I have went through all 5 pages of this post wanting to see an extranormals cartoon of Duke vs 421.......But nothing! Come on guys that's disappointing, you can do better than this!

That is absolutely the best news of this entire thread! Apparently, I could sell my 421 now and make a tidy profit.

Another point for the 421: According to Todd, they are increasing in value very nicely!

Back to being serious: I still don't get it. Both airplanes (421 & Duke) will cost about the same to maintain, and have about the same performance. However, the 421 will carry more people and stuff in a better cabin.

I know you like your Duke Todd, and I'm not going to bash it, but this is getting a bit silly.

Robert

The 421 is a nice plane and the Cabin is superior. I am not putting it down. My point is that the plane has no better performance and costs 3x as much. The claims of it's better performance is false.

If you want big cabin and are willing to invest 3x more then buy a 421. If you want the same performance and can live with the smaller cabin the Duke makes sense.

Todd, that's simply not correct. Perhaps 2x for comparable planes, but definitely not 3x.

A decent straight legged C model (76-79 model years) is around $300k, and it appears that a similar Duke may be $150. Of course, there are aberrations in the market on both sides.

The 421 market appears to be holding its own and even increasing slightly, which makes me feel pretty safe about my investment.

Robert

FACT: We cruise at 220-230 knots TAS routinely on 42 GPH in our 421 by setting up 65% power according to the RAM chart. This is in the 19k-25k altitude range. In ISA-20F (or more) conditions we have occasionally seen as high as 233 true @ 23-25K. The only time we see TAS as low as 220 is on ISA+20F (or more) temps (again at high altitudes). We have never seen TAS below 200 at any altitude or temperature, again using 65% power settings from RAM chart at 42 GPH. We routinely (not always - especially at MGW on ISA+30F day) climb at 1K FPM at 130 KIAS. I have never bragged about any of this anywhere and am not doing so here - only submitting facts for the record. In my limited experience with Dukes which I also love every bit as much as our 421, they seem to perform at this same basic range so I'm not even sure what we are talking about anyway. Anyone throwing out wild performance advantages in any category for either one of these planes over the other is in fact "bragging" and not stating facts.

Performance is very similar but 421 will haul a lot more in more comfort and space. As previously stated, direct comparison on performance and size/space is more appropriate between a 340 and the Duke.

You can buy a low engine time (and recent calendar date) B model Duke with recent paint and interior along with a WAAS 530 and average avionics for $100-$125k.

Like I said, the 421 is nice, I just think they are overpriced considering the cost of 100LL and the turbine options available near the same price range. I truly believe all pressurized twins like the Duke, 421, 414, etc will be scrap in another 10-15 years. That is why I feel the Dukes are a bargain compared to the rest of the fleet. You could fly one for 10 years, defer the maintenance, and only be out your initial investment which is essentially free when you compare the investment potential of the price difference between the two planes.

FACT: We cruise at 220-230 knots TAS routinely on 42 GPH in our 421 by setting up 65% power according to the RAM chart. This is in the 19k-25k altitude range. In ISA-20F (or more) conditions we have occasionally seen as high as 233 true @ 23-25K. The only time we see TAS as low as 220 is on ISA+20F (or more) temps (again at high altitudes). We have never seen TAS below 200 at any altitude or temperature, again using 65% power settings from RAM chart at 42 GPH. We routinely (not always - especially at MGW on ISA+30F day) climb at 1K FPM at 130 KIAS. I have never bragged about any of this anywhere and am not doing so here - only submitting facts for the record. In my limited experience with Dukes which I also love every bit as much as our 421, they seem to perform at this same basic range so I'm not even sure what we are talking about anyway. Anyone throwing out wild performance advantages in any category for either one of these planes over the other is in fact "bragging" and not stating facts.

Performance is very similar but 421 will haul a lot more in more comfort and space. As previously stated, direct comparison on performance and size/space is more appropriate between a 340 and the Duke.

