Twin or Single

[EIR]

Fuel price is a non issue. There is no defined mission other than the occasional northern Michigan trip. There will be no hard IFR flying & no mountain flying.

 

[milleR]

hahaha ... oh man.

Jessica Biel or Jessica Alba?

Despite this being argued to death over the ages I'll toss out one anecdotal tidbit for consideration- I know a LOT of people that have gone from single piston to multi piston, or multi piston to single/multi turbine. I can't think of anybody that went from multi anything to piston single (weekend toys like a Cub or Taylorcraft not withstanding). But like all good arguments, there's somebody out there with exactly the opposite experience I'm sure.

 

[EIR]

I know this has been beaten to death on every other forum out there. I have narrowed it down to these two airframes unless I can find a smoking deal on a BE36.

Trust me, if I could afford a mu2 - I'd be sold. @milleR

 

[Brian29]

 

[EIR]

View attachment 42422

Get out of here! Look who came out of the woodwork. I hope you're enjoying the Challenger.

 

[Brian29]

Get out of here! Look who came out of the woodwork. I hope you're enjoying the Challenger.

Citation X my friend which is actually the plane you should buy. How is the northern part of the country treating you?

 

[learhawkerbe400]

If you can afford a twin why even consider a single?

I’ll give you that twins MAY (keyword may) be more dangerous for around 10 seconds right after takeoff, but for the other 99.99% of the flight I would much rather sit behind 2 engines. Especially piston ones.

 

[learhawkerbe400]

Duplicate

 

[milleR]

I know this has been beaten to death on every other forum out there. I have narrowed it down to these two airframes unless I can find a smoking deal on a BE36.

Trust me, if I could afford a mu2 - I'd be sold. @milleR

I am biased towards twins, but regardless I think you will find the 310 is faster, has more payload, and possibly more range. They are both great airframes in my opinion though.

 

[Adler]

 

[ppragman]

Fuel price is a non issue. There is no defined mission other than the occasional northern Michigan trip. There will be no hard IFR flying & no mountain flying.

How much are you flying a year now and how much will you be able to fly a year after you buy the airplane?

 

[BigZ]

Fuel cost aside, you are still looking at a twofold increase in the maintenance costs.
If you're torn between a Bo and 310 and the above isn't a deciding factor, look into the short Be55 Barons - I've seen some go for substantially less than advertised

 

[learhawkerbe400]

Fuel cost aside, you are still looking at a twofold increase in the maintenance costs.
If you're torn between a Bo and 310 and the above isn't a deciding factor, look into the short Be55 Barons - I've seen some go for substantially less than advertised

If you’re comparing a bo to a baron, your fuel bill won’t be double and neither will maintenance. If you have to overhaul both engines at the same time yea that’s double but all of the other mx shouldn’t be double.

 

[Roger Roger]

If you’re comparing a bo to a baron, your fuel bill won’t be double and neither will maintenance. If you have to overhaul both engines at the same time yea that’s double but all of the other mx shouldn’t be double.

Yeah, more like 3x.

 

[milleR]

Yeah, more like 3x.

How do you figure?

 

[learhawkerbe400]

If you’re comparing a bo to a baron, your fuel bill won’t be double and neither will maintenance. If you have to overhaul both engines at the same time yea that’s double but all of the other mx shouldn’t be double.

Yeah, more like 3x.

Lol k

 

[EIR]

If you can afford a twin why even consider a single?

I’ll give you that twins MAY (keyword may) be more dangerous for around 10 seconds right after takeoff, but for the other 99.99% of the flight I would much rather sit behind 2 engines. Especially piston ones.

I agree with the safety argument. However, 90% of the flying will be day VFR. More times than not, there’s a place to put it down if it quits.

I am biased towards twins, but regardless I think you will find the 310 is faster, has more payload, and possibly more range. They are both great airframes in my opinion though.

The R is faster, but I’m looking at the earlier 310 with the 470. They’re about a 160-170kts plane, which is the same speeds at the 35. I’m bias towards Beeches, as I have quite a bit of time in them.

How much are you flying a year now and how much will you be able to fly a year after you buy the airplane?

For work I’m flying 300-400hrs. I’ll have plenty of time to fly small planes. When I owned my cheetah I was flying 150hrs while flying nearly 1000 with work.

Fuel cost aside, you are still looking at a twofold increase in the maintenance costs.
If you're torn between a Bo and 310 and the above isn't a deciding factor, look into the short Be55 Barons - I've seen some go for substantially less than advertised

It won’t be 2x fuel burn and the maintenance doesn’t scare me as long as I get a thorough prebuy. The earlier 310 burn around 22-24/hr.

Yeah, more like 3x.

Huh. Do tell. Are we talking about an islander?

 

[EIR]

I sent you that ad on barnstormers for that Berkut. Start saving.

 

[Roger Roger]

How do you figure?

Lol k

I agree with the safety argument. However, 90% of the flying will be day VFR. More times than not, there’s a place to put it down if it quits.


The R is faster, but I’m looking at the earlier 310 with the 470. They’re about a 160-170kts plane, which is the same speeds at the 35. I’m bias towards Beeches, as I have quite a bit of time in them.

For work I’m flying 300-400hrs. I’ll have plenty of time to fly small planes. When I owned my cheetah I was flying 150hrs while flying nearly 1000 with work.

It won’t be 2x fuel burn and the maintenance doesn’t scare me as long as I get a thorough prebuy. The earlier 310 burn around 22-24/hr.

Huh. Do tell. Are we talking about an islander?

Pretty easy...twin engines have more systems and more complex systems and they break more often. Everything from wiring faults to dual vacuum regulator systems screwing each other up. Also if you’re talking earlier 310 vs a newer Bo the sheer age of the airplane (despite a thorough prebuy) and the difficulty finding parts are gonna be fun. But hey, what do I know. Not like I took care of a fleet of aging piston aircraft for a few years or anything.

 

[Flyinthrew]

With what mission objectives you have offered throughout the thread, and if you are going to go with the best fit for that mission, then go with the single. It will be a better value in every way. If you were to add caveats like greater useful load or air conditioning or not canceling just because there are low ceilings, then you're more in twin territory, but I'd personally still say look harder at a 36 at that point.

Full disclosure: I fly a single engine airplane in some elevated risk scenarios so I'm just slightly deadened to the risk associated with flying a single compared to a few others.