Hello,

I have been flying a 1985 Cessna P210R for the last 5 years. It is dialed in about exactly where I want it - new panel, new interior, etc.

This is a great traveling machine for my family (wife and twin 13 year old boys). We fit in the plane very comfortably.

With 1100 hours flying singles, I am starting to think about a twin. More room, a bit more speed, better climb, and of course the redundancy of a 2nd engine - and all benefits and drawbacks that come from that.

The SETP just seems a bit out of range. CAPEX, and the possibility of a $100K or $200K event for the engine.

Looking through BT for the past week has me thinking that a Cessna 340A would be a good transition. The cabin is 5" taller, 1' 5" wider, and 4' longer. Seems like a nice upgrade for a 200KTS, 20,000' airplane.

I have looked at and flown a really nice 1985 58P. That plane is really sweet to fly! It's just that the cabin is not much bigger.

Along with my family trips, I go on a few (5-6) trips per year with some golf buddies. The P210 is great for 3 of us with clubs. It is not very fun with 4 guys and clubs. Fine for me with 4 guys, but I have to listen to complaining most of the way.

Another aspect of this is my risk tolerance after over 1000 hours in a single. I don't really want to debate the safety of single vs twin, but flying along at 18,000' I would feel a little safer in a twin.

Looking for thoughts on the Cessna 340 (I am looking for RAM VII) and feedback from anyone who has made this transition. Hate to sell a perfectly good plane that has very expected and relatively low hourly/yearly costs for the unknown, but I believe it is time.

Cooper, what is your hangar availability for a larger aircraft?

Your plane is the pinnacle of the 210s. I understand the second engine and all but you may be teetering on some very diminishing returns when factoring everything in.

Nick - The hangar availability is what is pushing me in this direction. I got a larger T hangar last fall at PDK in Atlanta. I was on the wait list for a long time.

Frank - you are right. My plane is dialed in.

I spoke with my mechanic (who's opinion I value) and he said the only pressurized twin that he would own would be a 58P.

I suppose I should be happy with what I have, until we outgrow it

Great news on the hangar, and wise move to consider your mechanic’s perspective. Will he maintain a P Baron or whatever you end up with next?

Having a wife and children changes the psychology of tough terrain, even if the statistics suggest our piston twin pilot community hasn’t done a stellar job responding correctly to asymmetric loss of power.

We just flew our 58P across the country from WA to MD in a day, wife and 10 year old daughter. Right over the Frank Church and Rockies at night, and clear over Lake Michigan without pulse raising a beat. I’m not naive to those risks regardless of number of engines, yet it does “feel” better, I get it, and agree.

If space larger than a Baron is desired, can you swing an entry level turbine like Cheyenne or -21 C90?

You know this, but nose baggage, aft baggage, and space between front 2 Baron rows - along with pulling an aft seat - frees up a lot of cabin space.

We have a nice low time 340A Ram VII for sale. Listed with Jerry Temple.

https://www.jerrytemple.com/inventory/? ... mid=614755

Well, I went from a P210 to an MU2 after considering piston twins. The MU2 is a much better plane than any piston twin, better performance, better systems, much better and more reliable engines. It is bigger than a P210 and the others you listed. A 400 series Cessna is similar in size, but not performance or reliability. My plane is scheduled for its 100/200 hr inspection next month, it hasn't been in any shop since the last 100/200 hr inspection last year. This will make three years in a row that has been the case for. Can't say that about any piston plane I have owned, all 5 of them. Yes, it burns more fuel than the P210, 4 times more in fact per hour, but it is 80KTAS faster and Jet A is less expensive, sometimes much less expensive with contract fuel. For example, at my home field today I can get contract Jet A for $3.64, the best price for 100LL is $7.65. It has been shown, and my experience agrees that you can operate an MU2 for comparable dollars to a pressurized piston twin and have a better more capable plane for your dollar. Hangar might be an issue, you need a little over 20" from the T wall to the door because of the tip tanks on a short body MU2, something to consider. I was where you are 4 years ago, and am very happy with the choice I ended up making. You should at least consider it.....especially since you are very close to two excellent MU2 shops, one in Aiken SC and one in Dickson TN.

