BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Oct 2010, 21:45

I own a 421C for the extra room and useful load. I agree the 421C is better than a 340, but not by much over a Ram seven. The Ram seven has a bigger turbo (17vs10 inch??) and a completely different induction system. If my memory is correct the seven will make METO power to 25,000 feet and it runs cooler than the Ram four or six. My Ram seven was great and I only sold it because I could not fly three planes enough to keep the rust off. If anybody wants a 340 they should get a ram seven if possible.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Oct 2010, 21:57

Would somebody share their w/b numbers for the 340 Ram7 and 421C, please? Also (both 340/421), what would be your planning fuel for 250nm+res at MGW?

Thanks.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Oct 2010, 23:35

Username Protected wrote:

Would somebody share their w/b numbers for the 340 Ram7 and 421C, please? Also (both 340/421), what would be your planning fuel for 250nm+res at MGW?

Thanks.

421C for 250NM would be about 1.25 hours at 38 gal per hour. Plus a 40 gal reserve would be about 87 gal. My useful load is 2350 lbs less fuel at 522 lbs leaves about 1828lbs of payload for people and bags. Ram seven speed and fuel would be about the same as the 421 and the useful load of 1803 less 522 pounds would leave a payload of 1281 pounds for the 340 on a 250NM trip.
The ram seven 340 has the same wing and landing gear as the 414 which ram certified to about 6800 pounds. Ram said the FAA limited the R7 gross weight to 6400 lbs because the CG range got too narrow above 6400. I do not recomend this, but people have flown the 340 at 6800 lbs and said it flew fine. Jerry

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Oct 2010, 09:21

Username Protected wrote:

Brent,
A little bird told me you may have to spend as many hours polishing the gold trim in the plane as you do flying it. The RAM 7's make it a nice airplane.

John, that's funny! :lol:

I take it you're familiar with this airplane. Yes, the gold plated interior trim does have a certain "playboy mansion" look to it and will require hours of additional maintanance!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Oct 2010, 11:19

Brent, congratulations!

Like you, I've tried to find the "next step"...that would fit "just above the Baron, and beneath the King Air"....

Have fun with the 340..please keep us informed!

stan

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Oct 2010, 17:22

Thanks for the info, Gerald.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Oct 2010, 21:22

Brent, I was faced with the same decision about 18 months ago. I had the TN A36, a Ram 7 340 and a BE 58 in my mechanics hangar. I was seriously looking at purchasing the 340 and considering the 58. I had my Buyers agent and mechanic and simply asked them which airplane they would buy. Both said the TN A36.

Take excellent care of your 340, spend many AMUs upgrading the panel and engines and when you're ready to sell it give me a call.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Oct 2010, 21:39

Username Protected wrote:

I had my Buyers agent and mechanic and simply asked them which airplane they would buy. Both said the TN A36.

Oh course they did, they don't have to ride in it

just kidding of course.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Oct 2010, 07:36

Username Protected wrote:

I was faced with the same decision about 18 months ago. I had the TN A36, a Ram 7 340 and a BE 58 in my mechanics hangar. I was seriously looking at purchasing the 340 and considering the 58. I had my Buyers agent and mechanic and simply asked them which airplane they would buy. Both said the TN A36.

You should have hid them all behind curtains and had them choose "curtain one, two, or three"...

Sold Baron, bought a Cessna