Challenger 300
$24.0M
Challenger 350
$26.7M
Technical Specification Matrix
Performance Metrics
| Parameter | Challenger 300 | Challenger 350 |
|---|---|---|
| Max Range (NBAA IFR) | 3,100 nm | 3,200 nmWinner |
| Max Cruise Speed | Mach 0.83 | Mach 0.83 |
| Takeoff Distance (SL, ISA, MTOW) | 4,810 ftShort Field | 4,835 ft |
| Max Operating Altitude | 45,000 ft | 45,000 ft |
Cabin Environment
| Max Certified Seating | 10 pax | 10 pax |
| Cabin Width | 7.2 ft | 7.2 ft |
| Cabin Altitude @ FL410 | 7,400 ft | 4,850 ftLower Altitude |
Expert Insights
Range & Capability
The Challenger 300 excels in sheer capability with a 3100nm range, making it preferred for extreme ultra-long-haul city pairs, whereas the Challenger 350 counters with 3200nm.
Cabin Architecture
While the Challenger 300 focuses on its 2-zone configuration (7.2ft wide), the Challenger 350 provides 7.2ft of width, offering a distinctly different volumetric feel for passengers.
Technological Edge
The Bombardier Challenger 300 remains useful to understand because it shaped Bombardier's position i... Both platforms represent the pinnacle of modern fly-by-wire avionics and systems redundancy in the super mid size class.
Operating Economics (Est.)
Variable Costs Per Hour
Economic Note
Estimates based on 450 hours annual utilization. The Challenger 350 shows higher fuel efficiency resulting in lower direct variable costs per hour, while both airframes require similar fixed overheads for crew and hangarage.