SR22T vs G36, Both fully loaded and latest model.

G36. The Cirrus is fun to fly, but a G36 is a freaking battle tank which will protect me and my occupants.
 
I find the G36 very fun to fly. Fingertip handling.
 
I would definately get a G36 if they would have about 300# of useful load. However, I been flying cirrus for several hundred hours and they are also pretty reliable and often true out at 183 at 10-12 thousand ft.
 
I agree with the G36. With the extra length, could easily squeeze some skis inside there if I want to go skiing.
 
At this point the G36 because my I have a family of 4 with bun in oven! My wife and I are 330 lbs, both are under 35lbs each so about 100lbs with car seats. But, the kids will grow!
 
Climb performance=safety, getting up to more favorable tailwinds, and overflying weather if necesary. I just see a turbo as an extra tool in my toolbox. It probably has the service ceiling at 18500 due to the lack of a turbo. NA engines suck at climbing after about 8000 ft. Cirrus I fly has given me above 1000 fpm up to about fl200.
 
Yabut I wouldn't wanna deal with the headache or hassle that is mx on a turbo. It's the reason we went with a 201 instead of a 231.
 
cirrusmx said:
Climb performance=safety, getting up to more favorable tailwinds, and overflying weather if necesary. I just see a turbo as an extra tool in my toolbox. It probably has the service ceiling at 18500 due to the lack of a turbo. NA engines suck at climbing after about 8000 ft. Cirrus I fly has given me above 1000 fpm up to about fl200.
Click to expand...

Departing KTVL at a nearly 10,000 foot density altitude in the summer I could point a normally aspirated Debonair straight at Echo Summit and clear it no problem. The same departure in my Turbo Arrow required a couple circles to accomplish. Turbos are great if you need them but they are just one more thing to fail, and you pay for them.
 
once you go turbo you dont want to go back. I sometimes get to fly an sr22 and it sucks balls compared to the sr22t.
 
I did. I fly an NA Arrow II now. Meets my mission requirements.
 
DavidWhite said:
Yabut I wouldn't wanna deal with the headache or hassle that is mx on a turbo. It's the reason we went with a 201 instead of a 231.
Click to expand...

If you go for the turbo, don't screw around with it - go for the 252
 
Muttley said:
G36
Much more professional quality airplane
Bigger cabin, more capability, other people don't laugh at you....
Click to expand...

I don't laugh at Cirii. They still NEVER wave back at me in my little Vtail though. I'm something like 0 for 50 now.

I love me some Bonanzas, but wouldn't the turbo SR22 have more capability over the NA G36, if only in time to climb and service ceiling?
 
schmookeeg said:
I don't laugh at Cirii. They still NEVER wave back at me in my little Vtail though. I'm something like 0 for 50 now.

I love me some Bonanzas, but wouldn't the turbo SR22 have more capability over the NA G36, if only in time to climb and service ceiling?
Click to expand...

Cirrus pilots usually don't wave back, it makes the stick hurt if they turn their head.
 
I have noticed the Cirrus guys tend to have some type of back straightening device permanently installed up the no no hole, and their nose trim tab seems to be stuck a little high.
 
I've met some Cirrus renters that I like, and even a few SR20 owners who aren't total asshats, but I don't think I've ever met anyone with an SR22 I would care to spend any amount of time with.
 
Muttley said:
G36
Much more professional quality airplane
Bigger cabin, more capability, other people don't laugh at you....
Click to expand...


Agree with the looks and build of the bo, but a measly 1000 # useful load kind of defeats the purpose of the bigger cabin. What happened to the older planes more reasonable payload?
 
cirrusmx said:
Agree with the looks and build of the bo, but a measly 1000 # useful load kind of defeats the purpose of the bigger cabin. What happened to the older planes more reasonable payload?
Click to expand...

Avionics and safety features. My 1966 172 had a higher useful load than a new 172SP and the gross weight is 250 pounds less.
 
Someone was showing them at an event at my aerodrome. They guy was nice until he found out that I was learning in a LSA. He had bought and SR-20 which he was also obtaining his license in.
I will mention that same day, the people who were showing their Kodiak, and the people who were showing their King Air didn't give me the time of day.
 
I dont blame the airplane, but rather people being snubbish because they hit it big on a business or profession and totally forgetting that money goes around. This is what I call the doctor syndrome. Those types dont live long once they get into aviation.:yes::yes::yes:
 
Some people here are funny. You all bash the crap out of Cirrus's, and in turn the pilots who fly them. But then your butt hurt if they don't wave to you. Talk about egos.
 
jmp470 said:
Some people here are funny. You all bash the crap out of Cirrus's, and in turn the pilots who fly them. But then your butt hurt if they don't wave to you. Talk about egos.
Click to expand...

"Yeah those Harleys. Things are noisy, slow and shake a lot.

And the riders never wave back...."
 
Flew both for a radiology hospital...Bonanza all the way. this has been beat to death on BT lots of Cirrus guys end up in a Bo.
 
I note the obvious negativity towards Cirri and those who fly them seem to come from those who haven't given the airplane a chance.
 
cirrusmx said:
I would definately get a G36 if they would have about 300# of useful load. However, I been flying cirrus for several hundred hours and they are also pretty reliable and often true out at 183 at 10-12 thousand ft.
Click to expand...

Get an older A36 and upgrade the panel with whatever glass you want. Latest and greatest gee-whiz stuff with extra useful load.
 
As Cap'n Ron said once

"I don't care if it rains or freezes
'long as I got my plastic cirrus
plastered to the butt end of my seat"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top