I'm starting the pre-search for my next bird. I've had my V35B for just over a year and am thoroughly impressed by it, but the mission has changed and so must the airplane. I've pretty much narrowed my choices to Aerostar 601P, A* 700SS, or Cessna 421C. I owned a 601P for a few years back in the 90s and had a great ownership experience (once I got past a crooked maintenance experience). The 421C is only in the mix because of the <5% of the time I'll want to carry six peeps and all their stuff and actually go somewhere. I know they are slower and a bit spendy but will haul a good load in comfort. The turbine crowd is pitching that route but I don't see it happening at my target price of 250k or less. I will, of course, move that up for the right bird. I think anything around that price point in a turbine is going to require me to have sizeable maintenance reserve.

The typical mission will be KVBT (Bentonville, AR) to KFNL (Ft. Collins, CO) at 573NM. KFNL (Ft. Collins, CO) to U42 (Salt Lake City) at 318NM. Some days I will go nonstop KVBT to U42 and back, 871NM each way. I think I'll need extended fuel for that one westbound in the winter.

I really liked the turbo normalized IO540 in the 601P but I'm thinking coming out of Salt Lake in the summer I'll need the smash of the TIO. What to you think?

Oh and by the way KVBT is 4426' long at elevation 1298. U42 is 5862' long and 4606 elevation. All can get hotter than 40 hells so I'm asking a lot of this new bird. There are longer runway options at each end if needed. Just trying to fit to the ideal.

I want any and all feedback. My first specific question is on the boosted engines. Some 700 sellers pitch the U2A engine as a selling point. Is that engine better than the modified S1A5 or the modified AA1A5 ? Why ?

Also did anyone ever do anything with the J2BD Super II. I liked that engine on the Chieftan, but heard it didn't work well on the Aerostar.

Bring it, guys.

Stewart

If passenger comfort has any weighting in your analysis, then the 421C wins.


Yup, probably, or just do a fuel stop on those few days you can't do it non stop.


Takeoff, 1976 421C POH numbers, factory MGTOW (7450 lbs), 40C (104F), zero wind:

KVBT, 1300 MSL: 2,520 ft ground roll, 3,610 ft to 50 ft, 4,600 ft accel/stop, N/A accel/go

U42, 4600 MSL: 3,100 ft ground roll, 4,750 ft to 50 ft, 5,470 ft accel/stop, N/A accel/go

To get to the point you have accel/go numbers, you have to get down to, say, 6,500 lbs. 40C has a lot of effect. Or you can be at MGTOW and 10C and have accel/go numbers that are reasonable.

Mike C.

I can only talk about Aerostars, as that's what I used to own. Had a 601P just like you and loved it. Doing it again, though, I'd probably go 700. They're just a little better performers overall. However, if economy is important to you, the 601P with S1A5 high comp engine rules. Fuel misers at LOP - they rack up a consistent 200kts on 25gph up high. The low comp/high boost engines can't touch that, not even pulled back. But if you want 350hp, the U2A engines have a reputation for being tough. A heavier case built to take the 350hp from factory. The overboosted AA1's of the Superstar is what not always holds up as well. The S1A5 is solid because they only take 290hp from it.

The Chieftain engine doesn't hold well at all, from what I hear. Runs hot. Has single shaft, dual mag, which is not a good design. One huge turbo at back, rather than two, which is so close to accessories and hoses it fries them. But when they do work, I've heard they're the fastest Aerostars there are.

421 certainly has better cabin size, so if you plan on flying a lot of people, then that might be the choice. But like I've said in other threads, running a GTSIO will be very close to running a TPE in cost. An Aerostar is still a lot cheaper than that - mine was about $400/hr plane, so if economy is important, the Aerostar is probably the best choice.

I loved mine, damn thing flies like nothing else. It's like a little fighter jet. You really can trash it around, built like tanks. I used to love to get slam dunk decents from ATC: just pushed the nose over, never reduced throttle. Crazy high VNE and almost no yellow arc, so I just took the speed every time and came screaming down at 270kts.

XNA and SLC would be such dramatically better choices for runway length.


Edit - but from a safety/performance standpoint hot & high, nothing with pistons will beat a 700.

If you really need 5-6 pax capacity the 421 is the way to go. Squeezed 6 into my Aerostar, we were like sardines. Great 4 seater though! I have a 680 Aerostar and takeoff performance is fine in the mountains even with some elevated temps. The 421 may be a bit better though. Adam is correct, the U2A engines are the best with heavier cases. I have the S1A5 and they seem to run fine.

The airport elevations you listed are not too high. Seems like a straight 601P could do those. Obviously the bigger motors are better. With the bigger motors you generally need the aux tank, which reduces the baggage space by 1/3. I just added the aux tank and do miss the baggage space. But I wanted the gas. And with the aux tank, you really need to move the battery to keep the cg far enough forward if flying alone.

I think the 421c is your best bet short of a turbine.
I am thinking a 250k turbine will not be much to look at.

Race car performance = Aerostar

Chevy Suburban comfort = C421

Very good summation, Thomas. And we all know what the bestseller out of those two car types is....

I do realize it's comparing kiwis to mangos. I know I WANT the Aerostar, but the 421C probably fits the mission a little better. I think I'm hoping I'll hear so many horror stories about the Cessna that I'll be convinced that going there will be a mistake and I'll just have to modify my mission to fit the A*. But then most 421 owners or previous owners don't have much bad to say about it.

