Business Jet Traveler's annual product support survey hit my inbox today. The eye popper was the very convincing way Mitsubishi dominated the turboprop support category on almost every category. Pretty amazing for systems so long out of production.

This is routine, pretty much every year for the last 10 or so, MU2 shows up and scors higher than anything else, jets and new airplanes included. Pilatus and TBM are absent many years, the owners/pilot seem apathetic and don't reach the required minimum responses (which is 20).

The survey is not scientific, it depends on self reporting. So a more energized user base means responses than others. At the very least, this shows owner enthusiasm if nothing else.

Ultimately, the MU2 has been the most reliable and least trouble airplane I have ever owned. The things that cause the most issues are generally the stuff not specific to the MU2, namely avionics, instruments, etc.

Mike C.

I really love mine. I’m close to the 50 hour mark in 2 months and nothing has broken. It’s an incredibly impressive machine. FL to OSH, OSH to Maine to Boston, Boston to FL; all non stop. Averages 260kts at 60gph with 900lbs in the cabin and full fuel.

Going to Simcom this weekend with some BeechTalk guys.

I’m a cat guy but these are some friends dogs that I like.

The dog wants to be inside otherwise it’ll have to howl louder than the Mutation noise they emit.

Love that Argus. It's been out production for at least 15 years. I bought my 7000 on ebay for $50.

I fried it trying to get the battery replaced. I think I will order one on ebay right now.

wonder if the color version is plug and play for the non color?

I fried it trying to get the battery replaced. I think I will order one on ebay right now.

The Argus was the deal maker on that transaction. Mike would’ve passed if not for the inop Argus.

It’s hard to beat a Mitts. Great support, great network of owners, great instructors and a phenomenal plane.

Once you get used to it, it really does make other small planes feel a bit tin can like.

I know I was just asking whether to go pressurized....well now I'm thinking turbine. (with partner) Mike are you truly convinced all in aggregate ownership costs of the MU2 are comparable to C414 or C421? Average annual cost of MU2 ownership flying 100-150 hours per year? fixed costs? direct hourly? per nm? Thanks!!!

Thought to ponder:

A Cessna 441 empty weight is about 800-1000 lbs less than a short body MU2, and the 441 is physically larger (longer cabin and wider wingspan). Since the engines, props, wheels, avionics, ACM, etc, are basically the same, the net result is that an MU2 has about half a ton more metal in it than a 441.

So imagine a half ton of metal being slathered all over the airframe and how much beefier that much make the airframe. Now you get the picture for how truly robust the MU2 is.

The over built nature is a side effect of the Mitsubishi engineers transferring their F104J experience (what Mitsubishi was building prior to the MU2) into the MU2 so things were grossly over built, almost incompetently so. But the net effect is a plane that is all kinds of "hell for stout" as they would say in Kansas. The MU2 also inherited many F104J system philosophies as well, using high grade military style valves, fittings, etc. This may be one of the reasons the airplane is so reliable.

Mike C.

On a per mile basis, the MU2 and the 421 are going to be close and the particulars of your situation will be controlling as to which one wins.

I nearly bought a 421. I'm happy I went to the MU2 instead. I believe my overall costs per mission is about the same plane wise, but less in ancillary costs (less over nights, more reliable, etc), which makes the MU2 far more useful. It is possible to have a meeting 800 nm away and do it as a day trip in the MU2. That's much harder in the 421, especially in winter headwinds in the northeast. More than once I have suffered "only" 200 knot ground speed in the MU2, but oh how painful that would have been in a 421.


Fits my profile exactly. I do everything from a 20 minute hop to flying transcontinental.

I'm in the $700-750/hour range over a 10 year span. This includes fuel, maintenance, hangar, insurance, taxes, etc, everything related to the airplane. I do not count pilot costs (training). Block speed is around 270-280 knots, I do fair number of longer flights. That should give you useful per mile numbers, about $2.63/nm with that usage pattern.

Who and how you maintain the airplane is a big deal. I have a economical shop near me and I am involved in the maintenance to some degree. If you have a gold plated shop and just hand them the keys, it can be a different story.

Where are you located? Certain parts of the country have more MU2 resources than others, and I am in an area of lots of good resources.

Mike C.

One more thought.

I think the 441 is a superior plane to the MU2 and I wish I had one instead, but they were way out of my price range when I was shopping 11 years ago. The price split has come down a lot in recent times, so consider a 441. The -10 equipped 441 is within a few knots if not slightly faster than an MU2, can carry more people (versus short body MU2), and has much longer range. The 441 has a reputation, deserved, of being somewhat flimsy due to its piston heritage, but the upside of that is low weights and high performance.

Mike C.

One more thought.

I think the 441 is a superior plane to the MU2 and I wish I had one instead, but they were way out of my price range when I was shopping 11 years ago. The price split has come down a lot in recent times, so consider a 441. The -10 equipped 441 is within a few knots if not slightly faster than an MU2, can carry more people (versus short body MU2), and has much longer range. The 441 has a reputation, deserved, of being somewhat flimsy due to its piston heritage, but the upside of that is low weights and high performance.

Mike C.