Dream Land I was speaking from my own personal experience regarding the MU-2. True the King Air 200 and the Turbo commander had some pretty serious wing failure problems, however those problem were address by the manufacture and fixed. Nothing can be done to fix the problem of the MU-2 because it is the basic design that is at fault. There is just not enough wing on the airframe; the short airframe is a little better but not much.
I have never flown the Turbo Commander so I cannot remark about that aircraft. I have, however, about 600 hours in the King Air 200, in that time I had only one problem on that airplane, that was the landing gear indicating system.
I cannot really agree with you on comparing the Auto-feathering system of the PT-6 to the NTS of the Garret engines. The King Air 200s I flew did not have the Auto-feathering system installed; remember the Auto-feathering system is/was an option as was the rudder boost. Yes the NTS is supplied by the engine manufacture, however when the PT-6 has a unscheduled shut down the propeller blades aerodynamically start toward the feather position whereas the Garret TPE propellers quickly go to a flat pitch position that will guarantee the loss of control of the aircraft unless the NTS works.
Connie, you might want to look at the Piper Cheyenne IV (the one with the really big engines). I’ve never flown one except on a brief demo flight, but it has a lot of performance and climbs really fast for a turbo-prop. I also believe it also burns around 100 gallons and hour.