Well if you want to include airframes which are going to be 25+ years old then it's going to be a loooong list
Everybody and their dog used to make 150kt tourers.
I have flown in the DA42 and liked it very much. It actually flies just like a TB20 - very similar handling and performance. I would not buy one at this moment with my own cash because I consider it unproven in terms of both engines and avionics. The engines have had so many failures in the DA40 that some owners have (on threats of litigation) got 100% refunds after a year's flying. Diamond claim the failures do not happen on DA42s but we would never know if they were lying (remember this is aviation, not Dr Barnardos) because an engine failure in cruise is a non-event and won't be reported. Only the most desperate customers go public with this kind of stuff because one is risking losing the co-operation of everybody up the line (something I know about, too). I also consider the G1000 unproven too - the internal build quality is nothing to write home about, it isn't sealed, and only time will tell if it will last out the typical GA cockpit environment.
A Lancair 400 is no good for UK grass fields especially if a bit mucky. I have this from some owners. It's an "American hard runway" machine.
A Cirrus SR22 is objectively very similar to a TB2x and it would be down to details and personal liking. Personally I prefer the yoke, the TB build quality, the proper control over engine RPM, and I very much prefer the cockpit comfort and seating position/adjustment. The fuel flow rate in the two is very similar, at say 140kt IAS / 65% or so power, because the SR22 chucks away its slippery airframe advantage in having fixed gear.