This is probably down to each developer (together with the doubled cursor in VR).
JustFlight’s Arrow did not have the VR zoom initially but the devs implemented it pretty soon after release.
I also stumbled on one dev’s reaction that they do not use VR so they will not even be implementing VR related functionalities.
It is a pitty when 3rd party devs do not provide us options available in the core sim.
And we see mouse arrow Twice in VR. Annoying.
I can’t uninstall this from my system. If I delete it, it’s gone for the active session and pops back up with the next start of the sim.
you don’t delete it, you uninstall if from your content manager. very easy and everlasting.
I also stumbled on one dev’s reaction that they do not use VR so they will not even be implementing VR related functionalities.
I hope this is an inaccurate paraphrasing, if you are selling a product it doesn’t matter what you personally prefer, you don’t just leave out core functionality, especially without clearly stating in your description (as in at the top) that you have.
Two questions for the more experienced:
IRL you do indeed have to manually set the course on the HSI when in GPS mode. The GNS430 I use IRL actually pops up a “MSG” to remind you if you don’t update the course but I don’t think that is simulated in MSFS.
Not sure what you are referring to as the FMS? Do you mean the GPS?
It should work with VORs the same as it does for ILS (except as you say - without the GS)
Yes, I meant the GPS. I was trying to come up with another term because you can swap navigation between GPS and VLOC using the CDI button on the GPS.
Thanks for the reply, that clears up a lot for me.
Absolutely agree with you. I just wish the sounds were as good as their models look.
It is a shame when the visual experience doesn’t go together with with the sounds. In the case if the Seneca, the sounds are not too bad until you go on full power, where you get this annoying synthetic noise inside and out.
Would MSFS 2020 have a way to assign default sounds to 3rd parties models, that is something I would try doing.
How is the state on this plane, i know its lackings, but would love me a twin engine. Is it currently working properly? Ive read about some issues with carenado planes in the past due to sim updates.
Thanks for your honest input. 
I have watched several reviews about the Piper Seneca V before buying - and it is PERFECT!
But it has one flaw since summer 2021: The weather radar is not swiping left and right or up and down anymore, but keeps showing a static picture.
So I guess we have to wait another year for a weather radar (Asobo until some day they patch the issues related to the weather radar, and Carenado´s patch which is ready one week later will need 6 months untill finally appearing on the Marketplace.) 
After one of these infamous SU updates last year all weather radar in all planes suddenly stopped functioning (also in the Fly by Wire Airbus), also the Carenado weather radar is still broken.
It sounds exactly like in the YouTube cockpit videos flying a Seneca V when the storm window is closed, and has a great big-block engine sound from the outside.
Wait for the MILVIZ 310 instead. Better plane and better brand IMO.
Along with the Baron G58, this is my favorite twin engine so far. Love the interior , it’s powerful, and the semi-glass setup vs full glass is a joy to use. I bought it when it was on sale so it was more than worth it.
I think it is the best of the Carenado offerings in MSFS, but with the MilViz 310 just around the corner, I’d wait.
Carenado is slow to update anyway, and is further hamstrung by the “Marketplace only” sales channel.
Sim Updates are a reality that is not going away. Developers need to have the ability (and desire) to tackle issues that arise in a timely manner.
Thanks everyone for your opinions. Id like a twin prop and im absolutely aware at what realism level carenado aims at.
So if there are no gamebreaking issues right now, i might take it.
You can‘t go wrong with the Seneca. I ike it a lot and the weather radar does not have a high priority for me.
I enjoy the Seneca. I’ve been flying it quite a bit over the last few months. I usually fly in good weather, so I haven’t used the radar lately. Other than the radar, there are no problems I’ve found. The fuel burning heater/defroster is not modeled, and the yaw damper switch does not operate. Those are the two main systems Carenado didn’t include. Otherwise, this is quite a good plane. Performance and fuel flow are very close to the POH. You can follow the POH checklists to fly the plane largely without any changes (aside from the fuel burning heater/defroster).
The turbocharged engines suffer from a mixture bug in MSFS which affects all turbocharged engines (the Just Flight Turbo Arrow has the same problem). Basically, the engine mixture becomes excessively rich as the airplane climbs, so leaning the mixture is required to maintain power. This should not happen with a turbocharged engine (at least, not below the critical altitude for the turbo). I wrote a little mod to correct the behavior. The thread for the mod is here:
The Turbo Arrow is still the only airplane that can take-off from Lower Loon Creek and fly through the mountain ridges. Turbo Arrow IV and Seneca V are my best most realistic and most beautyful props
Is this not realistic having the engine leaned to at least 50% in a great height like 15.000 feet? This is the lean setting of the Turbo Arrow on this height.
The real-world POHs for the Turbo Arrow and the Seneca V call for full-rich mixture throughout the climb (even if climbing to 15,000 or 20,000 ft). Mixture is leaned after leveling at cruise altitude and reducing power for cruise.
This is a characteristic of turbocharged reciprocating engines. The turbocharger counteracts the decrease in air pressure with altitude. A naturally aspirated engine requires the mixture to be leaned with altitude due to decreasing air pressure (and density).
