Cirrus SR22 demo flight

In article , Stefan wrote:
I think you forgot the most important point: It's fun to fly.

Indeed it is - more due to the awesome visibility you get than the
handling (it's definitely designed to be easy in IFR and not 'sporty'!)

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

In new aircraft, the right comparison for an Arrow would be the
Diamond
DA-40 rather than the Cirrus (or Lancair).

There is NO comparison for the Arrow in new aircraft because the Arrow
came into being solely to satisfy regulatory requirements -
specifically the requirement to take the commercial and CFI in a
complex airplane. The DA-40 is not an adequate substitute.

The reasonable comparison for the DA-40 is the Cheetah or Tiger.

Michael

Well, the Arrow gets 140 knots on 150 hp (75%) with 1000 lbs useful
load, and of course it's a prehistoric cabin design, but early Bonanzas
weren't any faster until they beefed up the engine, which doesn't count
in my view of aeronautical efficiency. I've flown a couple of the
newer designs (though not the Cirrus) The creature comforts are really
fine, they fly well, the glass panel is awesome, the skin is smooth
(though I'm not sure how smooth it'll be in 40 years after sitting
outside half the time).

It just doesn't make any sense to me, in spite of all of the above, to
invest that much depreciable money in a plane that cools off every time
I reduce power, has to be preheated all winter, burns a quart of oil
every 10 operating hours, and requires a manual mixture adjustment.
Many of the changes are admittedly much more than cosmetic, but the
engine is still a fairly important component of the system.