Looking for a King Air

[noserider]

We are in the market for a well maintained King Air. We have our search narrowed down to a B100, A100 or straight 100 (or 200 if the price is right). Any info would be appreciated!!
Also if anyone has any opinions of the B100 please chime in.

Thanks

 

[deadstick]

Don't forget to rewind the props after you shut down!

Seriously, I had a DO who swore by them. From what I can remember, they were lower altitude planes because of the shorter wing.

 

[TRBojet]

Flown the 200 and 300, but a former company I worked for operated an A100 (I think it was an A). Anyway, I always heard they were really doggy. I would try to convince him to go with a 200 if it's in the budget. I thought there was a huge jump in performance between the 200 and 300, and I got the feeling it was the same kind of jump from a 100 to a 200. If that holds true, definetly try for the 200.

 

[sperfly]

Flown the 200 and 300, but a former company I worked for operated an A100 (I think it was an A). Anyway, I always heard they were really doggy. I would try to convince him to go with a 200 if it's in the budget. I thought there was a huge jump in performance between the 200 and 300, and I got the feeling it was the same kind of jump from a 100 to a 200. If that holds true, definetly try for the 200.

I second that I fly a 200 and have right seated in a 100 and there is alot more power with the 200. I say get a 300 if its in the budget

 

[junkjockey]

Im flying a 200 and a B100. B100 is a pile. Startup procedure sucks and ya gotta twist the props when u get out. Those Garrets are loud as hell. The 200 is a sweet bird. Power, performance is unmatched. 200 if ya can afford it

 

[Cloudfish]

I have about 500 hours in a B100 with the PT6-28 engines. I wouldn't recommend it is an upgrade--go for the 200. While most of my time is in a C90 and C90B, the time I have in the 100 is enough to know that the performance the 100 has is not much more. It does not do very well at high altitude/high DA airports and your SE performance at altitude limits you when it comes to high MEA's in the mountains.

 

[jergbsn]

I use to fly a B100, and have about 500 or so hours in it. Yes the garrets are loud but sitting inside with headsets on you don't really notice it (especialy <sp?> once you start losing you hearing).

The garrets are nice since there is no lag in engine response. It was my first turbine engine I ever flew and it was easy to get a handle on. For a turboprop, manageing the engines wasn't a big deal.

We stayed at 16,000 to 17,000 usually. You could drag it up into the low 20's if you felt like it. In the upper teens you could pretty much get direct and any weather deviations you needed so it was nice. No problem carrying a bunch of people, and fuel. We did a number of 3+30, 3+45, flights. It's been a while so don't quote me, but I think I filed 245 TAS,,,, maybe 235. I can't quite remember.

I've never flown a PT6 so I couldn't compare. It's basicly, as far as I know, a KA200 body, with a KA90 wing. So you do the math. Your deffinitly limited but for what it's worth, I thought it was a pretty solid airplane.

I still got the books somewhere, if you have any ?'s PM me and I'll see what I can come up with.

JG

 

[400A]

I have about 500 hours in a B100 with the PT6-28 engines. I wouldn't recommend it is an upgrade--go for the 200. While most of my time is in a C90 and C90B, the time I have in the 100 is enough to know that the performance the 100 has is not much more. It does not do very well at high altitude/high DA airports and your SE performance at altitude limits you when it comes to high MEA's in the mountains.

Must have been an A100 or 100. The B100 had TPE-331's, not Dash 28's.

 

[cptsesso]

I have about 900 hrs in an A100, no B100 time, 1200 hrs 200 and presently 300 hrs in a F90-1. King airs, no matter which model are rock solid.

First turbine experience was in the A100. Jergbsn is right, the 100 is an E90 with a 200 cabin. Same engine, fuel sys, elect, etc. just a few more seats. Very underpowered. Summertime, single engine, 2 crew and half fuel, expect about 100 fpm climb, on a good day (real world test). I don't want to even know what it will do with a full cabin. Cruise was 215-220 kts in the mid teens. Struggled to get it into the low 20's a few times.

If in the budget, I would not even hesitate to recommend a 200. There are quite a few of them on the market now. You will be 40 to 65 kts faster (straight 200 vs B200) and will be able to cruise in the upper 20's all day long.
Single engine, the 200 will climb almost like a 100 with 2 engines burning.

Now if cabin size is not a factor, an F90-1 is a little hot rod.

 

[Cloudfish]

Must have been an A100 or 100. The B100 had TPE-331's, not Dash 28's.

400A---You are right. It has been a while and I wrote quickly. Upon thinking about it I even remembered the serial number---I just hadn't thought about it for a long time.