Seneca 3 vs 310 vs 55
Posted by hellowater44@reddit | flying | View on Reddit | 27 comments
These all seem pretty much the same to me and I’d appreciate any insight. The mission is:
1) providing multi instruction
2) cross country up to 700 nm for two, night/ifr/overwater/
I’m a highly experienced multi pilot but I’m new to piston.
Honestly it seems like any of the three would work. Opinions?
Cessnateur@reddit
I recommend joining the owner group for each type - either the formal ones, or the FB groups. From there, you can ask actual owners about parts cost/availability, handling quirks, ownership concerns, etc.
I'd also take the time to gather insurance quotes from multiple sources for each type. If things are otherwise mostly equal, this might prove to be a solid tiebreaker.
Finally, I'd ask those owner groups for volunteers to take you up for a quick demo flights. Sometimes, one of the most compelling factors is a general feeling, design philosophy, or ergonomic feature. These sorts of things don't show up on spreadsheets, but they're absolutely valid when forming a buying decision.
Dangerous-Sign5878@reddit
idk man but sounds like u gotta do ur homework for real
D-Dubya@reddit
Opinions:
Seneca 3. No experience, but it is turbocharged which may not be the best choice from an MX perspective in the somewhat more demanding training environment.
I own an E55 and love it. The B55 with IO-470's are great flying aircraft although they are a bit tight across the shoulders with two big guys sitting up front.
I looked at 310's seriously before buying my Baron. They are right on top of the 55 in terms of performance, but have a bit more cabin room IIRC.
You may want to also add the Piper Aztek into the mix. It's slow and flies like a dump truck, but it's frequently used as a trainer. It's what I got my multi with. I also flew a Twin Comanche a bit. Single engine performance was docile, but there was not much excess power with an idled engine.
equal2infinity@reddit
But the cabin width of the E55 and B55 are the same, no?
D-Dubya@reddit
Yes, same with the bonanza as well. What I was trying to say is that the b55 would make the better trainer of the Baron types. I could have phrased that better. It sounded good in my head.
tms2x2@reddit
As a mechanic I would say Beech 55 if you’re going to use it for training. Seneca 3 engines are finicky, run lean a couple seconds too long and change a cylinder. 310 have some corrosion issues you have to be careful of.
Top-Pop-2742@reddit
As others have stated your mission is too broad for a hands down clear choice. I’ve owned both a 310 and a 55. I started in the 310 and it was a wonderful airplane so everything after that was compared to that and everything failed miserably up against the 310. It is a XC machine all weather capable of out fitted accordingly. I hated my 55 and got rid of that as quickly as I could and turned it into a 340. That was a wonderful plane but mx and operating ate my lunch. Any of those as a trainer? You’re asking for headaches. It would be one thing if you were going to do some 1 off training of buddies or friends of friends but to instruct out of it regularly would create all kinds of headaches for both you and the students. Buy a clapped out Seminole and a tricked out 310Q with Colemill converted engines and don’t look back.
Perfect_Big_5907@reddit
I have lots of twin cessna time and used to fly a Colemill 310 Q . Damn that was a fun plane ! Rocket for sure
Funkshow@reddit
You got rid of a 55 and went to a 340 for reduced costs?
CessnaMir@reddit
I’ve done training and teaching in both. they are incredibly different. I had a similar mission to you and did buy a 310R. It was an amazing airplane and we took it so many places. It was a lot to train people in, it took more hours and costs more per hour. That being said my students came out as damn good multi pilots. I would do it again, but I don’t miss training students in it. We did not cut corners and it definitely cost students more money but it brought them success.
the Seneca is easy to fly and train in. Not as good to travel in. Kind of boring.
x4457@reddit
Well they're definitely not all the same at all.
You do not want to use a turbocharged piston for multi training, so that's the Seneca III out.
The year of 310 will make a big difference. A 310B and a 310R are pretty different airplanes.
From a training perspective, the 55 series Baron is better than a 310 because the systems are a lot simpler than a 310. Higher odds of checkride oral success.
Cessnateur@reddit
Might a Travel Air make an even better trainer?
equal2infinity@reddit
Did my multi in a Travelair and I thought it was a great trainer. The single engine service ceiling is <5000ft so sloppy OEI handling has you losing altitude vs the baron which has enough power to mask some of it. You also don’t have as much asymmetric thrust to kill you during VMC demo’s.
