", I'd go straight to a used Vision Jet. After all, it's a fork-tailed Cirrus, right?

 

[MarkH]

Background: I'm pricing out the upgrades I would like to pursue with my J35 Bonanza. The plane flies great, does everything right, and has no significant squawks. However, it's an older plane and it's overdue for some cosmetic work and updating.

In theory, I could retire "early" in less than a year. In reality, my current position has a lot of runway, and my company is on a great growth trajectory that could keep me active for another decade.

What happens if you wait? There are 3 concerns I have with reading this:

1) There is some risk with upgrading a V tail Bo, ruddervator corrosion being the obvious risk. MOSAIC's impact on value of older certificated 4 seat planes being a less obvious risk.

2) If you are considering retiring early, is the plane you have now the best plane for your retirement? Personally, when I retire I plan to move to an ELSA for more flexibility, lower costs at the tradeoff of speed and range.

3) The new airplane market could change radically in 2 years, the comparison right now is Upgrade vs SR22, but MOSAIC's changes may put a new RV-10 on the table, and if I am in your shoes, I would upgrade over the SR22, but buy a new RV-10 over the upgrade. (RV-10 is just an example, there is also the Sling TSI and others that could come to market as complete planes thanks to MOSAIC).

 

[StraightnLevel]

1) There is some risk with upgrading a V tail Bo, ruddervator corrosion being the obvious risk.

Not true anymore. Replacement magnesium ruddervators are back in production.

V-tail Bonanza ruddervator corrosion solved

The American Bonanza Society awarded a prize first announced in 2021 to SRS Aviation, for solving a problem with V-tail ruddervators that was an existential threat to the fleet.

www.aopa.org

2) If you are considering retiring early, is the plane you have now the best plane for your retirement? Personally, when I retire I plan to move to an ELSA for more flexibility, lower costs at the tradeoff of speed and range.

I actually see it going the other way - I'll need more load, range and speed than I do today, because more of my flights will be to distant relatives with the dogs in the back. This is part of my decision planning today; if I know I want to upgrade for the missions when I retire, why not go ahead and do it now?

3) The new airplane market could change radically in 2 years, the comparison right now is Upgrade vs SR22, but MOSAIC's changes may put a new RV-10 on the table, and if I am in your shoes, I would upgrade over the SR22, but buy a new RV-10 over the upgrade. (RV-10 is just an example, there is also the Sling TSI and others that could come to market as complete planes thanks to MOSAIC).

I struggle to envision any of these as serious cross-country planes. Note that my three-way decision matrix was 1) Fully updated IO-550 V-Tail with 94 gal tanks, 2) New SR22[T], 3) 1/4 share of a new Epic. I'm not looking for a $100 hamburger plane - I'm looking for something to get between Milwaukee, Charlotte, Baltimore, and Houston. DA50RG? Maybe....but I haven't seen one in person yet to have a sense of how it compares.

I looked pretty hard at the JMB VL-3 before I picked up the J35, and the performance numbers looked outstanding as a solo plane. Useful load is pitiful, though, as is the case with the great majority of likely MOSAIC candidates. If my wife is in the 2nd seat, I'd have to offload fuel if we decide to pack a toothbrush, never mind adding a couple of 75-lb huskies.

 

[WDD]

Well, I'm not a doctor, so there's that......

But you did stay at a Holiday Inn….