I double checked the pressurization limit - it's 6.6, not 6.4. My valve is set at 6.5 although 6.6 is legal. The 1000 has a 6.7 relief valve. The 1000 has about 12% more range (using less fuel!) at any given altitude. The ceiling is the same at FL350, and I was wrong about that -47C limit - it's -57C. (I need to go back to recurrent!) The 1000 limit is -54 C. But no, I haven't been at FL350 yet. For the really LR solo pilot flights, I like a little less cabin altitude.
There are a few other things:
The King Air cabin is definitely quieter and I think the cockpit is quieter. Part of that is running the Raisbeck props at the slowest speed possible - I can gain 4-6 knots by running them at 1800 vs 1600 RPM. Running them slower makes for a much more comfortable long distance flight for only a few minutes of time.
I show both planes using 2100 feet to clear a 50 ft obstacle with an ISA sea level takeoff at gross.
The B200 has better hot & high performance. Seriously, it does. Check the manuals for gross weight takeoffs to clear 50ft at 6000 ft & 30 degrees C. I get about 4,000 ft for the Raisbeck B200 and 4,300 for the 1000. That may not matter to everyone, but that's where I live. It's a small difference, but I gotta claim my victories where I find them.
I have not figured out how to load a B200 out of cg with anything other than lead bricks.
There are B200 mechanics and pilots everywhere.
The B200 is VERY well built. It's a super solid airplane. Nothing breaks.
The B200 seats can easily convert into lie-almost-flat lounges if you have 4 or fewer people. I don't know if the Commander seats will do this, but they should - there's enough space.
The B200 turbulent air penetration speed is higher, and Va is higher. Va isn't as important (it's a direct function of flaps up stall speed, period) but a higher turbulent air penetration speed is nicer. The 1000 has a higher Mmo of 0.60 vs 0.52. The Raisbeck B200 has a significantly lower Vmca (78 vs 95.) Flap and gear speeds are almost identical.
As far as speeds - when I look in the 1000 POH, I see the same speeds that I see in my cockpit. 11,000 lb, FL310, ISA, 98% shows 281 kts for the 1000 - I can get 280 at that altitude at gross. I am burning more fuel, of course. The 1000 seems to be more weight sensitive - the speed comes up faster as fuel is burned.
The Commander baggage compartment wins hands down, period, full stop, no contest. Beech likes to say the baggage is "accessible in flight" - but that's what your carryon is for. Only a few bags are accessible anyway - the top of the pile. Schlepping bags up the steps and throwing it in a big pile behind the net is a pain. Bikes are a pain. Anything awkwardly shaped is a pain. Finding your toolbox is a pain. It's got a 410 lb limit, but I can't figure out how you can fit 410 lb of normal baggage in that space. Did I mention I don't like the baggage setup? There are some aftermarket baggage lockers for $80k.
There just aren't enough 695Bs - weren't there only 8 made? I'd probably trade for one of those, but they never show up.
Looking at the POH, it seems that the 1000 is really overusing the wing at 10,500+ lbs. All performance drops significantly at that weight. One other way to look at it is to say performance really improves as you burn fuel! The B200 is used by the army as the C12 at 14,000 lbs and the same wing is used in the B350 special missions in the 16,000 lbs range. The B200 can lift a LOT more without getting into higher-drag AoAs.
Anyone who wants to convince me that I should be in a Commander 1000 - let's go! I'll trade rides anytime. So far I've only flown a 690B-10, and it was nice but I really want 6.x pressurization and long range tanks.