British Airways From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (15 years 9 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 980 times:
You said you like the 310 over the seneca. But the 310 is a death machine. I like it looks and but an under powered twin are not good.
What is everybody’s opinion on the 310 Vs. the Seneca and which have you flown?
I have never flown each but heard many bad stories about the 310!
Cool Cat IIIc From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (15 years 9 months 1 week ago) and read 980 times:
The only Cessna 310 I have extensively flown is the 310R, the last model of the line and the most powerfull. It's a very nice airplane and I can assure you that it is not at all underpowered (as far as piston twins go). Now the PA23 Apache, that is an underpowerd plane (yet sweet).
Jetstar II From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (15 years 9 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 980 times:
I occasionally fly a 310R. Very powerful twin. It will do a 400 fpm single engine climb at about 95 to 100 kts on a fairly warm day. I have no time in a Senaca but the 310R is a very capable airplane.
The 414 on the other hand..........
Ricky From Indonesia, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (15 years 9 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 980 times:
I don't have my multi-ticket yet but I have had the chance to get some rides on the right seat in the Cessna 310 and the Seneca III. I'm sure the 310 is a better plane. I had more fun flying the 310 than the Seneca. The 310R, the last version, has 285hp engines. The Seneca III has 220hp engines. The 310 is beefier and stronger. Without doubts, the 310 is the best one in its categorie!!!