For the people who have both these aircraft please can you comment as to which you like best; i know the Dreamfleet A36 is brand new and has all the bells and whistles but is it frame rate friendly or a resource hog? Carenado's F33 was released for FS2002 so will probably get better performance but probably not be as up to date in the virtual cockpit as regards textures. what do you all think?

I think there's no way you can compare these two... :-hmmm Even though one aircraft is the older Bonanza and the new one is the 1998 model it's just no comparison in terms of FS2k4 design. It's like trying to compare Simflyer's KPHX to Microsoft's default KPHX. In my book the default airport is not that bad and many have opted to save money but the same airport in payware standards is a sight to behold.Now the straight answer on the A36 is it's fully customizable meaning you can do away with some visual features to get better framerates. The aircraft in my book is the best GA release we've seen in awhile. Coronado did a great job with theirs but I feel it was for a different market and time period. The DF A36 is more for the hardcore crowd looking for as many realistic features as possible. The Coronado version is a quick and easy fun plane to get in and fly with little emphasis on realism in many subtle ways (it's very basic but great fun at the same time). Coronado's Centurion is a more in debt simulation than their Bonanza if we compared those two.So if you want to know what owning a real A36 could be like then go with the DF Bonanza. If you want to know what owning a real Bonanza F33 is like, the Coronado version won't quite give you as much as you would need. That's the big difference here. Now when it comes to Coronado's Centurion, it would give you a good idea of what the real plane is like. If DreamFleet did a Centurion then we'd have two packages to seriously compare. I hope I'm making since here...

As Dillon said, it's apples and oranges. the Carenado designs are revamped FS2002 aircraft with gauges that were outdated even then (the gauges in it look a lot like what was normal in early FS2000 addons).It also models an early production Bonanza (so the old style gauges are somewhat appropriate even if Carenado could have used more modern technology and still make them look vintage), the Dreamfleet one models a late production aircraft with a full glass cockpit.The visual models have similar distinctions, the Dreamfleet one being far more complete and accurate (especially in the small details and paintwork).Both fly nicely, but the Carenado one I hardly flew because the panel just wasn't up to scratch for me.

No comparison. The Carenado Bonanza was a decent plane when it came out but it's an FS2002 design and was never a top addon. IMO the Carenado Bonanzas are very overpriced at $21. In fact they're barely worth half of that these days since the tech is so outdated.Now Carenado has improved so the quality of their addons shouldn't be judged by the quality of their outdated designs. Their Cherokee 180 is a fantastic addon, and the C210 is also quite good. Don't have the Mentor but it's also supposed to be good.Re: the DF A36 Bonanza - no need to repeat what the other posters said. It's quite possibly the best GA addon released to date and it's only like $4 more than the Carenado.

I have the DF A36 and the Corenado V35, externally i think the Corenado plane is very good, nearly as good as the latest stuff but the insides are from a different era, while Dreamfleet have allways been at the forfront, corenado have come on leaps and bounds their latest planes are as good as any others take the delightful little Cherokee. The V35 is still worth getting as it is the V tailed model, but honestly i could not justify the cost of the F33, although i do have all their other FS9 compatable aircraft.

Just looking at the Carenado website i noticed that they have reduced the price of their two Bonanza models to $17 each, but i still like the Dreamfleet A36 best of all.:)

carenado is a great model. Almost up there with the DF/F1. If you want a nice avionics stack.. all around, more improved and better, go with that new F1/DF. Easy on frames for me.. i lock at 30. See specs below.Great plane.. :-wave

The Dreamfleet offering is really nice. You get some nice Reality XP toys, excellent model, great panel/vc. Well worth the money!

As I have said before I have both and due to the big difference in age it's difficult to use them in any sort of comparison.One thing is for definite - the Dreamfleet is a serious frame-rate hog on my machine - more so than any other aircraft in my virtual "hanger" (even the PMDG 737NG gives me better FPS inside and out).If you can cope with a potential FPS drop the Dreamfleet Bonanza is a super little aircraft to look at and fly accurately.Adam

I just bought the A36 last week and am mightily impressed. It's a very sophisticated piece, with two Reality XP gauges included (the weather radar, which is nice, and the GNS 430, which is HARDCORE). It's top-notch, inside and out, but it is a bit of a resource hog. Not much, but enough to be noticeable. I love it. I'd been looking for a high-performance piston single to fill the gap left by the horrid FS2004 default Mooney...the A36 fits it perfectly.I don't have the Carenado Bonanza, but I do have their T-34 Mentor, and that is one fun little bird. Uncomplicated and straightforward, and just a blast to fly. If you don't like the old-school instrument panel on the Mentor, there is a replacement available in the libraries here that adds VORs--the panel that comes with the T-34 only has one ADF. It does, however, have one of the nicest and most usable VCs you'll find.Lewis "Moose" GregoryRichmond, Virginia

This is an unfair (and pointless) comparison: since, as others have pointed out, the Carenado Bonanza is much older. Can't blame Carenado for that. On my system, the Dreamfleet Bonanza is a resource hog only when I switch from 2d view to virtual panel -the textures take time to load. Other than that it runs smoothly. ricardo

I have a mid range gaming system, and i can lock at 30 with out and issue. What are your system specs? If it is close or better than mine, and its a pretty current system, id be looking for a way to fix it. But i love the plane though! :)

System specs below. All custom built and optimized for FS2004. Most aircraft 2D/VC view average 40-80fps - Dreamfleet Bonanaza 15-30 if lucky. External view is a real frame-rate hog as well compared to most of my others in "my hanger". It's a real pity because I would fly it more if it had more of a frame-rate friendly panel. Flight Dynamics are very accurate and fluid.AdamWin XP - ARIA 3200PCPrescott 3.20 GHz - 2GB RAMAsus ATi Radeon X800 Pro TD 256MB19" CRT 1600x1200 @ 100hzAudiophile 24/96 Audio