PC12?
Personally, IF I was going to make that kind of change I'd go for the PC12.
Having flown one, it's nearly as fast as a TBM and so much more practical. It's also built VERY tough (think in terms of a HS125) and thoroughly enjoyable.
I can see the points about being a single engine and what Aeroncaman says is quite valid. That said however, I believe the last PC12 to ditch floated for 7 hours. They also have a 'turn back' procedure on the course that allows one to return to the airfield of departure in case of EFATO from an amazingly low altitude.
I also note that you can touch down at a VERY low speed (especially when you don't care if you can use the aircraft again) and the engine is mounted well forward and on a kind of space frame..... Not that I'd like to test my theory I imagine a reasonable frontal impact would be survivable.
These sorts of aircraft are often flown over mountainous areas, but I also note that most of these areas contain an abundance of valleys that have roads at the bottom.
If it's foggy on the ground when it happens I'd say you were stuffed, I think it's just a case of deciding what is sensible and what isn't.
One thing I would commend is to look carefully at the options list and make sure any boxes relating to dual systems (gens, hyd pumps etc) are ticked, and a reasonable FMS like a Global GNS or Universal makes uploading the flightplans a lot faster, although they are rare on this type of aircraft.
Jeff