Interactive comparison

Compare ownership, not brochures

Purchase price is only one part of the decision. Figures are indicative estimates at the typical market year for each model.

Decision factor	Beechcraft King Air C90View aircraft profile	Beechcraft King Air E90View aircraft profile	Beechcraft King Air A100View aircraft profile
Typical market year	1976	1976	1976
Estimated purchase	€629k	€751k	€611k
Annual cash cost at 80 h	€496k	€504k	€512k
Five-year cash outlay	€3.11m	€3.27m	€3.17m
Cruise speed	216 kt	234 kt	240 kt
Advertised range	819 nm	711 nm	863 nm
Seats	6	6	7
Realistic payload	450 kg	450 kg	540 kg
Runway need	900 m	900 m	1000 m
Data confidence	Preliminary — verify source data before deciding	Preliminary — verify source data before deciding	Preliminary — verify source data before deciding
Main trade-off	The King Air C90 combines 6-seat turboprop capability with about 819 NM reported range and about 216 kt reported cruise, while payload, runway and operating-cost figures remain indicative and should be verified for the specific aircraft before making a decision.	The King Air E90 combines 6-seat turboprop capability with about 711 NM reported range and about 234 kt reported cruise, while payload, runway and operating-cost figures remain indicative and should be verified for the specific aircraft before making a decision.	The King Air A100 combines 7-seat turboprop capability with about 863 NM reported range and about 240 kt reported cruise, while payload, runway and operating-cost figures remain indicative and should be verified for the specific aircraft before making a decision.

Popular head-to-head guides

Start with the decision pilots are actually researching

Each guide adds mission context and links back into the live comparison and Finder.

Two premium piston singles with very different answers to speed, fuel, cabin design and ownership complexity.

A fast, refined travelling aircraft against a slower utility platform built around payload and access.

Two leading single-engine turboprops that optimise for different combinations of speed, cabin volume and payload.

Modern diesel efficiency and composite design compared with a conventional turbocharged piston twin.

A modern Jet A trainer and tourer compared with the most familiar four-seat training platform.

No generic winner