johnh wrote:
Not sure I follow. My GFC500 installation was no cheaper because of the existing KFC225, apart from the few $K I got for its residual value.
No, it would not be. Changing an existing system to a totally new one is the same thing, if not more expensive, than completely new. For me, as a normal working class guy who is trying to keep things reasonable, I would never again try to put an AP in a plane which does not have one, nor would I change an existing one that is working, with the possible excheption of “plug and play” upgrades like the 55x-Avidyne upgrade.
The work involved is simply way too expensive. Even more so if you have to exchange more. A complete IFR set including AP, dual Navigators, EFIS plus all the installation, wiring, certification, paperwork, will easily be more than the cost of a readily equipped airplane in full, given the revenue from the sale of the old one.
I have a SR20G2, IFR with the original 430+Avidyne+55x. Biggest worry is there seems to be no path out of AVGAS and Cirrus does not appear to be doing anything about it. We were kicked out of our old airport because of this and our new airport is no longer accepting any more avgas-only planes (though they are not kicking out ones like us already there, for now). Not sure what the Saratoga options are but there are plenty of UL98 approved or diesel converted PA28s flying around. Secondary worry with the SR20 is the extreme cost if the avionics needs replacing. Biggest plus is the comfort and the uncluttered cockpit the side stick gives you, great for longer trips.
As a satrisifed but educated ex Cirrus owner a couple of warnings:
1) A G1 SR20 would be presumably quite old. If the engine is origonal look out for the likelihood of an expensive overhaul. If ghe engine is nevertheless low time look oiut for corrosion
2) Bw careful with the Avidyne panel equipped Cirruses. Avidyne is no longer maong the panels as I understand. They do fail witlh aalarming regularity and they ate hugely expenisve to replace/overhaul
3) Check when the parachute will need to0 be overhauled. Another very expensive item
ji wrote:
I have a SR20G2, IFR with the original 430+Avidyne+55x.
As an owner, how do you rate the SR20 in terms of performance, owner experience and so on? I always felt the SR20 is an underrated airplane in the shadow of the larger SR22 but I understand it has quite a few happy customers.
ji wrote:
Secondary worry with the SR20 is the extreme cost if the avionics needs replacing.
For the 430 the “easiest” replacement is the Avidyne 440. The AP could in theory be replaced plug and play with the DFC90, which many have done. The rest is expensive, true. Many SR20’s I see have single or dual Aspens.
I don’t have an SR20 to sell, but I do have a FIKI Mooney 252 Encore, which is the holy grail of four-seat singles touring aircraft in terms of efficiency.
Hello Patrick,
How about a Beech Bonanza? I did really enjoy the F33A we did fly years ago. Sure it is not a proper all weather plane but more a light IFR tourer. But it is rather fast and it is a joy to fly. I think it could be a great upgrade from an Arrow. It is not super cheap to maintain but also does not come with crazy things like mandatory CAPS overhaul or similar and there are plenty of them around. So there is an ecosystem to buy, sell, maintain and get training on those planes. Compared to a SR20 the Bonanza is a real performer. When upgrading I would look into the 300hp class to really get something different than an Arrow.
In the end the only thing the Bonanzas cannot do properly is serious IFR but then you are looking into much more complex and expensive options where a fully featured SR22 with turbo and deice is only the very bottom end.
Dear all,
Thanks for your input so far!
Let me provide some additional context/background (which I left out initially to not overcomplicate the thread) and answer some questions and maybe ask some more.
), I’m sure she would like the chute. To look at it the other way around: Give me a certain aircraft, I will find the missions for it. If I had the budget (or a group willing to share) to operate a Malibu, I would do flights that do justice to that plane. If I had an ultralight, I would fly with my wife to our nearby islands. If I have a Saratoga with 6 seats, I will make use of them – but I don’t necessarily need them. I don’t even need an airplane to begin with – but since I have one, I always make regular use of it within the limits of its capability.1) A G1 SR20 would be presumably quite old.
That depends on where you are coming from. Our Arrow is now 56 years old.
AFAIK, @mri has set up a PA32 owners group.
I had joined that group already some time ago. 
They are in two different classes in terms of capability. Even though (if looking at NA Saratogas), the cruise speed is almost the same. Yet the operating cost will be much different.
