Cessna 182T w. G-1000 pirep

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
C,

for at least $30,000 more. It also burns 3 gph more fuel (but
gas mileage is about the same -- so much for supposedly more streamlined
design of the Diamond)

How do you arrive at these figures? First, you can get a G1000-equipped
182
for 280,000? Second, you're saying the turbo 182 (which, of course, is WAY
more expensive than the DA40, not just 30,000) will burn only 13 gph? At
what speed? Could you pls elaborate? Thanks!

A G-1000 equipped 182 costs $290,000, while the DA-40 costs $260,000. The
182 is pretty consistent at 13 gph, but the T182 burns more like 15 gph. A
T182 costs about $25,000 more than a 182.

The Cirrus is beautiful, comfortable, and way over-rated. The airframe life
limit is a show-stopper all by itself. Putting that aside, it has about the
same payload as a T182, but it is quite a bit faster with a cruise speed of
180 knots. The Avidyne in the Cirrus is nowhere near the panel that the
G-1000 is, though. If the Avidyne fails in flight it cannot re-acquire
itself until on the ground, which is why examiners and instructors save
partial panel stuff for the end of the flight. The side stick is really only
half a yoke. Some controls (such as trim) are awkwardly located, especially
considering the manufacturer likes to brag about the plane's ergonomics. The
poor safety record is alarming. Maybe they have fixed it; maybe they
haven't. My take on the Cirrus is to give it a little more time. Let the
company work out the compromises they made with the FAA on airframe limits,
fix the controls, fix the panel, and see if the safety record improves.
Until then, it is like a super-model with a bad attitude: everyone who sees
one thinks they want one, but it remains distant and likely to bite.