16 Nov 2025, 07:04 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m?  Posted: 11 Nov 2017, 15:03 |
|
 |
|
|
Joined: 05/18/15
Posts: 16
Post Likes: +18
Location: Ames, Iowa
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
|
|
|
No -- first turbine experience, was happily surprised with the insurance. Relatively low cost ($14,000) and minimal requirements. Apparently the insurance company liked my 300 hours of 421 time -- multi, flight-levels and similar approach speeds and weights to the Mustang
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 11 Nov 2017, 15:18 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/08/12
Posts: 1445
Post Likes: +940
|
|
I would probably get a Beechjet.  For T-Prop, I would most likely do a long body MU2 or Merlin IIIB/C.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 11 Nov 2017, 15:22 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 07/11/11
Posts: 2413
Post Likes: +2772
Location: Woodlands TX
Aircraft: C525 D1K Waco PT17
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Phenom 100 is nice for short flights but range/payload limited. The EV is much better, but now your pushing 3M Compared to a CJ? Like some of the CJ line, KA200, etc, the later mode versions get so much heavier that they do no better even with gross weight increases. Earlier Phenoms are 7,000 lb planes vs almost 7,500 for a loaded up EV. Your CJ is looking good btw
Thanks Bruce.
Yes compared to the CJ. The P100 (not the EV) typically configured BEW is around 7370 lbs. (or at least the one I share hangar space with). My CJ is 6450 lbs - that's almost 1000 lbs lighter. Max fuel on the P100 is 2800 lbs - 3220 on the CJ. MTOW on the P100 is 10540 - 10400 on the CJ.
The P100 I share hangar space with can't fill the seats and fly to Cancun from Queretaro - a stop is always required. In fact at full fuel (and since the owner has it on a Part 135 Mexican certificate), only the crew can fly - if they watch their weight and don't eat too much... That's pretty disappointing performance.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 11 Nov 2017, 15:44 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 03/09/11
Posts: 1770
Post Likes: +829
Company: Wings Insurance
Location: Eden Prairie, MN / Scottsdale, AZ
Aircraft: 2016 Cirrus SR22 G5
|
|
Username Protected wrote: No -- first turbine experience, was happily surprised with the insurance. Relatively low cost ($14,000) and minimal requirements. Apparently the insurance company liked my 300 hours of 421 time -- multi, flight-levels and similar approach speeds and weights to the Mustang They absolutely did 
_________________
Tom Hauge
Wings Insurance
National Sales Director
E-mail: thauge@wingsinsurance.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 11 Nov 2017, 17:07 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 05/29/14
Posts: 3010
Post Likes: +3093
Location: CEA3
Aircraft: PA24-260, C340 Ram 7
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Posts stating the obvious are always good around here..  Mini jets listed for sale on Controller: Phenom 100 23 Mustang 26 M2 11 CJ1 and CJ2 30+ HondaJet 9 All of the above do about the same thing. I guarantee you can take down a Phenom 100 if you make a list and start working the phones. Advise I heard years ago, still stands up today. Buy the nicest airplane you can afford, keep it nice so that when you sell it, you get the asset value back out of it. If the Phenom 100's are discounted "with a call" that much, how comfortable are you owning it, without worrying "the bottom's falling out of it's value long term? Murray
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 00:14 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/04/09
Posts: 356
Post Likes: +149
Aircraft: Dakota
|
|
That thing is beautiful AG. I've been flying in one lately that I help maintain. Lot of bang for the buck.  can we copy your paint scheme  j/k
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 01:55 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/23/13
Posts: 8521
Post Likes: +11080
Company: Jet Acquisitions
Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I mean $1.3MM
You tell me what you see them trading hands for...... Or are they trading at all? There sure are a lot of them for sale. We typically work markets for our clients, and we haven’t had anyone hire us to buy a Phenom 100... but I can tell you that conventional knowledge is that they trade about $400 - $500k above a CJ1... so I don’t believe they can be bought for $1.3m Everyone knows I’m not a fan of Blue Book or Vref... but I doubt they are wrong by $600k either... Just to be fair I’ll run the market next week and we’ll know, because if you’re right we should be offering them as an option to the CJ 1’s we are doing.
