Good evening all

I have wife's permission to buy our first twin. Sold our Cherokee and moving up to a long range, fast, IFR, comfortable platform for 2 adults usually and occasionally 2 more adults. Yes, day and night cross - country.

Yes I have been narrowing down Barons .... but the bottom seems to have dropped out of the price of 310's and 320's.

Is it too good to be true?

Why would I / should I consider at Cessna?

Thank you,

Martin

PS - my multi engine time is minimal

Yes, I want a twin

Sky King
Slick
Roomy
Fast
Sexy
Less expensive to buy
.

purchase price doesn't make a meaningful impact on cost of ownership if you keep the plane very long

over enough years, the baron will cost you less than the 310

Arlen -
With a plane that looks that good, you could sell 310s all day long!

Surprisingly very few 310s in controller today. Only 8 in the USA. Not counting the T310s.

Contrast that with the 421s, 414s and 340s. 84, 75 and 50. Might as well just take the next step.

I've been around a lot of 310s, at my home base, and I know this:

They are very good aircraft.
They, like the Bonanzas/Barons are very capable IFR platforms.
They have an indistinguishable sexiness about them, IMO, those tip tanks angled up just set it off
And, they are very good XCountry/travel planes.

If I were going to have a Piston Twin other than a Beech, it would be the 310.

And, I must say Arlen, you have the most exquisite example of a 310 that I've ever seen. The time and money you put into it really shows

The 320 has an odd duck persona for some. 310R models are always a favorite. 163 gallons. Fantastic cargo and cabin room. Ventilation is not so hot. Great looking. Nearly as quick as CDE Barons. Dual instruments. Lots to love.

1974 Colemill 310Q.

Best 310 there is. The extra power goes a long way to not feeling the need for turbos.

1973 and 1974 were the years with the increased cabin height in back, makes good room for tall people.

1974 was first year airspeed was in knots, not MPH, like a real airplane should be.

R models, introduced in 1975, are too heavy, long nose makes them dance more in turbulence.

Turbo models are more maintenance and have problems with exhaust failures.

Mike C.

Not an odd duck at all if talking about a D, E or F model 320. Relatively low production numbers (285 built from 1966 to 1968 when production ended) but a great performing tubocharged twin with TSIO-520B's. The aft cabin has more headroom than the 310, most think the two share the same fuselage but that's not the case. The 320 was discontinued in 1969 when Cessna put turbochargers on the 310P. Another factoid: The 335 and 340 were both built on the same type certificate as the 320.

1969 Colemill conversions. Lots of upgrades. High dispatch rate.

Actually, I love my plane, but it pretty much came to me already lookin” good 2 years ago. Its 33 year old paint has held up surprisingly well

Now, Mark H”s 310 is the ultimate...

Martin,

When I bought mine a couple years ago, I wrote up the "search and buying experience" here: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=118653

It was a long and winding road.....but worth it in the end.

Agree with the others. I have a 310R, happy to answer any questions. Don't know much about the turbo's other engine beams can be a issue.

You could go to Mars on those panels.

Cannot stop lusting after Jim’s 310 / U3
The old tanks and tail fit in a small muni hangar at my airport so it fits the operational parameters for me better.