C182 VS Cirrus 22

J

Jim26

Well-Known Member
Our local FBO said they would like a C182 or Cirrus 22 on lease back. We were considering doing it depending on opperating costs and such. what would the pros and cons of either plane be. coments are greatly appreciated.
 
Jim26 said:
Our local FBO said they would like a C182 or Cirrus 22 on lease back. We were considering doing it depending on opperating costs and such. what would the pros and cons of either plane be. coments are greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

The feasibility of a lease right now is highly dependant on who pays for the gas.

The maintenance, loan payments, engine, airframe, avionics, are all easy to plan and budget for. The gas prices are what make things difficult right now.

If you buy the plane outright, you'll be in a lot better position.
Also keep in mind that higher performance planes usually rent for fewer hours than basic trainers.

I'm planning on setting up a 172. And for me, the safest (with lower return possibility) is to try and get a setup where the school takes care of insurance, mx, and gas, and gives you a lower percentage of the rental fee. (18-25%) But it is very rare to find a school that won't have you paying for the overhaul...which is not really a deal killer.
 
Also, a brand new 182 or Cirrus could come with a warranty? (i don't know) That might help things out. You can also get a nice depreciation with the 50% deal.
 
The Cirrus we have break down alot when they get flown alot. They were not built to be trainers.
 
if the cirrus was put on lease back the FBO said they wuld probably require a PPl to rent it. They also like it because of the saftey of a parachute. IDK, i guess it comes down to what kind of money you want to put on the line and how much the FBO will pay for
 
Jim26 said:
They also like it because of the saftey of a parachute.
Click to expand...

I've heard that the only reason the parachute is on there is because the airplane could not pass its spin flight test within the FAA defined parameters...

Can anyone else confirm/deny?
 
slushie said:
It can barely get my big butt off the ground.
Click to expand...

If I can instruct and fit in a 152 ANYONE can ;)

Seriously, I think its cool that schools want to get these fancy planes with more avionics than some airliners, but whats wrong with a solid well maintained C-172 or Piper Warrior?
 
Chris_Ford said:
I've heard that the only reason the parachute is on there is because the airplane could not pass its spin flight test within the FAA defined parameters...

Can anyone else confirm/deny?
Click to expand...
The SR20 was designed to inhibit departure from controlled flight. The FAA has found that this enhances stall
performance, and together with an airframe parachute, provides safety at least equal to spin requirement of FAR
23.221
Click to expand...
Thats not true. Its an airplane, it will get out of a spin in the early stages. The reasoning behind the Chute and the spins is purley about the Type Cert. Cirrus was already putting the chute through its test which included spins and the FAA said it would meet the spin criteria. So to save time and money they used this insted of going through the other Certification requirements for spins. I believe it is certified for spins without the chute in Europe.(See below...I was wrong)
 
You might want to look at the SR20 instead of the SR22 for insurance/maintenance/and fuel burn. It has the same performance numbers as the 182 (or better). It is only 200hp so no hi performance needed as well.

For an FBO, I think an Cessna product would be better over the Cirrus due to tranisition training that would be needed for anyone to fly/rent. I like the cirrus, but I think the 182 would get more rents.

My .02
 
Seggy said:
If I can instruct and fit in a 152 ANYONE can ;)

Seriously, I think its cool that schools want to get these fancy planes with more avionics than some airliners, but whats wrong with a solid well maintained C-172 or Piper Warrior?
Click to expand...

NOTHING is wrong with it! When I flew at Erby Diddle, I mean yeah wow two GPS units and a MFD, but man, you can't beat an '82 Duchie with no fancy stuff and a door opening in IMC.

I dig the older planes, I don't know why, but I will agree that new planes are nice, but only once in a while.
 
seems like all the guys around here with cirrus' seem to have lots of problems mechanically with them. also saw a while ago how much more insurance is for the cirrus compared to the 182, guess teh cessna is a proven design and the insurance companies charge acordingly.
 
dakovich said:
seems like all the guys around here with cirrus' seem to have lots of problems mechanically with them. also saw a while ago how much more insurance is for the cirrus compared to the 182, guess teh cessna is a proven design and the insurance companies charge acordingly.
Click to expand...

The Cirrus I fly hasn't had mechanical problems, electrical probelms yes and avionics issues (PFD failure) which took the plane down for a good while. It was under warranty and Cirrus was great about handling once we got them involved.
 
ComplexHiAv8r said:
The Cirrus I fly hasn't had mechanical problems, electrical probelms yes and avionics issues (PFD failure) which took the plane down for a good while. It was under warranty and Cirrus was great about handling once we got them involved.
Click to expand...
Yeah same issues here. The flap relays seem to burn out once a month, but its plugin a new one and off you go.
 
ComplexHiAv8r said:
The Cirrus I fly hasn't had mechanical problems, electrical probelms yes and avionics issues (PFD failure) which took the plane down for a good while. It was under warranty and Cirrus was great about handling once we got them involved.
Click to expand...


well, if both alternators trying to tear themselves off the plane is considered electrical, then they have had electrical problems :) i kind of lumped all problems as mechanical, thinking about it now there's been a mix of mech/elec. problems from what i hear
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top