310R VS C-414 Advice Needed!

[ryanbatc 12,851]

10 minutes ago, sniper31 said:

Are you implying that it might, maybe, happen in the future?   😉

I couldn't possibly imply

[sniper31 638]

Just now, ryanbatc said:

I couldn't possibly imply

Gotcha...just wishful thinking on my part 🙂 

[ryanbatc 12,851]

1 minute ago, sniper31 said:

Gotcha...just wishful thinking on my part 🙂 

FSW does have a discord channel if you're interested.  I believe they are working on some sort of systems updates - I know for a fact they are working on adding 3d passengers to the plane.

https://discord.gg/6thdHk3M

[JYW 2,980]

On 5/22/2022 at 10:35 PM, Bert Pieke said:

In all fairness, they modeled an existing plane, same panel, same avionics.. what should they have done? 😉

Hi Bert,

This evening I watched 5+ vids on YouTube, all of C310Rs.  Every one had a different panel in some regard or another.  Funnily enough, none of them had the KAP140 autopilot that's been in the Milviz C310 iterations since 2010!  Some had G5s fitted. Some had EFD1000s.  you get the idea.  I mean that's what STCs and certification is about - variation and upgrades.   Sorry I'm not buying it that the 2022 Milviz C310R has to have an identical panel and avionics (save for GTN750 options) as their earliest iteration.

You're a panel avionics expert in this hobby; you should appreciate that! 😁 (just tongue in cheek).

[RobJC 2,069]

Sounds like two great options. Too many options in MSFS land atm! 

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

6 minutes ago, JYW said:

Hi Bert,

This evening I watched 5+ vids on YouTube, all of C310Rs.  Every one had a different panel in some regard or another.  Funnily enough, none of them had the KAP140 autopilot that's been in the Milviz C310 iterations since 2010!  Some had G5s fitted. Some had EFD1000s.  you get the idea.  I mean that's what STCs and certification is about - variation and upgrades.   Sorry I'm not buying it that the 2022 Milviz C310R has to have an identical panel and avionics (save for GTN750 options) as their earliest iteration.

You're a panel avionics expert in this hobby; you should appreciate that! 😁 (just tongue in cheek).

I have no trouble with a newer autopilot, if it works correctly.. If their actual C310 has a KAP140 in the panel, I would not expect them to offer a different autopilot in MSFS though..

[CaptainNick 575]

Both are fine planes. Kudos to us having several good choices for GA piston twins now.

Graphics: the recent update to the 414 made a big difference here. Prior I though the cockpit was better on the 414, external on the 310. Now I’d say they are close on the external and the 414 is still superior in the cockpit.

Flight model: Both are convincing. 414 is heavier and more stable, 310 is a bit twitchy in some aspects but not having any seat time in either I can only judge by my assumptions from other planes. They both feel like I would “expect them to”. Draw here.

Systems: 310 has more depth with the persistence options. 
 

I still prefer the 414. You can’t go wrong with either but as others have mentioned I love that 70’s/80’s feel of the cockpit. I prefer the shape of the 414 to the 310 and I fly it exclusively on FSE. Perfect for the 200 mile + sectors as it allows it to climb into the flight levels and do what it was meant for. If I was doing multiple 100 mile low and slow hops the 310 would possibly be a better fit.

You can’t make a bad purchase with either.

and as others have said, get the TDS 750xi. 

[Sky_Pilot071 580]

Can't speak to the 310 but my flights used to be 500 miles withe the Carenado Seneca at FL 180 and now with the 414 about 1000 miles at FL 280.  Using the PNS 50 GTN 750.

sp

[jfri 42]

On 5/22/2022 at 10:28 PM, JYW said:

Milviz need to get some new gauges and a new AP into the C310 for MSFS, to differentiate it better from their previous C310 offerings.

It's a close on but the C414 wins it for me overall.  Better cockpit texturing, more interesting avionics, stunning sounds, and just a little more ambience overall.