@boscomantico: Could you elaborate on that? In my view, they are in a similar class, just at different edges of that class. A Malibu I would consider a different class altogether. However, my real question is on your comment regarding the operating cost. I have a very precise idea of the annual cost of our Arrow. For the Saratoga, I would roughly calculate 1.5 times that cost (e.g. 6 instead if 4 cylinders to maintain, higher fuel burn, higher landing fees etc). The SR20, I’m not sure – I would assume the regular costs to be similar to the Arrow with somewhat more expensive parts if they are Cirrus specific (which is really airframe stuff I would say, as engine related parts will be usual Conti prices) plus of course the chute and line cutter maintenance. Well, AFAIK the older SR20 have a 6 cylinder Conti 360, so also here 2 more cylinders to maintain. Avionics always depends on the actual avionics installed, in each of the mentioned planes.
Patrick wrote:
The plane I desire with my heart is the Saratoga – with all its additional capability but also limitations. Here, more specifically a Saratoga II HP (i.e. non-turbo), mid to end nineties.
Just to be sure, we are talking about the PA32R, so the retracable version of the Saratoga, as there are some which are fixed gear as well.
Those if I look at them are well over 200k, almost all of them. And yes, they have a pretty high fuel consumption too but they are quite roomy in the cabin (same cabin as the Seneca) and basically are a nice family truck.
Patrick wrote:
I realized the increased availability of G1/G2 SR20 on the market at a considerably lower price tag and the real question here is: How much of a better deal is the latter (say, a model with WAAS and Aspen) and will it offset my emotional attachment to the Saratoga sufficiently?
First of all, the Cirrus is a much more modern airplane and it has the all important CAPS. Your emotional attachment may go for a Saratoga but in terms of safety and family comfort the Cirrus would probably win hands down, if for nothing else than that parashute. If anything, I would not restrict myself to the SR20 but also take into account the SR22 as there are some which fit your budget.
As for avionics, there are some spanners in the works which need considering. Both the GNS boxes as well as the original Aspens which are built into those things (can be same for Saratogas as well) are de-facto outdated avionics no longer supported by the factory, Aspen just announced they will no longer repair the original EFD1000 after the end of the year I believe, Garmin has stopped maintaining the 430’s including the W already. Also Avidyne appear to have dumped the original Entegra screens.
All this does not make the choice any easier. And while a broken Aspen can be plug and play replaced with a Max unit, as well as the GNS’s can fit a Avidyne 440 plug and play (which I regard very important in terms of installation cost which is prohibitive) and even the S-Tec 55x can be replaced by a DCF90 in the Cirri, budget to upgrade those avionics needs to be put aside.
Patrick wrote:
Could you elaborate on that? In my view, they are in a similar class, just at different edges of that class. A Malibu I would consider a different class altogether.
Well, sure they are all in the SEP “class”. But within this, they are different classes. What set them apart is the engine (300hp vs. 200hp). Along with that comes higher weights, higher fuel burn, etc.
However, my real question is on your comment regarding the operating cost. I have a very precise idea of the annual cost of our Arrow. For the Saratoga, I would roughly calculate 1.5 times that cost (e.g. 6 instead if 4 cylinders to maintain, higher fuel burn, higher overhaul costs, higher landing fees etc).
1.5 times the cost is probably not too far off, but that is still quite a difference I would say. That is for a VFR Saratoga. If you really want to go IFR, maybe 1.7 or so. Really keeping an aircraft in shape for actual IFR costs money: the avionics must be flawless, the batteries, the alternators, etc. Plus the databases and possibly the Jepp charts of course.
The SR20, I’m not sure – I would assume the regular costs to be similar to the Arrow with somewhat more expensive parts if they are Cirrus specific (which is really airframe stuff I would say, as engine related parts will be usual Conti prices) plus of course the chute and line cutter maintenance.
Well, AFAIK the older SR20 have a 6 cylinder Conti 360, so also here 2 more cylinders to maintain. Avionics always depends on the actual avionics installed, in each of the mentioned planes.
Well, you got it. But it all adds up. As you say, the engine is more expensive to maintain and overhaul, the airframe is more expensive to maintain, the avionics are more expensive and the CAPS comes on top. Figure 2.1k/year for CAPS maintenance alone. I bet the total for normal annuals isn’t much more than that in the Arrow. And in the end, you have not so much more capability than with your PA28. A Saratoga would be quite a bit more capable, due to the extra power. The late more ones are also little faster than the early ones I guess, although I am not an expert.
Of course, in the end, it all depends a bit on if you get a decent example. Pre-buy is certainly key.
Regarding your other comments, I fully agree with you. This “mission” thing is sometimes overstated. We buy what we like. Most of us don’t “need” the aircract. And the mission adapts to the aircraft. So, if there is one aircraft type that you particularly like, go for it. Life is short, and a pilot’s life is even shorter.
