TC Saratoga vs Seneca V vs Baron 58

[T-handle]

BE-58

BE-58 hands on. Best workhorse piston twin out there. I was fortunate enough to fly a 1982 BE-58TC.

It had brand new engines and winglets. Back in the day, this sucker hauled some serious chiznit (240 TAS around 18,000 ft). But it sure sucked up gas like there was no tomorrow. I believe it could carry up to 190 gallons. I remember it burning around 35-40/hr depending how much you pushed the "go-fast" knobs.

We had to plan very early from our desination because as soon as you pitched the nose down for descent, it would gain 20-30 knots no matter how much power you brought back. And being they were delicate turbocharged engines, we had to baby them.

 

[sydeseet]

I too have flown all three and agree with the Baron people. A baron comes at a price though. You can get the worlds nicest Seneca V for the cost of a used Baron and a used Seneca for a whole lot less. If money isn't too much of an issue then get the Baron. I fly 135 part time and we just dumped 2 of our Barons because the new insurance makes it VERY hard to justify the cost of them. One of the owners is going to wait until the market gets better and then sell it. His premium went UP by 10K/yr - good ol' AIG.......

 

[Caveman]

If I have to pick from either of those 3 I would go with the Baron. Like a couple other posters suggested, why not think outside of the box. I agree with the suggestion of a Caravan. I'd rather have 1 PT-6 than two piston engines. A couple of other 'weird' choices:

a. A Cessna 340. Pressurized, cabin class twin that can probably be had for less money than a Baron.

b. Citation I. The operating cost is way higher than a light piston twin but you could buy the a/c initially for less than the cost of a late model Baron. Plus it adds considerable 'corporate stature' to the guys business.

 

[prpjt]

Baron

Of the three, I think you're seeing a trend here. Cast another for the Baron. If you go for the Baron, look at a 1984 or later model. That's when they changed the panel and throttle configuration. Also went to the 300 hp engines. MTOW is 5500lbs.
We operate a 1997 model. It does 196 true day in and day out at 2300 rpm. You can get 204 if you want to listen to the props at 2500. Climbs better than any of the Senecas, 1600fpm through 5000 is normal, 1900fpm if you're light.
One thing you do have to look at in the Baron is the useful load for your particular plane. There is no way I could one stop Mass to FL. with the load z-man had unless the parents and kids were tiny. With a 190lb pilot and 3 200lb pax, and 80lbs of bags, we can fly 1:45 with IFR reserves, no alternate. Pretty much a 300 mile trip. Our useful load is only 1440lbs. The 1999 and up Barons give you another 100lbs useful.
I recall the older Barons being able to carry more, but it's more of a function of optional equipment. We're air conditioned, TCAS, known ice,radar, stormscope etc.
The Baron is really in a different class than the Seneca. One thing that a pilot or owner will like is the Baron will climb on one engine at gross. It's not a rocket, but it's positive.