These Cheyennes, if they can really be operated with reasonable reliability, in line with the cost figures I've seen, and hit the performance figures, do seem like a whole lot of plane for the money.
I'm only a couple months into Baron ownership but am always looking at the next thing... and these seem quite an interesting option.

http://youtu.be/kFPcrWVFlcY
Awesome airplane.

What does it cost to O/H a ACM vs. a new combustion heater?

We has the electric aux heater installed and only needed it one time that the combustion heater didn't work.

Very impressive aircraft the 400LS.
Piper in the days were building all these cool and high performance aircraft and now the best they can offer is a Meridian??

Combustion heater costs abt 2200 to replaceI believe, they were used to preserve performance instead of diverting air from engine for heat. Don't think there is a big concern for fire as the heater uses jet a that must b brought up to 100 psi just to make it burn in the chamber.

The I and II have combustion heaters. The IIXL III and IV have ACMs.

The 400LS is amazing! What is the catch? Why were so few made?

You'd think Piper could offer a new production run of the 400 and make a go of it. 410 in a turboprop that will out climb a lot of Citations will get attention. It is a tight cabin but so was the Concorde.

Introduced at a bad time
Piper problems unrelated to airframe
Efficient and un-sexy is a thin market (i.e. Propeller prejudice)

Surly if a company (maybe not piper) were to start with the 400LX's general design and improve it with today's modern CAD machines and wind tunnels testing, (with composites thrown in there), it would have to be a winner. If it were made clean and simple with those big -14s driving it it has to go fast and carry a load (wouldn't it?)

Piaggio P.180 Avanti is the result of someone using the computer a bit too much.

The main issue is that certifying and building a FL410, 350 KTAS turboprop costs MORE than doing a jet, so companies make jets instead.

If all we had were 3000 ft runways, the world would be different. Then we would see a lot more turboprops, though the P.180 is particularly poor at runway usage.

Mike C.

Introduced at a bad time
Piper problems unrelated to airframe
Efficient and un-sexy is a thin market (i.e. Propeller prejudice)

Mike, what would be your thoughts on ownership of the 400 LS?

What drives this?

I'd check what the engine costs are for the -14 engines. Companies tend to charge a lot more for the "big block" versions of their engines when it comes to overhaul and hot sections. The one "power by the hour" number I have for the 400LS is $275 per engine per hour, or $550 per hour JUST for engines per hour. Wow.

I'd check VERY carefully on the props, especially the Dowty Rotol props. I hear it can cost a major fortune to overhaul those. I'd look into the MT prop replacement at the next overhaul if the plane came with D/R props. I am starting to see more and more with the MT props which should tell you something. Count on $100K for a set of MTs.

The performance number look fantastic. Range, altitude, speed are all improved over what I got. But then, I bought my plane for a third of what the 400LS are going for, and I am sure I am operating it for significantly less per mile, so there's a money tradeoff.

I think by the time you figure the true cost of flying a 400LS, you could fly a jet for that same cost, or real close.

Mike C.