I have the C310 and my impression is that it offer deeper simulation than what we we are used to with other payware planes.

After reading this thread I have started to consider getting also the C414. What I have noticed is
Many consider it slightly better then the C310 and that is while it is still a beta version.
They state a price which is said to be introductory so the price will rise later ?
Under features they list three panel options. From that I get the impression that this plane does not have an no GPS option. Is that so or have I misunderstood something ?

[ark 1,290]

18 minutes ago, jfri said:

I have the C310 and my impression is that it offer deeper simulation than what we we are used to with other payware planes.

After reading this thread I have started to consider getting also the C414. What I have noticed is
Many consider it slightly better then the C310 and that is while it is still a beta version.
They state a price which is said to be introductory so the price will rise later ?
Under features they list three panel options. From that I get the impression that this plane does not have an no GPS option. Is that so or have I misunderstood something ?

My understanding is that because of the great response to the C414 Beta, which surprised FSW, there likely will not be a future price increase. But that is certainly not my call.

The three versions of the C414 currently are:

1. A panel with an Asobo GNS 530 and a Navomatic AP. This is the AP that was in the original panel of the real C414AW before the panel was updated to "glass".

2. A panel with dual PMS50 GTN750s and a Garmin 605 AP

3. A panel with dual TDS GTNxi 750s and a Garmin 605 AP

Al

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by ark

[taguilo 33]

2 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

I have no trouble with a newer autopilot, if it works correctly.. If their actual C310 has a KAP140 in the panel, I would not expect them to offer a different autopilot in MSFS though..

Actually the C310 Redux for P3D includes a realistic KAP140 version (with CWS). The MSFS one includes MSFS version, which is not realistic but performs good enough if properly managed. 

[The Flight Level 2,113]

9 hours ago, Ixoye said:

I have the 310 but I have lost interest of it as it so boring to land, you have to fly it down at high speed, otherwise it will fall like a brick.

It is pretty much spot on in terms of realism for landings, but ya uneventful with a proper approach speed. Currently working on an engine failure video with emergency procedures! Try it. It is not boring to land with an engine out! Flight dynamics are very good compared to the aircraft’s real behaviour.

[jfri 42]

10 hours ago, ark said:

My understanding is that because of the great response to the C414 Beta, which surprised FSW, there likely will not be a future price increase. But that is certainly not my call.

The three versions of the C414 currently are:

1. A panel with an Asobo GNS 530 and a Navomatic AP. This is the AP that was in the original panel of the real C414AW before the panel was updated to "glass".

2. A panel with dual PMS50 GTN750s and a Garmin 605 AP

3. A panel with dual TDS GTNxi 750s and a Garmin 605 AP

Al

 

I have looked at the manual and a couple of things caught my attention

1) The panel has a weather radar but that is not functional. How realistic is that ? Is there hope that it might be implemented later ?

2) The trim buttons on the yoke is not functional. Really not realistic. How do we control trim on this plane ?

[BufordTX 50]

Love the 414, but hate that you can’t adjust mixture (game issue) and when I pull back props, at constant MP, there’s no change in fuel flow.  Completely wrong.  if I set 20” MP, and back down the props from 2500 to 2000, fuel flow (and power) should drop 20%.  It doesn’t.
I have both and fly the 310 more…it is same quality/detail as the JF pipers.  414 has a long way to go. 

I know it’s Asobo fault somehow, but the JF turbo arrow engine works properly.  Maybe magic?

i also prefer switching panels via tablet, not livery. 

Edited May 24, 2022 by BufordTX

[Nickbe 401]

If I'm not mistaken, quite recently there was a similar topic on the forum - 310 vs 414.

Those of us who fly real planes in real life then said - you don't have to choose one, you have to take both.

And I completely agree with them.

But even though I have both of these planes, I still takeoff on the C414 much more often. It perfectly immerses in the atmosphere of the 70s, even with modern GTN 750 displays.

I vote for both models, but if only one is needed, then 414!