I have experience with the King Air 90, 100 and 200 series as far as maintenance time limitations and checks, operating costs.
I was talking with the boss about bringing in an old C model on the certificate and we are not familiar with the airframe time limits and maint or operating costs. Is it a huge difference from King Air's? I know they are air cycle a/c. Service bulletins?
We have 3 414a's running 50 hrs a week each right now. The 4th one I am in the middle of doing the f'in 15000hr wing spar strap and engine beam r&r AD's (guess what? Not cracked, dam 402 operators w shitty maintenance).

Most 1900s under 20k TTAF for sale last less than 9 weeks on the market, per the Textron Demo pilot with whom I spoke.

There is a reason for that...the 1900 is a very versatile airframe, for both cargo and pax operations. Its a widely shared opinion in ICT that 300 1900s could be sold tomorrow, should Textron make that decision (as highly unlikely as it is...)

Maintenance, from my uneducated standpoint will track very closely with the King Air, with the exception of certain 1900 specific parts which are becoming expensive and rare. The last 1900 has likely been built unless someone buys the certificate from Textron like Viking did the DHC aircraft.

Most of the airframes on the market are 40k+ airframes with corresponding cycles. They are worn slick, in the main. Generally reliable, and most have been with airlines with progressive maintenance. With an boutique operator who would be progressively maintaining them nearly daily, they would probably be OK (assuming some massive AD doesn't appear, which could potentially sundown the entire fleet.) Fifty hours isn't a corporate style operation, but it isn't a regional airline, either.

I don't know if any of the above helps. I can ask around. Obviously, if you're already in the PT-6 market, you know the costs of the engine, which will still be the primary cost driver.

no love fore the sewer pipe?