EuroFlyer wrote:
Cirrus has disrupted the market, nothing else, and they have rightfully taken away most of the business from i.e. Textron, who were too slow, too lazy, and too stupid to have a strategy for the single engine piston segment.
How so? Despite selling planes like weed, Cirrus had to get bailed out by Chinese investors, or would have gone bankrupt. Textron is still alive and cooking while divesting away from single piston engine market. So who actually was smarter?
Having said that, I give Cirrus tons of credit for running a modern shop with great marketing and innovative engineering, and we ought to applaud them for their accomplishments, and wish them success.
A colleague bought one ex demo from Cessna and was very pleased with it – it apparently flies very nicely and was well finished – I don’t recall it having any bugs/defects.
200 KTAS + with fixed gear and a luxury cabin is a nice personal mix. The flying controls design and undercarriage all seem to be more refined/tougher than the competition.
I flew in N400UK many years ago. The best finished GA plane I had seen.
RobertL18C wrote:
A colleague bought one ex demo from Cessna and was very pleased with it – it apparently flies very nicely and was well finished – I don’t recall it having any bugs/defects.200 KTAS + with fixed gear and a luxury cabin is a nice personal mix. The flying controls design and undercarriage all seem to be more refined/tougher than the competition.
Spot on !
Peter wrote:
The best finished GA plane I had seen.
And I can add that they are “holding up” very nicely, which just goes to show what a quality product they are.
Since you are probably selling one, that is just as well, although a full independent prebuy is always recommended 
Despite my great affection for the 182 there is a Columbia 350 vintage 2007 for sale for around 230EUR, and a similar vintage T182T for 320EUR, somehow I feel a Columbia 350 at nearly 100AMU less than the sturdy 182 is a good proposition.
I have co-owned and flown a Cessna Corvalis for a couple of years, which was unfortunately lost.
Corvalis is so rare in Europe that I’m looking into Cirrus as an alternative and and I have to say that fit and finish is my biggest grief on the Cirrus. They all look like a dog lived in them after a couple of years. My second grief is the handling, the Cirrus is one of the worst handling airplanes I have flown while the Corvalis is one of the best – the difference between the two is startling given how similar the designs are.
I am still likely to end up in the Cirrus camp due to the availability in Europe and I also like to have the parachute.
RobertL18C wrote:
The flying controls design and undercarriage all seem to be more refined/tougher than the competition.
While it handles really well, the undercarriage is positively flimsy. For that reason the aircraft has a max landing weight well below the max takeoff weight.
Yes max landing mass is 170 lbs below MAUM of 3400 lbs, not unusual for aircraft to have a landing weight restriction-although more common in GA multi engine. The PC12 has a lower landing mass and it’s landing gear has never been described as flimsy.
The Columbia/Corvallis has a steerable nose wheel and am not aware that the under carriage has been a problem in service.
