I figured rather than having folks shuffle between threads, people that own it could post their review thoughts here. If it's too many topics, feel free to delete/merge it.

I bought it, thinking that I wouldn't fly it much. Really didn't have any expectations at all.
 

I think this plane deserves a solid 9/10. A bit of background, I've flown turboprops (King Air) and have a bit of time in them, but never a single engine turboprop. I ended up leaving a company that got Kodiaks right after I left, so never had the opportunity.

I think they did very well simulating how the PT6 engine works. They're great engines, and Asobo really missed the mark. These guys did a really good job. Aerodynamics are fantastic. It is NOT an easy plane to fly, but it feels right.

For my test, I flew with about 1000 lbs of fuel, and no other payload, so a light aircraft. I'll try flying it later at max weight. It started out with a simple traffic pattern to get used to the flight characteristics, and I've gotta say, it's much more slippery than I thought it would be. But it makes sense, have you seen that wing?? LoL. This version of the PT6A-34 is rated at 750 SHP, so it's a pretty powerful engine, especially considering that during my tests I was only at around 5100 lbs.

ENGINE START:
Starting the engine was awesome. It felt just like starting a real PT6. As soon as you introduce fuel, things happen quickly, and the related indications appeared to rise and settle very realistically. It was nice seeing the NG rise to a realistic 21/22% as opposed to the 12% from other planes in the sim have (*caugh* Caravan). The only thing I wish they had was the "ignition click" when starting, but it's not a deal breaker at all. It doesn't appear that HOT STARTS are modeled....

TAXI:
We're pretty used to planes taxiing like BLANK in MSFS, so this is a breath of fresh air. It actually feels like the wheels are on the ground...not on skates. When you apply full rudder in either direction, the plane WILL turn. I think that the way this plane taxis is a good precursor to how the plane flies. It requires a light touch. No more needing to over control everything. I also like how they simulated HIGH IDLE and LOW IDLE. When you're light, like in this flight test, the plane will move just fine on its own with the condition lever in LOW IDLE. When moving it to HIGH IDLE, it picks up speed pretty quickly. If you have your throttle set up to have reverse thrust toggled by a button, and you use your throttle to set the amount of reverse, you can taxi by using BETA to slow down, as opposed to constantly using the brakes (just like in real life).

TRAFFIC PATTERN:
The plane behaves similar to a cross between a Cirrus and a Caravan. It has a ton of aileron authority, especially at low speed. When you add power, you need a TON of right rudder throughout the takeoff roll and climb. I just trimmed the rudder during the climb, and it seemed to maintain coordination as long as the power was static. Leveling off, it required a re-trimming of the rudder. It's surprisingly easy to hand fly, but it can get away from you if you're not paying attention. It's really a positive control aircraft, where as the Caravan or C172 are "set it and forget it." I turned on the autopilot (with no flight plan) just to see if the basic functions worked, which they did. It seemed to behave more realistically in that the autopilot felt dampened. It wouldn't do anything too drastic or sudden. If I put in a V/S of -1000FPM, it would get to the target V/S, but it didn't initiate a dive to achieve that target. That was nice.
Putting out flaps was very satisfying in that you NEED to apply forward pressure on the yoke to prevent you from pitching up. It didn't seem over exaggerated like with other planes, it felt "right."
They simulated ground effect well too. I was doing a short-field landing, and was very slow. The ground effect simulation allowed for a smooth and short landing. The test field was about 5,500' MSL, and the temp was 22 C, so it didn't stop in 350' as it would have if it was at sea level, but it performed very well.

MANEUVERS:
Next up, it was time to try out some maneuvers. I didn't do steep turns, since there's really no point, but do a full stall series, slow flight, and emergency descent.
The first one was a Clean Power On Stall. Holy Cow! That was an intense maneuver. About 5 knots before the stall, you lose all rudder authority. Some people would say that it's too over done. I may agree to an extent, but remember, this is a really powerful engine. For comparison, the C208B Caravan, has about 880 SHP, and carries 1,200 lbs more. That's only about 100 HP more. With the propeller slipstream pushing the tail left, and very little airflow otherwise, you're going to lose rudder authority. I wanted to take it as far as it would go, and ended up getting into a spin! It recovered nicely, but I'll probably do that a little higher from the ground next time 😅.
The next one was a Clean Power Off Stall. It behaved just as you'd expect. It did try to drop a wing again, but pushing the nose over quickly fixed that. It felt good. It felt right.
The Approach to Landing Stall with full flaps went well too. Because the flaps were out, it didn't drop a wing as intensely as it did with the previous two, but if it did, it was quickly fixed with small rudder adjustments. The plane became a falling leaf.

 

ENGINE FAILURE:
Well, why not. I pulled the Emergency Fuel SOV, and set the autopilot to maintain a descent at 85 knots (no idea what best glide is, just used 85 as an arbitrary target). Pulled the prop lever back to feather, and my V/S decreased a bit when the prop stopped moving. Now, in real life, when you try to restart a turboprop in flight, there's a transition from the prop being in feather, to going back to a normal propeller pitch. During this transition, it feels like you hit a wall. You get a speed reduction, and then your speed will increase with a power increase. It did not have this transition. The speed remained constant, and so did the V/S. Not sure how they'd actually simulate this, but it'd be a nice feature if they were able to...though most people probably wouldn't be flying the plane in this way. After all, if a PT6 fails....it's done.

SOUNDS:
Sounds for this plane are spectacular. I wish they had the ignition "click," but that's about it. Stall buffet sounds are modeled, yoke trim sounds are modeled, the engine sounds are fantastic. I am very particular when it comes to sound, and they knocked it out of the park.

