A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Piper Seneca II vs Cessna 310



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 13th 05, 01:54 PM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Piper Seneca II vs Cessna 310

Anyone have any good insights on the pros/cons of the Seneca vs the 310?
I've seen several for sale in about the same price range.

Thanks.



Ads
  #2  
Old August 13th 05, 10:32 PM
Darrel Toepfer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Doe wrote:

Anyone have any good insights on the pros/cons of the Seneca vs the 310?
I've seen several for sale in about the same price range.


Check into the spar issues with the Cessna 3xx (not 377 which has its
own issues), 4xx line, and its off and on and off again SB/AD that can
potentially doom the fleets value...
  #3  
Old August 14th 05, 12:34 AM
Jim N.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Seneca goes a lot slower (smaller engines). Also, you should take a look at
insurance costs if you are low or no-time multiengine.

If you're looking for a solid plane that holds six pax and luggage and also
goes fast and far, a B-200 King Air or a Citation X should be about right.


  #4  
Old August 14th 05, 06:03 AM
Montblack
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

("Darrel Toepfer" wrote)
Check into the spar issues with the Cessna 3xx (not 377 which has its own
issues), 4xx line, and its off and on and off again SB/AD that can
potentially doom the fleets value...



AvWeb had it maybe a month ago. Found it ...

http://www.avweb.com/newswire/11_25a/briefs/190002-1.html

June 20, 2005
FAA Issues Final Cessna Wing Spar ADs

By Mary Grady
Newswriter, Editor

After much back and forth between the FAA and owners of affected Cessna
twins, two final Airworthiness Directives about wing spars were issued last
week. The final ADs require a spar-strap modification, but allow most owners
up to 800 flight hours to comply -- that's four to eight years of flying for
most owner-operators. The modification then is good for another 5,500 to
12,000 hours, with no further inspections required. The initial cost to
comply is still high -- aviation columnist Mike Busch told AVweb he
estimates it will cost $40,000 to $60,000 per airplane, and up to two months
of downtime. However, he said, the market value of Cessna 300/400 twins
should start increasing now that the AD is on the streets. "It has long been
my feeling that the uncertainty of the impending rulemaking was depressing
the market more than the certainty of a known AD," Busch said. "Furthermore,
the spar-strap mod will instantly increase the market value of the aircraft
by very nearly 100 percent of the cost of the modification, so the
modification cost will largely be recaptured if and when the aircraft is
sold."

  #5  
Old August 14th 05, 12:29 PM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yea, that's what I'm trying to explain to the wife.

How about a B60 Duke?


"Jim N." wrote in message
...
Seneca goes a lot slower (smaller engines). Also, you should take a look
at insurance costs if you are low or no-time multiengine.

If you're looking for a solid plane that holds six pax and luggage and
also goes fast and far, a B-200 King Air or a Citation X should be about
right.



  #6  
Old August 14th 05, 01:28 PM
Viperdoc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

There's a big difference between a used Seneca and a Citation. If you can
afford it, buy the Citation along with the training and pilots to fly you
around.

A Duke still won't carry six pax and much luggage very far, and the engines
are pretty rare (I've been contemplating them versus a 340 or 414 myself).
Figure over 100K for two engines when it comes time for overhaul.


  #7  
Old August 14th 05, 05:26 PM
Nathan Young
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 23:34:54 GMT, "Jim N."
wrote:

Seneca goes a lot slower (smaller engines). Also, you should take a look at
insurance costs if you are low or no-time multiengine.

If you're looking for a solid plane that holds six pax and luggage and also
goes fast and far, a B-200 King Air or a Citation X should be about right.


Seneca II should be more affordable to insure than a 310.

If you are able to fly high the Seneca II (which is turbo'd) is
probably not that much slower than a non-turbo 310.

There are a few 310s on my field, and the early models do not have
much baggage room behind the 5/6th seats. They also do not have a
nose baggage section.

The Seneca does have space behind the 5th/6th seats, and a nose
locker.

-Nathan

  #8  
Old August 14th 05, 09:56 PM
Clay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Landing gear is much better in the Seneca II
Seneca II is easier for the passengers to enter (club seating)
Seneca II will give you a good honest 165 knots and burn a total of 21
to 23 GPH.
Seneca II has counter rotating propellers.
Seneca II has a user friendly fuel system compared to a C-310.

  #9  
Old August 17th 05, 12:39 AM
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The C310 dumps its exhaust over the back of the wing resulting in a
wing that always looks dirty. Just my $.02 from my very small amount of
C310 time.

-Robert

  #10  
Old August 19th 05, 01:33 PM
OtisWinslow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My choice would be the Seneca.



"John Doe" wrote in message
nk.net...
Anyone have any good insights on the pros/cons of the Seneca vs the 310?
I've seen several for sale in about the same price range.

Thanks.





 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wow - heard on the air... (long) Nathan Young Piloting 68 July 25th 05 06:51 PM
How safe is it, really? June Piloting 227 December 10th 04 05:01 AM
Insuring a C310 vs. Piper Seneca Dave Owning 17 October 27th 04 03:29 PM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM
I am going to do it again! A Piper Seneca? Michelle P Owning 5 August 20th 03 01:59 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2014 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.