R66 and MD500
Flew both R66 and (another) MD500.
R66 is nice inside, spacious, good view, supposedly idiot proof starting, very quiet (you can truly talk without headsets with the thing running), benign autos (while the rotorhead is still attached!) - one of the few helis I've been in which actually seems to move horizontally rather than plummet almost vertically, albeit while light. It's pretty good at quite a lot.
But, while opinion may be divided as to whether it is a supreme piece of engineering to achieve remarkable strength with half the amount of aluminium or it's clearly missing vital strength, it does subjectively feel a bit light and flimsy. Also, I think I'm becoming shallower than I thought I was - it just doesn't look that cool! It has distinctive looks of the R44 which sort of says it's not quite the real deal. A 206 is a proper heli and an MD500 is impressive. Also, cruising at 120kts is only 10kts off Vne and other limits seem near, even if apparently they are conservative limits - if you're going through something gusty at 120kts and drop something it seems like there's a risk that with an accidental nudge of the T bar (will probably get used to it but it doesn't feel that natural) and if the rotorhead doesn't detach, you'll bust Vne. The start feature is nice but I trust myself to pay attention for a full 30 seconds and remember the complex process of not taking my finger off the starter and frankly I wouldn't want to lend my toy to anyone whom I suspected might find that a challenge!
MD500 is just great to fly. It does descend somewhat sharply in auto but it can indeed fit a 5th seat with a shoulder strap in (and I'm only planning to fill seats with kids or slim women so don't care if it's a bit cozy, need number of seats not space in them).
No doubt a 206 would be better for carting kit or people who might complain around in but I can travel light, (and if people start to grumble about space, I'm sure exploring the flight envelope limitations will take their mind off that).
Weather and a diversion meant I haven't yet seen the 480 but will look seriously at one.
Re TET's analysis, I think the picture is different if you factor those against and the strength of feeling rather than simply counting votes in favour. No-one really says a 206 is a bad thing, nor an MD500, just one is a bit slow and boring and the other is not designed primarily for passenger space/comfort, both valid but not damning.
Re accidents, the R66 incidents are somewhat concerning, even if one blames the unfortunate pilots, it's only fair to assume they had some time in helis and probably weren't trying to detach the rotorhead and probably wouldn't have succeeded in doing so in another type. The EN480 has low numbers and hours flown so you wouldn't expect much in the way of accidents but I think everyone would agree there is nothing to suggest a safety concern. However the passionate views on maintenance can't be ignored and it isn't that quick or that pretty or that spacious. Interestingly I looked up accidents in the MD500 and, leaving out what I would consider silly pilot error (like hitting something) in a few decades it seems to have suffered little in the way of mechanical problems, but there were a fair few stuffed up autos (pilot error perhaps, but suggests it may be easier to cock up an auto in one than in some others, a concern to me) although at least the pilots tended to kill the aircraft rather than themselves in the process. Just something to bear in mind, I guess practise should mean at the end of each trip you can calmly start the cool-down timer at 2000ft and have the chart neatly folded by the time you put it gently on the pad!