That's nice. A good friend has a 340 and it is a hoss. Fast and fun. I like the honorary Beech status idea. Good luck.

Good luck Brent! I went through the same process over five years ago and bought the 58p, but liked the 340. It's all a matter of mission and priorities. I chose the sportscar over the sedan.

Best,

Dave

Congratulations on your new plane. How is the real world performance on the 340? Like you I was looking for a pressurized plane and the 58P was on the short list......but the cabin was a little on the small side. And I wasn't too keen on the Duke engines reputation. Ended up with an Aerostar 680. Runs a little more fuel burn than the book values as you run into a TIT temp limit.

Brent,
Congratulations on the new airplane! I am glad you made it to the Duke Flyers meeting. More people should take that step to learn about the airplane. I am not sure what aspect of complexity threw your decision over to the Cessna (ie what seemed too complex) but everyone has different considerations and priorities to them -- and comes to different conclusions. I loved the 310 I had and if I had that mission again, the Cessna would be a strong contender.

It was good meeting you and I hope to see you flying around somewhere.

-Kingsley

The complexities around getting maintanance accomplished without having to fly the airplane some distance to get that accomplished. My local maintanance facility is familar with Dukes having had few on the field over the years, but wasn't not enthusiastic about the idea of working on another one. I am still a devoted follower of a the Duke and will likely always wish I'd had one, but I have a tremendous amount of respect and trust in the my maintance facility, and they were much more in support of the twin cessna.

At the end of the day, the decision was really one about having confidence in the convenience of the on-field maintance available, and not having to have someone come to the plane, or take the plane somewhere else to have maintanance preformed as needed.

Personally, I have nothing bad to comment regarding the Duke. The airplane has some positive attributes that are unmatched by anything else. An incredible useful load. A wonderful cockpit, good performance, comfortable cabin, timeless good looks, and it's a Beechcraft.

Congrats Brent. I'd be interested to see how the maintenance costs work out. Good luck.
cheers, Eric

Brent,

Congrads... hope it works well for you, and keep us posted.

Now, let's take bets on when Brent will be back in a Beechcraft. <g>

Seems like Beech missed a plane that competes well with the Cessna Cabin class planes. What they need would have been a plane like the Duke, with better engines, lighter weight... perhaps an oversized Baron, with an airstair door, and a small isle.

While I've enjoyed my time in the 340, 414, and 421, I was always glad to get back to the Beechcraft. Now, if one didn't need pressure, the Chieftain is a very impressive cabin class plane for the money. Impresses the passengers, even though it flies like the box it came in.

Brent; I went through the same process in 2000. I kept my Baron and added a Ram seven 340 N6219C as a second plane. The Duke is a great plane, but I passed for the same reasons you did. I bought the 340 to fill a family transportation need and put 500 hours on it . A good pre-buy is very important on twin cessna's and with TAS doing your 340, you have a good plane. My 340 was known ice with spoilers and I put a porta potty in the back for the kids. I liked the 340 so much I kept it when I added my 1980 421C to the fleet. I thought I could fly all three and after a while the 340 sat collecting dust while I flew the Baron and 421C. A good friend bought the 340 and was very happy with it.
I hope you enjoy your 340 and I wish you the best of luck. Jerry

Order more checks from your bank. 340's are not for the faint of wallet-IF you are doing the maintenance the right way. They are a fine airplane when kept up with, but are not in the "cheap to operate" category. Nothing like a NA Baron, for instance....

Personally, I think the 421 is a better airplane overall if I was asked to choose. But neither are for the CSOB crowd.

PMC

Paul I agree, that is why I keep my Colemill President two Baron. I fly about 250 to 300 hours a year. When the trips are less than 400 NM and weather is not an issue I always fly the Baron because it's more fun and uses a lot less fuel. Jerry

Jerry what an awesome fleet

Gerald, thanks for the kudos. To those that are skeptical, I understand. I really enjoyed my E-55. No complaints at all. I just wanted more room, known ice, and the ability to get into the flight levels when oportunity permits. Whenever you step into pressurization supplied by turbocharged pistons, the maint factor goes up.

I'm had a very reputable maint facility do my pre-buy, and they are also addressing the discrepancies. I have confidence that the 340 will deliver the grins just as my Baron did. I didn't go down this road because I thought it would be less expensive. I made a change because I was looking for more capability and a little bit more comfort for the family.

Thanks for all input folks! I'll keep you posted on my experience with brand C.

Brent

As long as your expectations are realistic (sounds like they are) I'm sure it will be a capable and enjoyable airplane for you.

The RAM upgrades help quite a bit.

PMC

I agree with Paul, the only twin Cessna i would consider is a 421C.
I bought the Baron for its simplicity vs other twins.
Good luck with the C340.

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.