Jeff Axel
N228WP

If you go with a Cessna 300/400 series, look closely at the full fuel useful load, as it can be quite low with all the usual goodies (known ice, radar, a/c).

Depends a lot on your usual trip length and loading, obviously.

It won't help you gain interior space but have you thought about a silver eagle given your P210 time?

I hear folks that have them, love it. And I'd suggest with a turbine out, it is as much a step up in safety as a twin.

Jeff,

Thanks for responding. I knew you used to fly a P210. It seems like a twin turbine would be much more reliable than a pressurized piston twin. The Cheyenne and MU2 have really peaked my interest.

If I haven't flown in a few weeks, I usually make a run to find some cheap fuel. When I do this, I will shoot an approach or two and do a good bit of hand flying. This is typically a 1 hour flight with two or more take offs and landings. I burn about 25 gal doing this. Lately, I can get 100ll for $5 a gallon and usually get at least 100 gal. The $2 per gallon I save by getting "cheap fuel" pays for this flight. I am trying to wrap my head around doing this in a twin turboprop. If I burn 80 gal of jet A doing this, that's about $320 in fuel cost. I suppose an extra $200 an hour in fuel cost is not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of aircraft ownership. Of course, many times I am at an FBO and purchase $7.50 100ll. That makes it $165 per hour vs $320 (twin turboprop).

It seems like fuel burn/cost in an average year (100-125 hours flown) would be as follows:

P210 - 2,300 gal x $6 = $13,800'
Pres. piston twin - 4000 gal x $6 = $24,000
Twin turboprop - 8000 gal x $4 = $32,000

Not too bad for a superior traveling machine!

Matt,

I have strongly considered a Silver Eagle. Pretty much what I have with better climb and a bit faster. Almost forgot to mention: reliability and safety of turbine.

Prices for these seem to be in the $600K-$1M range. I just feel like I would be better off going with a Piper Meridian with an extra 50 knots of speed.

UL is relatively important to me. My P210R is right at 1300#. I can put 100 gal in it and have 700# for my family (current weight of family including me - 505#). The weight of my family will continue to rise. Should peak right around 700#. That's 3 hours flying with IFR reserves. If only two people in the plane, I can fill it up - 149 gal and fly over 1000 miles.

It is really the (potential) safety issue of flying single pilot IFR over terrain and LIFR that has me thinking about turbine. Bigger space for passengers is also up there.

Considering your math above Cooper, If for one year, you only consider your Normal Missions, that are about 2 hours or grater, you may burn less fuel than you calculated as you'll be completing those missions much faster

But who knows, with that MU2, you may burn a little more, because of New Missions

I vote for the Mitts

Mitts vote. So many threads confirming it. My own experience was a Malibu cost 50k per year all in and the MU2 was about 75k (a few years ago but likely not far off present as fuel is similar again) and I was flying about 40% more miles in MU2. It’s really hard to beat. It’s also fun and rewarding to fly. Cabin is great too.

Food for thought

we all know twins are safer.

just realize that when you have a faster more capable aircraft your flying hours will go up. The biggest myth in flying is if i go twice as fast my hours will go down by half. Nope they may double or more.

i know it’s a cliche but buy your last airplane first.

the more capable the plane the less stress. stress kills.

i went from a cherokee 6 to a seneca II to a 340 to a Turbo Commander 690a,b,c to a series of leased citations to a Citation Mustang. Fly 400-500 hours a year. 100% dispatch rate. Weather delays are nearly never. Icing is meh. Thunderstorms are only an issue if they are at the destination or departure airports. jet aircraft values hold steady.

i get capex is a harsh reality.