BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Mar 2020, 20:26

To me pressurization and A/C trumps all. If you find a really nice 340, I'd take that over any non-pressurized plane.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Mar 2020, 03:16

310 has the better cabin, maintenance will vary from plane to plane.[/quote]

I found the rear door on the 58 to make the cabin much better than climbing over the seats in the 310.

My experience was that the Cessna 310 took more maintenance than my Baron.

Conklin and Dedecker show the following costs per hour...

$457 - Cessna 310Q

$373 - Baron 58

Both hourly costs seem a bit high to me, but the relative difference seems about right.

KJ[/quote]

Could be, but I’d seriously doubt the 75 dollar per hour spread without further explanation.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Mar 2020, 13:13

I flew my 310R last year 70 hours and spent no where near the numbers listed all in, training, hangar, insurance, maintenance, fuel. I've found those numbers absurdly high for the jets as well (We manage 4 jets). Probably a very conservative number to not give owners false hope but they can also scare people away.

Looking at various sources for flat rate inspections the 310R was about $2500 vs $3200 for a B58 annual. Parts seem cheaper as well.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Mar 2020, 22:59

Username Protected wrote:

Hi, I have owned and operated a C310 for over 20 years and worked for a charter company and flew and maintained a B58 for 5 years.
When I first started shopping for a light twin, my mission was to be able to fly 5 people (3 kids) from the East coast to Chicago where my wife’s family was located. For many years I did this trip 2 or 3 times a year, along with many Florida trips. My decision to buy the 310 was based on many factors. First, I found the 310 offered the most bang for the buck...Comparing apples to apples the Baron was 30-40 percent more expensive getting in. Some might argue that the Baron was, arguably a better built airplane. This is probably true but this was offset that Beech parts were a quantum leap more expensive than Cessna parts. I personally find the planes to require about the same amount of maintenance with the exception of the landing gear on the 310, which need an experienced shop to rig. Early on I started bringing the plane to TAS Aviation in Defiance Ohio to periodically have the gear rigged. TAS is the world’s foremost expert on twin Cessna’s. With either airplane a thorough pre purchase inspection, or better still a pre purchase annual will pay huge dividends, My impression is that the DOC to be about the same for both airframes. I found the 310 to be 5-7 knots slower than the Baron, but with a much higher useful load, and a more comfortable cabin for my mission.Plus the wing lockers are a huge advantage, both for luggage storage and weight and balance considerations. As far as handling, I like the 310 better. I usually hand fly, and find the 310 to be a more stable instrument platform. Plus, in my opinion the 310 is a tougher looking plane on the ramp. I hope this info and opinions helps.
Blue Skies
Steve

All this reminds me of Russian philosophy on building planes; “better is not better than good enough”. :btt:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 21 Mar 2020, 16:11

Those are all good airplanes, with their own plusses and minuses. The C340 is a different bird though, being pressurized.

I owned a Seneca II for about a decade. It really hit a great sweet spot for a non-pressurized twin. Excellent useful load, I could always fly 200lbs undergross, which is a big plus. It was FIKI and turbocharged and would hold 13000' on a single engine. It treated me pretty well. A lot of maintenance to keep up, which is true of any twin. But it was Piper-simple and easy to care for. Reasonably efficient at altitude and it never left me stranded.

Honestly, I greatly prefer turbocharged aircraft. It opens up a lot of altitude choices, sometimes for great winds, sometimes for smooth cool air, sometimes to get out of the clouds.

Pressurized is a whole nother ballgame, and it can get pretty dollar-intensive to care for. But man, if you travel, that's the stuff.

I'm still a nose-hoser though. Fortunately my wife doesn't mind it either. Maybe someday.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 21 Mar 2020, 18:34

We went from a J35 to the 340 when we were flying out of Michigan to SC and beyond.
What an amazing step up in capability, but she's no problem to operate or maintain if you've got a good airframe and engines. When my wife can take a pee in flight, the kids can sit at the table and play cards, and they can play musical co-pilot on a 4 hour leg, there is no comparison. It'd fun enough to go for a flight up the lakefront on a nice sunny day with a few neighbors, do a $200 steak run, or load up the family and go a long way - 700+ miles was easy for us, 1,000 doable. And we came home from Christmas one year and the kids had stuff in their lap in the Ford Excursion I drive that was tucked away and not in the cabin seating area on the flight. It can haul a lot of volume and weight. I've done several Veterans Airlift Command flights and the hero's - everyone so far a multiple amputee - have not had an issue getting aboard or being comfortable. FIKI and air conditioning are nice too!

Our situation has changed and we are moving out of our 340, but they are awesome machines. Run about as fast as the 421, no painful AD's. (The 414C's are the one with the AD if I remember correctly.)

If you are looking at a Twin Cessna, call Marla at TAS in Defiance Ohio. They know the Twin Cessna's better than anyone. They'll work with you on the whole acquisition process, inspections, etc... Top notch people to work with.

310 vs B58 vs C340