_________________
We ONLY represent buyers!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 02:05 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20747
Post Likes: +26215
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: So my question is what would you buy for 1.3 mil? And why? Jet: C501 Eagle II (501SP with Williams). 370 knots, 1600 nm range, single pilot. Turboprop twin: 441 with -10 engines. You'd have money left over. 2000+ nm range, fast, FL350 (if RVSM). Turboprop single: None. The 441 is cheaper to operate than a PC-12 or TBM, so why have a single? Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 08:09 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 08/05/11
Posts: 5248
Post Likes: +2426
Aircraft: BE-55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Old. Better built. By far. All you have to do is get on owners forums and monitor them:AOG for 8days:corrosion on the Landing gear(3years old); (my plane won’t climb with the bleed air on”(brand new plane). Then go look at them. Guess you’re out Chip. 441 is by far my second choice though i looked hard at a Merlin. Awesome plane. BTW. Mike didn’t mention the 501 will carry 1200lbs full fuel. Blows the others out of the water. Edit. Whoops. That 1200lb UL is for the stallion mod. Not sure what the Eagle II is.
_________________
“ Embrace the Suck”
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 12:49 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/11/11
Posts: 2413
Post Likes: +2772
Location: Woodlands TX
Aircraft: C525 D1K Waco PT17
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Better built. By far.
Sam - I'm curious about this statement. Better built than what? Usually aircraft built to Part 25 standards are built like tanks. I'm not sure a C501 or a C441 are necessarily better built than a Phenom 100 or a 525. Take a look at this accident. While on an night instrument approach, the captain of a CJ with 6 passengers onboard, hits a 27 inch diameter utility pole 10 feet above the ground, climbs out and flies for 40 minutes to his alternate 100 miles away without fully realizing what had happened. Power on the utility grid was never interrupted. A farmer finds a piece of the broken pole on the ground with paint marks on it. It wasn't until the utility company eventually contacted the FAA with a piece of the broken pole that they were able to piece together the full story. We discussed this specific accident at length during the last CJP convention, and I would say the CJ is no light weight... https://reports.aviation-safety.net/201 ... _N61YP.pdfhttps://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 20140203-0On a sidenote, the pilot involved is still flying and hauling people around the country... 
Last edited on 12 Nov 2017, 13:14, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 13:13 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20747
Post Likes: +26215
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Sam - I'm curious about this statement. Better built than what? Usually aircraft built to Part 25 standards are built like tanks. I'm not sure a C501 or a C441 are necessarily better built than a Phenom 100 or a 525. I'll point out that the C501 is really a slightly changed C500 which is part 25. The other examples you list are all part 23, and the C501 is technically part 23 as well. So why do you think part 25 has anything to do with it? Quote: Take a look at this accident. While on an night instrument approach, the captain of a CJ with 6 passengers onboard, hits a light pole 10 feet above the ground, climbs out and flies for 40 minutes to his alternate 100 miles away without fully realizing what had happened. Note that this was a part 23 aircraft. All the 525 series are. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 13:16 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/11/11
Posts: 2413
Post Likes: +2772
Location: Woodlands TX
Aircraft: C525 D1K Waco PT17
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Sam - I'm curious about this statement. Better built than what? Usually aircraft built to Part 25 standards are built like tanks. I'm not sure a C501 or a C441 are necessarily better built than a Phenom 100 or a 525. I'll point out that the C501 is really a slightly changed C500 which is part 25. The other examples you list are all part 23, and the C501 is technically part 23 as well. So why do you think part 25 has anything to do with it? Quote: Take a look at this accident. While on an night instrument approach, the captain of a CJ with 6 passengers onboard, hits a light pole 10 feet above the ground, climbs out and flies for 40 minutes to his alternate 100 miles away without fully realizing what had happened. Note that this was a part 23 aircraft. All the 525 series are. Mike C.
Mike - please r-e-a-d.
My question is the C501 and C441 are better built than what?
Second, the 525 is a part 23 aircraft certified to part 25 standards. Your point being????
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 13:19 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20747
Post Likes: +26215
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Second, the 525 is a part 23 aircraft certified to part 25 standards. Your point being???? The 525 is a part 23 aircraft certified to part 23 standards. There is no part 25 for the 525. Where are you getting that information? Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Best t-prop or jet for $1.3m? Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 13:26 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/11/11
Posts: 2413
Post Likes: +2772
Location: Woodlands TX
Aircraft: C525 D1K Waco PT17
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Second, the 525 is a part 23 aircraft certified to part 25 standards. Your point being???? The 525 is a part 23 aircraft certified to part 23 standards. There is no part 25 for the 525. Where are you getting that information? Mike C.
How about Cessna, Flight Safety... oh and the AFM. To be very precise:
This airplane is certified in accordance with 14CFR Part 23 Normal Category. 14 CFR Part 36 (Noise). Takeoff and Landing performance special conditions certification requirements equivalent to 14CFR 25.
So is a C501 and C441 "better built" than a Phenom 100 and C525? Please fill in the blank_____.
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|
