Which one gives me best bang for the buck, and is more realistic - and how much “after” are the other aircraft in comparisation? Dont wanna get an aircraft which I regret (which I acutally did with the Staggerwing). Or are there other realistic and fun planes with “feeling” that you can recommend. Ive got the Piper pac, the M20 Mooney, The Hawk, that front and rear prop Cessna (cant remember its name). Most of them ar like “naaaa”, feels like some use of general aerodynamics etc… I want to come as close as feeling Im in one of them for real (well as good as it gets in a sim).
3 Likes
The C310R its great, looks great, fly nice, checklist and systems of aircraft its very good simulated.
Take the Cessna 310 and be happy.
2 Likes
Go for the MilViv 310 from what I’ve seen its the most realistic GA in the Sim right now… However if your looking for a good twin, check out FlySimWhere’s C414aw, yes its a work in progress but every update makes it even better… And it has a pressurized cabin (unlike the 310)… 
3 Likes
The C310R adds a lot to the experience with the ownership/rental and the repairs. It takes some practice to land properly. If you remove power as you flare, it drops like a rock. More challenging for me. The 414 is also very nice, and I flew it frequently until the 310 released, but not much since.
2 Likes
I definitely fly the 310 more, but I’d be silly to not say the Kodiak isn’t also amazing. The 310 just set a new bar that even MilViz said they’ll likely not reach with most of their other addons. In that way, one of a kind in being the only A2A or near-A2A level aircraft out there, which makes it a must-buy for me if you like GA aircraft.
Not at all knocking SWS though. Prior to the 310, the Kodiak was in my view the premier aircraft for MSFS. In the turboprop (or even single engine) category, I’d say that’s still true for me.
1 Like
Seriously, I say get both. You’ll regret neither. Probably the 2 best GA planes currently available as far as I’m concerned. C310 is the best piston, Kodiak is the best single engine turboprop (by a long shot).
The C414AW is nice too, but too “beta” atm as far as I’m concerned. Nice plane, fun to fly, etc, but in constant flux from version to version. What you may love about it today may not be there tomorrow. I like it, but I’ve parked it for the time being until they get it closer to complete.
3 Likes
I have both and they serve different purposes. If I want to fly into a tight bush trip I will go with the Kodiak .Casual GA flying the C310 is my go too aircraft!
2 Likes
Is the Kodiak even any better than the Milviz PC-6 in terms of modelling fidelity (or e.g. the JF Pipers)? Or do people like the Kodiak more simply due to it’s greater speed, lesser fuglyness and lesser divebomberness? Honest question, I wouldn’t know since I don’t buy yoke aircraft.
The Kodiak 100 good things:
- has a customizable interior and can be used as a cargo plane
- has animated cargo inside
Kodiak 100 bad things:
- the G1000 is not realistic and missing some features and realistic labelling
Milviz C310 good things:
- has a very interesting cabin comfort meter on the electronic flight bag to enhance the immersion if the cabin is heated well and stuff like that
- has interesting and authentic engine failures
- all circuit breakers are animated and functional (you have the complete fuse box on your hand!)
Milviz C310 bad things:
- the interior is ugly. It is hard getting used to these absolute ugly seats and potato-bag material covering on the side panels. No Cessna 310 interior looks like the simulated one. By the way I found these two-tone seats I made for my cabin overhaul but in real-life they have headrests:
CESSNA 310R Seats – 1977 | AirplaneInteriors.Aero
Cessna 414 Chancellor good things:
- The most beautyful interior. The Carenado Seneca and the Cessna Chancellor have the most beautyful cozy and good-looking interiors.
- the turbocharger and some parts of the exhaust are glowing. This feature is so cool and so awesome and uniqué and new that I miss in in every other airplane!
Cessna 414 Chancellor bad things:
- there is an ugly fake-mirror textures in the read bulkhead… A mod must be used to get rid of it.
3 Likes
Curious on what it is missing / labelling issues?
On Youtube are some bushpilot videos, and the G1000 looks different than the real one. The engine, oil, torque and more labelings are not present in the Kodiak G1000. But the Kodiak is currently not installed that´s why I cannot make comparison screenshots right now.
Kodiak 100 
Do you have a link to the video? Curious as to what it shows versus what I see.
I have the Working Title G1000nxi installed so curious.
1 Like
Here are his videos, in almost all videos you will see close-ups of the G1000 main and navigation screen
But maybe some problems are already patched - I don´t know I haven´t flown the Kodiak for half a year or so and it is currently not installed.
Not to troll your thread but if you can only go with one atm the C-310 is the best GA plane atm. Kodiak is still a lot of fun
1 Like
Ah yes, familiar with his channel. Just looked and he’s the G1000 displays that information. Make sure you Jane the latest working title mod installed.
I have both, but I’m already back to TBM again as usual.
2 Likes
It has to be both.
If you do however want to choose I’d put it like this. The 310 is a sports coupe, the kodiac is a utility truck, say like an F150.
If you do more bush flying or like Short take off and landings etc and want thindra wheels for dirt strips and bumpy runways you are better off with the Kodiak.
If you want a nice flight into say KVNY from a similar airport then the 310 is the way to go.
The Kodiak is more versatile IMHO but then as I said it comes down to a sports coupe or a utility truck.
2 Likes
