safetypee, it does (the inet) and I could bringt you umpteen examples of landings I made that were at least very close to these numbers. The internet in turn is a place where I could be anything from being an experienced pilot to an armchair dude...
I will - on your request - narrow it down:
that is bollocks for the types I have flown.
Those were a lot of Cessnas (C500-550-560 in all variants but the Encore+, C525 in all variants nut the CJ3+ & CJ4, C650-III & VIII, C680), Kingairs (mostly B200s) and the Challenger 300….(most of these are not true FAR25s types but the 650, 680 and the 300 are)
These aircraft are remarkably easy to fly, the proof (IF you believe this post/poster) is, that I haven't had an accident - cause I´m an average pilot at best.
There are few overruns to start with in this category, but the ones you find in the news/acc reports have one thing in common: very bad judgement on the pilot side. Recently: Blackbushe / Phenom 300. Putting down half down a short runway with overspeed gets you in trouble. If you don´t understand that, then... None that I have seen was down to mechanical failures etc. One could argue that because of the relative low numbers required, almost every time the airplane has more than even the factored distances available. True. However, I have done hundreds of landings on a runway that has a very limited lenght (LDA 3323ft) and has a bad obstacle situation on top of it. (prevents you put the 50ft point before the THR - in fact you need to follow a 4° PAPI in order not to take out big lorries on the elevated 6 - lane road right in front of the THR 27) None was even close to use significant more than the unfactored distance. Now, I use reverse thrust, but as the reversers are so slow to open on the C680, we hardly get any real effect from it. I landed B200s there CJs, CJ2s CJ3s, the C680 and the Challenger 300.
Of the 1500ish landings our C680 has by now, roughly 450 were made there.