Century 41 vs. KAP-150?

[skeptic]

I have noticed that two of the most common autopilots in the aircraft I have been looking at are the KAP/KFC-150 and the Century 41.  Can anyone comment on the relative merits of these two systems?  I have always considered the King to be superior, but perhaps the Century is also a good product.

[N33GG]

When everything works, the Century 41 flies quite well, and so does the King... when everything works. Service expense and keeping these older autopilots working would be my biggest concern. I would opt for the King. If I wanted to know more, I would call Autopilots Central and ask them their opinion on serviceability of these older autopilot systems. Good luck!

[M016576]

I have a C41. It was inop when I bought the aircraft (porpoising, would track off to the left). I had the computer sent to autopilots central, it was fixed, and the autopilot has been working perfectly ever since. Total cost was somewhere between 500-800 dollars. The MSC that I had remove the computer and send it off said I was throwing good money after bad and suggested I install an STEC55... The bill on that would have been $15,000+! I'm very happy with my C41 and have had no further problems in the four years I've owned the plane. I no longer use that MSC, by the way.

[jgarrison]

Just my thoughts.  C-41 and KFC/KAP 200 compare head to head.  I believe one is probably modeled after the other (C-41 designed to compete with K-200).  The KAP-150 is a more modern autopilot than the 200 or the 41.  Probably the better comparision to KAP/KFC-150 is the Century 2000.  You don't see many 2000's, but they are pretty good autopilots. 

 

From a value standpoint, the Century is a smidge less, just because it says Century on the face and not King.  From a function standpoint, I think about identical.

 

Agree on A/P Central in Tulsa.  They can fix just about anything.  As long as you don't need it this month.

[bnicolette]

I have a Century 31 AP and from my understanding the only difference between the 41 and the 31 is that the 41 can drive a flight director.  My AP works great and I have no issues with it.  It will fly the ILS, track a VOR, hold heading, fly a back course, climb, descend, and hold altitude even on bumpy days.

When I first purchased my airplane the AP would not track a VOR or ILS and the previous owner did not know what was wrong with it.  He also said it was the only problem he has ever had with the system and he owned the airplane since 1983.  Five minutes on the phone with Autopilots Central and they diagnosed the problem.  Sent my HSI into them and when we put it back in the AP worked perfect and has been perfect ever since!

I would have no hesitations buying another aircraft with the Century AP system in it.

[skeptic]

Thanks for the good feedback.  I have also seen a few Mooneys with the Century 2000 system.  I would assume this is a newer design than the 41.  Not sure if the 2000 is analog or digital.

[bd32322]

From reading the manuals, the C41 seems to be just as good as the kap. One thing in its favor maybe that its sold new. Is the kap sold new or supported by the manufacturer?

[smccray]

Just my thoughts.  C-41 and KFC/KAP 200 compare head to head.  I believe one is probably modeled after the other (C-41 designed to compete with K-200).  The KAP-150 is a more modern autopilot than the 200 or the 41.  Probably the better comparision to KAP/KFC-150 is the Century 2000.  You don't see many 2000's, but they are pretty good autopilots. 

 

From a value standpoint, the Century is a smidge less, just because it says Century on the face and not King.  From a function standpoint, I think about identical.

 

Agree on A/P Central in Tulsa.  They can fix just about anything.  As long as you don't need it this month.

 

I've only seen Century 2000s in the lean machines from the late 80s that didn't come from the factory with an autopilot.  I'm sure there are a few replacements where the King system was removed and the Century installed, but I don't think the Century 2000 was ever installed by Mooney (not that it matters).

[skeptic]

I have seen a few late 80's M20J's with the Century 2000.  I have no idea if they were factory installs.

 

There is currently a 1989 J for sale on Trade-a-Plane that has a 2000.

[chuck459]

I have no experience with the King autopilots, but there is no comparison between a Century 41/31 and one of the STEC boxes.  The Century autopilots are both rate based and attitude based and will fly the airplane in turbulence far better than the STEC.  I have been very happy with my Century 41.  It has been reliable and the only problem I have had in the past ten years was fixed with a small screw driver on the front control panel.  The Century 41 can be bought new but is intended for larger airplanes.  They are quite expensive (new) and heavier than an STEC but they are excellent autopilots.  The factory in Mineral Wells, TX provides excellent service on this autopilot.  

 

[Bennett]

Over the years I have owned aircraft with King (KAP150, KFC200), STEC (30 and 40), and a TruTrac in my LSA, autopilots, as well as a fair amount of time in Pipers with various Century models, and Cessna's ARC autopilots.  My favorite: the KAP150, even though I am currently having LAC Avionics and Honeywell run down a minor up and down nose bobbing.  Honeywell is supporting the Bendix King/Allied/Honeywell product line.  The best of all is probably the new Garmin autopilots integrated with their 1000.2000.3000 series of glass panels, but that will have to wait until I win the lottery.  I am using an Icarus SAM (as are several Mooney owners on this forum) between the GTN 750 and the KAP150.  The combination is amazing on the intercepts, and changes in headings following flight plans. Very smooth transitions. 

[RocketAviator]

I currently have both, have flow 700+ hrs with the Century 41 in my Saratoga and only 10 hrs with the KAP 150 in my Mooney Rocket.  I have had both sent in for repairs!  I will say the service I received from Century (Matt whom is the service manager at Century) was outstanding.  The 150 is due back Monday from a AP shop in the Midwest my Avionics shop sent it to, we will see how it works out.  When both are working correctly in my opinion both perform very close to the same, I like the panel features and the self test of the Century 41 more than I do the KAP.  Both are more than acquitted autopilots, especially in IMC where  to me they really count.  I have spend a fair amount of time in IMC lately where I fully enjoy the benefits and safety of a correctly functioning autopilot!

 

I hope to pick up my Mooney this next week with the new avionics panel and correctly working autopilot, Ill let you know how it all works out.  

[skeptic]

Thanks for the good comments.  Always nice to hear from those that have owned and/or flown with these systems.

[Carl S]

...

I hope to pick up my Mooney this next week with the new avionics panel and correctly working autopilot, Ill let you know how it all works out.  

 

How did it work out? 

[M016576]

To add to this thread- my "new" missile has a KFC150. After about 250 hours using the C41 vs ~20 using the KFC150, I think the C41 is a better autopilot, despite the lack of a flight director. It flew the plane better on approaches, coupled better in nav mode, and didn't have to hunt as much to figure out wind corrections. With the KFC150- I fly in the approach mode any time I couple to the GPS (so far); it's the only way it tracks as well as the C41 tracked in the nav mode. Could just be my A/P... But I'm about 95% sure it's functioning correctly: just a more "budget" system.

Edit: my C41 didn't have a flight director, but you can get the C41 with one.

[flyboy0681]

I've been having a problem with the 30 year old KAP-150 tracking the VOR and Localizer and sent it to Autopilots Central. After a few days it was returned with a full bill of health (the diagnosis cost was $120). The issue turned out to be the HSI.

 

My point here is that for a 30 year old piece of equipment, it's still functioning up to factory standards, which I think is pretty good. Also, when I spoke to the tech about the results of the bench test, he said parts are still readily available.