Travelairs are getting hard to find though. Most are 60+ yrs old. And I much prefer to the newer systems in the 70’s and newer.
x4457@reddit
I'd say no only because they're pretty underpowered, but from a simplicity perspective, sure. They're also almost the same price as a 55 Baron anyway.
redditburner_5000@reddit
What's the context here? You borrowing a friend's plane or buying it to operate it as an instructor?
For a school, those are all very bad choices. You want something with Lycoming four-cylinders. Seneca I, Apache, Twin Comanche, Derringer, or a Seminole come to mind. OEI performance sucks, but you're not traversing the Rockies in it, you're training for checkrides in the practice area.
If you're borrowing a friend's plane: Baron 55. A 310 is a terrible trainer for the same reason it's a great cross country plane. A Seneca II and newer are turbocharged and that opens up more questions for the examiner.
x4457@reddit
I’m curious why you think a 310 or 55 Baron are poor trainers, as someone who trained in a 310R.
redditburner_5000@reddit
Baron is actually decent, it's just a lot of fuel burn for a trainer. I don't think anyone can say the Baron is a bad plane. They made so many for a reason!
The 310 is just not meant to be a trainer. Now, all of my time is in the later models, most of them turbo'd, but I do have a fair bit of time in the NA 310s doing ME add-ons for a school. They work as trainers, but it's a lot of plane for new multi pilot and needlessly expensive.
They're all good planes, and the Baron is probably the best of the three if I had to pick one, but none are my first choice for an ME trainer. Anyway, it's splitting hairs at this point. I had a student get his add-on in a C401. Any twin will work. It's just a matter of what the student wants to spend.
To me, nothing really beats a PA-23 running 87. Nice docile twin with a critical engine that won't bleed you dry.
Cessnateur@reddit
Calling the Seneca, Baron, and 310 bad choices and then recommending a type with a total production run of 12 examples (with seven active on the registry) is certainly an approach!
Much as I love the Derringer, it would be a lot easier to deal with the maintenance and fuel burn of four additional pistons than to contend with the poor/nonexistent parts availability and service experience/expertise for such a limited-production type.
Flimsy-Ad-858@reddit
Hmmm I smell inspiration for a near future Instagram post...
redditburner_5000@reddit
Hey...if I'm spending someone else's money, why not?!
I don't think the recommendation presents a practical problem because (a) they are never for sale and (b) he needs four seats and baggage.
Flimsy-Ad-858@reddit
If you're going to be doing regular instruction, absolutely do not get something with turbos unless they're full manual wastegates that you can leave open and just treat as normally aspirated when you feel like it. Not worth blowing something up.
Bob_Ross3346@reddit
I trained on a Seneca. Blew my mind that they used a turbo’ed plane for training, but…. ok I guess.
davidswelt@reddit
I owned a 310R and thought it was a great plane, albeit painful and expensive to maintain. Not the most compelling economics for instruction, but great for real-world XC.
My checkride was in a basic, old Seneca that was quick and simple to learn. Grateful for that. As I understand it, the 310 is too powerful for things like a Vmc demo at full power. Things also happen pretty quick on and after takeoff, and this is not necessarily the best for students.
So maybe your mission is a bit too broad...
RyzOnReddit@reddit
I fly a Seneca III with my family of 4 and love it.
Space is way better than a 58 Baron, let alone a 55. It won’t keep up with a Baron unless you go very high.
Where are you based? Happy to chat or go for a ride if it works.
omykronbr@reddit
> I’m a highly experienced multi pilot but I’m new to piston.
🤣
Cessnateur@reddit
What's funny about this? Pretty standard for military folks.
rFlyingTower@reddit
This is a copy of the original post body for posterity:
These all seem pretty much the same to me and I’d appreciate any insight. The mission is:
1) providing multi instruction
2) cross country up to 700 nm for two, night/ifr/overwater/
I’m a highly experienced multi pilot but I’m new to piston.
Honestly it seems like any of the three would work. Opinions?
Please downvote this comment until it collapses.
Questions about this comment? Please see this wiki post before contacting the mods.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. If you have any questions, please contact the mods of this subreddit.