One of the most overlooked advantages of the 700 Aerostar is its rate of climb. At a cruise climb power setting of about 85% power and about 35 gph per hr. per engine you will maintain 145 KIAS and about 1200 ft/min., at gross, all the way to FL180. That is mostly due to the intercoolers keeping the servo inlet temperatures very close to sea level temps as you climb. (No power loss, No rate of climb loss) If you climb to FL250 and pull the power back to about 50% you will see 210 KTAS on 28 gph total, so you don’t always have to cruise at 245 knots and 45 gph. I have flown numerous trips of 500 miles with 6 on board and once you are all in and situated you have adequate leg room and shoulder room. You are not going to get up and move around like you can in a 421 but it is not uncomfortable for a 2 hr. ride. Another often overlooked advantage of an Aerostar is that it offers the best ride in turbulence of any twin I know of. No tail wagging or wing rocking even in moderate turbulence. It is even better than a Cheyenne IIXL which is a great airplane. If you need fuel and payload the 700 can be upgraded to 6850 gross wt. giving you 2200 lbs. useful load and about 1000 pounds of payload with 210 gal on board.
Case cracks on Lycomings haven’t been a big issue but the U2A engines are newer and the cases have been upgraded over the years. If you bought a new S1A5 engine today it would have the same case as a U2A. Many Aerostars with S1A5 and AA1A5 engines have the newest cases on the engines as they were changed out during some overhaul. The biggest safety advantage of the 700 is that at 6,000 lbs. you can lose an engine just after rotation, put the gear and flaps up and maintain 100 KIAS and your altitude while you figure out which engine quit. You normally have to be flying an airplane with 500+ HP turbine engines to get that kind of performance and safety. A high HP to weight ratio makes a twin much safer and easier to fly on one engine.
It is hard to find a 700 in excellent mechanical condition, low time engines, updated radios, known icing etc. for around 250K but I have one now. It won’t win Queen of the Fleet because of paint and interior but its performance is outstanding.

Best regards,
Jim Christy

Stewart,
I've owned my 1982 421C in a two person partnership for a year and a half. It's a great plane for carrying a load. I affectionately call it the Cessna Suburban. My wife loves it because she's so comfortable.

Cheap isn't a word I would use to describe it though. I had heard several other owners say to plan on a 50amu first annual no matter how good your prebuy inspection is. Ours had an in depth annual as we were buying it paid for by the seller and I thought for sure our first annual as an owner wouldn't be more than 20-25amu. No our first one added to right at 50amu.

I do feel like and hope ours is caught up now. Old airplanes break and parts are expensive as though it was a million dollar airplane or more.

We set the engines up for LOP, the process was more arduous than a Bo or a Cirrus as only a small number of 421's are flown LOP so GAMI doesn't have a good starting point. I'm glad we are flying it LOP now as I can cruise at 215ktas on 36-37gph at FL220-230.

Six people lots of luggage and 3 hours flying or four people luggage and 5 hours flying. Great traveling airplane.

Good luck in your search,
Byron

Both planes have their advantages. You didn't mention how many people or how much luggage you typically carry. IMO, the Aerostar is a 2-3 person cramped plane with very limited size luggage. If you fly alone most of the time the AE will really do you well. The 421 will very comfortably carry 4 adults and any amounts or size baggage (bicycles will fit in the nose). The sheer roominess of the 421 will make the pilot more comfortable.

A more important point to keep in mind, who can you get to work on the plane. The AE is very limited in finding qualified mechanics. Are you going to have to fly 700 mile to get to an AE shop? Twin Cessna mechanics are more abundant. Otherwise, I believe that the twin turbo AEs have a history of slightly greater mx costs.

You mentioned that you can't find a decent turboprop for your budget. I believe that you might be able to find a good F model MU-2 within your budget. If so, an F model Mu-2 will leave an AE and a 421 in its dust and probably costs less per year to operate.

That's one heck of a pitch, Jim. You don't have to sell the ride and handling. I loved my 601P. I'm really leaning toward the 700 already. Having that performance reserve available when one cages at liftoff is huge to me. And really the times of hauling more than 2 or 3 others will really be rare.

I wasn't aware you could get the fuel flow back like that on a 700. That really changes the effective fuel/payload combination for me. Could almost manage my requirements without long range tanks and keep the large baggage space. Though I can't recall seeing a 700 without the tank.

I'm three weeks from getting into serious shopping mode. Life and work are getting in the way right now. If you still have it then I'll head out there and take a look.

I appreciate your input. A lot of food for thought.

Stewart

Sounds like it was painful getting there, but that is some seriously sweet efficiency. If I go 421 I'll be hitting you up on how you did it.

I appreciate you sharing your experience.

Stewart,
I've owned my 1982 421C in a two person partnership for a year and a half. It's a great plane for carrying a load. I affectionately call it the Cessna Suburban. My wife loves it because she's so comfortable.

Cheap isn't a word I would use to describe it though. I had heard several other owners say to plan on a 50amu first annual no matter how good your prebuy inspection is. Ours had an in depth annual as we were buying it paid for by the seller and I thought for sure our first annual as an owner wouldn't be more than 20-25amu. No our first one added to right at 50amu.

I do feel like and hope ours is caught up now. Old airplanes break and parts are expensive as though it was a million dollar airplane or more.

We set the engines up for LOP, the process was more arduous than a Bo or a Cirrus as only a small number of 421's are flown LOP so GAMI doesn't have a good starting point. I'm glad we are flying it LOP now as I can cruise at 215ktas on 36-37gph at FL220-230.

Six people lots of luggage and 3 hours flying or four people luggage and 5 hours flying. Great traveling airplane.

Good luck in your search,
Byron