Cirrus vs Lancair
I've been looking for a specific "Cirrus SR22 vs. Lancair IV-P" thread for awhile now and have yet to see the comparison made. Ideally I would even be interested in Cirrus vs Lancair Evolution.
Regardless, I think there are some obvious correlations to be made between these aircraft. They are both roughly similar in size and both meant for similar purpose, general commuter aircraft. The Lancair's claim to fame is a pressurized cabin, something all Cirrus owners have dreamt of for a small 4 seater commuter. Both are high performance, and both share similar avionics suites (at least with more modern conversions to the Garmin G900X). Lastly, they are both similarly priced on average.
That being said, I cant decide which one I would rather fly. The cirrus is obviously great due to comfort, practicality, ergonomics, and safety (if you side with the camp that says a parachute makes you safer and not more sloppy). The Lancair offers safety by way of "adversity avoidance". By that I mean flying above all the weather and traffic. There's not much going on at FL250 and this in and of itself is a safety feature in my opinion.
I am a heavy commuter and intend to fly upwards of 1000 mi. per week, maybe more. Both planes offer similar ranges and endurance, the biggest difference is handling and comfort. The cirrus has a nice bulbous cabin with dual entrance doors. The ergonomics of the avionics suite is ideal for quick data entry and situational awareness. The lancair without a G900X system is a bit more old-school (which is actually fine since I still fly with steam gauges). Although I imagine things could get a bit dicey in the lancair flying with ATC on approach.
One thing I'm not certain of is the performance edge the Lancair really has. Does 270kt beat the pants off 170kt considering climb/decent? I mean how often are we really going to hit the top of the IV's flight envelope? It's not like we need to hit FL250 every single day.
I know for a fact I am certainly not qualified to fly a plane like the Lancair yet, not even the Cirrus. My goal is to hire a PFI with experience in either and go for some coast to coast trips, and get maybe 200 hrs in before I go solo. We will practice LOTS of adverse conditions, especially landing/takeoff since thats where the majority of Lancair accidents happen.
A well equipped Cirrus SR22 should run about $500k. I can get a Lancair turboprop for that, although to be honest I dont really care about that since we're talking performance gains of mere 30kts or so. The biggest juicer is a piston Evolution will set me back 600-750k tops, marginally more expensive than the Cirrus, with all of it's advantages including pressurization. The only thing it's lacking is the chute, although I've heard it's possible to install one. The flight characteristics of the Evo are similar to the Cirrus, although still not quite the same. Some people dont even like the Cirrus's handling and feel, but I for one love it from my test rides.
Assuming money is no object, up to 700k, which would you rather have? A comfortable well-designed friendly Cirrus that cruises along at a decent rate, with solid range, and subject to all the tribulations of airspace below the flight levels? Or a somewhat faster, pressurized aircraft, with slightly more squirrley handling, totally unproven, but flying high and clear of everybody else at any time day or night?