"Dave" wrote in message
om...

So my question is - why such a huge difference between the two models?
And, does this mean the SR22, in particular, is going to be a tough
resel after someone puts a thousand or two hours on it?

Has Cirrus ever been asked about these limitations in public, and if
so what was their response?

Cirrus has offered numerous excuses for it. What is inexcusable is that
Cirrus does not mention this in any of their advertising, nor do they inform
buyers before they purchase the aircraft. As for magazine reviews, you
should understand that these reviews are little more than advertisements for
the airplane. Some are more independent than others, but none of them are
really going to publish anything sharply critical of an important
advertiser. Magazine reviews should be taken with somewhat more than a grain
of salt.

Cirrus says that they will eventually extend the life limit to 12,000 hours,
which means that instead of paying $70/hour just for the airframe, you will
only be paying about $25. Still, Cirrus has not been able to get the
extension and they have been promising it for years. The claim that the
limit is based on the SR-20 is obviously bogus. So is the claim that they
are waiting for the G-2. What does that have to do with it? Do they think
that sales will be better for the G-2 if they get a reputation for
misrepresenting the SR-22?