Markets tend to be brutally efficient, and they clearly disagree with you.

FWIW, my 421C runs at 205-215 at 40gph depending on altitude. I suspect that a 421 and Duke would fly the same mission in about the same time and burning about the same fuel. The 421 would just get more people and stuff there in better comfort.

Out of curiosity, what's the Duke's standard fuel setup? 206 gallons for the 421C in the mains, and most are set up with 232 or 262 gallons (one or two aux tanks).

Robert

FACT: We cruise at 220-230 knots TAS routinely on 42 GPH in our 421 by setting up 65% power according to the RAM chart. This is in the 19k-25k altitude range. In ISA-20F (or more) conditions we have occasionally seen as high as 233 true @ 23-25K. The only time we see TAS as low as 220 is on ISA+20F (or more) temps (again at high altitudes). We have never seen TAS below 200 at any altitude or temperature, again using 65% power settings from RAM chart at 42 GPH. We routinely (not always - especially at MGW on ISA+30F day) climb at 1K FPM at 130 KIAS. I have never bragged about any of this anywhere and am not doing so here - only submitting facts for the record. In my limited experience with Dukes which I also love every bit as much as our 421, they seem to perform at this same basic range so I'm not even sure what we are talking about anyway. Anyone throwing out wild performance advantages in any category for either one of these planes over the other is in fact "bragging" and not stating facts.

Performance is very similar but 421 will haul a lot more in more comfort and space. As previously stated, direct comparison on performance and size/space is more appropriate between a 340 and the Duke.

The B Dukes are 232 Gallons with 15 in each tip tank which requires no separate transfer pumps or valve. Simple On/off/cross crossfeed.

No wind it is a 950 NM machine with a conservative 1 hour of reserve.

Always, my friend

Cessna sold twice as many 421's as Beech sold Dukes .
There are still 3X as many 421's still flying than Dukes .
421's are holding their value better than Dukes .
Why is this happening ?

Same basic setup as most 421Cs with a single Aux tank (which does have a pump that feeds into the left main). The B models had multiple tanks and a more complex fuel system, but the C is straightforward.

With 232 gallons on board I can take off with 937lbs of payload. What about in the Duke?

Robert

About 700 lbs is all. It is a 4-person plane if you need 4.5 hours and reserve.

That is the beauty of the 421 - it will legally hold more and the cabin is much nicer for the passengers. As I said earlier, if you need the room the 421 wins hands down. If you want a twin that is good looking, handles like a B55 or V35, and is dirt cheap you buy the Duke. For a family of 4 it is a great plane, but makes a poor choice for charter. The charter business is keeping the 421C prices up. It won't last. Things MUST change in GA if we are to continue. The Cirrus and the LSAs are the first step. There needs to be a replacement for the old big twins. It will come quickly when 100LL goes through the roof. How many $2,000 fill ups will the average person tolerate in their big twin? We might be finding out sooner than we realize.

Standard C model (76 & newer) is 206 wet wing. Dead simple, nothing to do. Left/Right/Off source control for each engine.

Optional left & right Aux Nacelle tanks each hold 28g. We only looked at candidates that had both Aux tanks for a total of 262 useable because we wanted maximum range options.

Still dead simple. Sometime during the first couple hours of cruise flight, turn the aux pumps on (transfers aux tank fuel to main wet wing tank) and when the annunciator light comes on (about an hour later) turn the pump back off. Source control never changes - Left/Right/Off source control for each engine.

Approximate no-wind range/payload options with a conservative 1 hour reserve:
Mains only - 206 total - 800nm - 1,050 pounds of people/bags payload
Half Fill both Aux tanks - 234 total - 950nm - 900 pounds of people/bags payload
Top off everything - 262 total - 1,100nm - 750 pounds of people/bags payload

We are in the middle of the pack for Empty Weight, so there are examples out there that could be as much as 50 pounds more people payload or as much as 50 pounds less people payload (or so).