IN SUMMARY:
Engine Model 9/10 - I wish they modeled HOT Starts. It's an initial fear that every turboprop operator is aware of.
Aerodynamics 9.5/10 - Maybe a *tad* too yaw sensitive, but otherwise, it really feels really really good.
Sounds 10/10 - Awesome sounds...make sure to turn off Headphone Simulation in your settings to get the full range of sounds.
Taxiing 10/10 - Finally! A plane that feels like it's actually on the ground.

4 minutes ago, V1ROTA7E said:

I figured rather than having folks shuffle between threads, people that own it could post their review thoughts here. If it's too many topics, feel free to delete/merge it.

I bought it, thinking that I wouldn't fly it much. Really didn't have any expectations at all.
 

I think this plane deserves a solid 9/10. A bit of background, I've flown turboprops (King Air) and have a bit of time in them, but never a single engine turboprop. I ended up leaving a company that got Kodiaks right after I left, so never had the opportunity.

TRAFFIC PATTERN:
The plane behaves similar to a cross between a Cirrus and a Caravan. It has a ton of aileron authority, especially at low speed. When you add power, you need a TON of right rudder throughout the takeoff roll and climb. I just trimmed the rudder during the climb, and it seemed to maintain coordination as long as the power was static. 

Here is million dollar question. Does real Kodiak have enough rudder authority in initial climb? Here what happened when I tried take off with 10 degrees of flaps!  Full right rudder deflection airplane still slips. (I did set rudder trim little bit to the right prior take off ) 

Well, your speed is a bit low. Vx is all the way up at 87ish knots.

How is the reverse/beta simulation? I assume it's still default MSFS broken? 

8 minutes ago, V1ROTA7E said:

Well, your speed is a bit low. Vx is all the way up at 87ish knots.

Well, it right after Vr due to slip it's hard to get to Vx even with 450 fps. 172 would get there faster. Mind me to say 400 lbs useful load plus full tanks doesn't seem much

6 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

How is the reverse/beta simulation? I assume it's still default MSFS broken? 

Use old FSX trick F1, F2

23 minutes ago, V1ROTA7E said:

If you have your throttle set up to have reverse thrust toggled by a button, and you use your throttle to set the amount of reverse, you can taxi by using BETA to slow down, as opposed to constantly using the brakes (just like in real life)

NIce review, I just got it and did a short flight and agree with much of what you have said!  Can you elaborate on the above?  I use the Honeycomb Throttle Quadrant and currently have the 'reverse' button set for 'decrease throttle' and it quickly goes into full beta.  Would love to have something like you mentioned where it is more controllable....

8 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

How is the reverse/beta simulation? I assume it's still default MSFS broken? 

It works really well.

1 minute ago, Flic1 said:

NIce review, I just got it and did a short flight and agree with much of what you have said!  Can you elaborate on the above?  I use the Honeycomb Throttle Quadrant and currently have the 'reverse' button set for 'decrease throttle' and it quickly goes into full beta.  Would love to have something like you mentioned where it is more controllable....

The keybind is "HOLD THROTTLE REVERSE THRUST" I have it set to a button so when it's pressed and held, i can use throttle movement to modulate the amount of reverse thrust.

4 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Well, it right after Vr due to slip it's hard to get to Vx even with 450 fps. 172 would get there faster. Mind me to say 400 lbs useful load plus full tanks doesn't seem much

That's weird...I'll try while heavy...but I've had no issues with rudder authority on takeoff. Just did one after I read your comment, and it I still had quite a bit of free rudder real estate.

Just now, V1ROTA7E said:

That's weird...I'll try while heavy...but I've had no issues with rudder authority on takeoff. Just did one after I read your comment, and it I still had quite a bit of free rudder real estate.

I tried several Kodiak variants and different load. So I'm trying to figure out what is wrong or what am I doing wrong. CG seems withing envelope. If I let Kodiak accelerate a bit longer it takes offs much better., but if I bring nose wheel up at Vr  60-65 knots things get a bit squirrely. After cleaning flaps I do get elevator authority back though quickly. So baulked landings and short field take off right now is in question for me!

What are you rotating at? I've been rotating at around 70

1 minute ago, V1ROTA7E said:

What are you rotating at? I've been rotating at around 70

As per POH 60-65kts with flaps

ah ok. Yeah, i've been using flaps 10 and rotating around 70. Looks like flaps 20 at 65 should work.

Just for people going strictly off this review, the taxi physics may leave you a bit muddled if you like to park on slopes uneven ground. Here's a quote on the devs about this:

Quote

Climbing up steep slopes, the aircraft pulls left: This is a limitation of the ground handling model in Microsoft Flight Simulator. Even if the nose wheel is turned, the sim does not consider static friction or its effectiveness correctly until a minimum forward speed has been reached. We considered reducing the P-Factor but, because the Kodiak has a strong pull, that would render the flight model unrealistic in 99% of the runways. Therefore, the only solution to taxi up a steep slope is to begin with a running start.

For a list of all the issues (and there aren't many), you can find them here: https://simworksstudios.com/knowledge-base/kodiak-100/known-issues-kodiak-100.html

It sounds like a well built, solid product. If you have the spare cash on hand give it a whirl!

52 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Here is million dollar question. Does real Kodiak have enough rudder authority in initial climb? Here what happened when I tried take off with 10 degrees of flaps!  Full right rudder deflection airplane still slips. (I did set rudder trim little bit to the right prior take off ) 

I'm not seeing the issue with rudder authority you are. I've got full authority in all tested scenarios so far. I have noticed a problem with the payload calculation where 50% or more payload maybe being represented as 100% plus, resulting in an overloaded plane with no control at takeoff. I tried 25% payload and it is as expected if it were set at 50%!?