T206H Stationair vs Kodiak 100
The Kodiak 100 leads, topping 5 of 7 compared metrics.
Cross-shopping the Cessna / Textron Aviation T206H Stationair (introduced 1998) against the Daher Kodiak Kodiak 100 (introduced 2007) is a common decision, and the two sit closer on paper than the badges suggest. Both are utility, which makes them natural cross-shopping rivals. The clearest separation between them is cabin capacity, where the Kodiak 100 carries more passengers. We line the numbers up below, then translate them into the mission each aircraft actually wins.
6 more specs per aircraft — ceiling, climb, cabin, dimensions and more — are free with an account.
T206H Stationair vs Kodiak 100: the key differences
- The Kodiak 100 delivers 63% more range (T206H Stationair: 693 nm; Kodiak 100: 1,132 nm).
- The Kodiak 100 delivers 18% more cruise speed (T206H Stationair: 155 kt; Kodiak 100: 183 kt).
- The Kodiak 100 delivers 67% more passenger capacity (T206H Stationair: 6 seats; Kodiak 100: 10 seats).
- The Kodiak 100 is the newer design (introduced 2007 versus 1998 for the T206H Stationair), a gap of 9 years that usually shows up in avionics, cabin systems and fuel burn.
- The Kodiak 100 is the larger aircraft by maximum takeoff weight (7,255 lbs versus 3,600 lbs), which typically buys more cabin and payload at the cost of higher trip economics.
Which mission suits which aircraft
The Kodiak 100 is the stronger fit for regional and short-to-medium legs — its 1,132 nm of range removes fuel stops on those legs. The T206H Stationair, at 693 nm, is better matched to short-haul and regional hops, where lower trip cost counts for more than outright reach. If most of your flying sits inside the T206H Stationair's range, the Kodiak 100's extra capability is range you pay to carry but rarely use.
Which should you choose?
On published specifications the Kodiak 100 leads on both range and cabin capacity, so it suits operators who want maximum mission flexibility from a single airframe. The T206H Stationair can still be the smarter buy on acquisition cost, operating economics, runway performance, or current availability — the factors that rarely show up in a spec sheet. Our acquisition advisory team can model both against your actual mission profile before you commit.
More comparisons
T206H Stationair vs Kodiak 100: FAQs
Which has the longer range, the T206H Stationair or the Kodiak 100?
The Kodiak 100 has the longer published range — 1,132 nm versus 693 nm for the T206H Stationair.
Does the T206H Stationair or Kodiak 100 seat more passengers?
The Kodiak 100 carries more passengers at maximum configuration — up to 10 seats, compared with 6 on the T206H Stationair.
Which is faster, the T206H Stationair or the Kodiak 100?
The Kodiak 100 cruises faster, at 183 kt versus 155 kt for the T206H Stationair.
Which is newer, the T206H Stationair or the Kodiak 100?
The Kodiak 100 is the newer design, introduced in 2007 versus 1998 for the T206H Stationair.
Is the T206H Stationair or the Kodiak 100 the larger aircraft?
By maximum takeoff weight the Kodiak 100 is the larger aircraft — 7,255 lbs versus 3,600 lbs for the T206H Stationair.
Should I buy the T206H Stationair or the Kodiak 100?
On published specifications the Kodiak 100 leads on both range and cabin capacity, so it suits operators who want maximum mission flexibility from a single airframe. The T206H Stationair can still be the smarter buy on acquisition cost, operating economics, runway performance, or current availability — the factors that rarely show up in a spec sheet. Our acquisition advisory team can model both against your actual mission profile before you commit.
Still weighing up the T206H Stationair vs Kodiak 100?
Specs only take you so far. Our advisors give an independent recommendation based on your mission, budget and how you actually fly — and represent your side through to purchase.