Comanche 180 vs Mooney C Model

Jaybird180

Jaybird180

Final Approach
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
9,036
Location
Near DC
Display Name
Display name:
Jaybird180
Don't know much about Pipers, but the basic specs are about the same. Purchase price is around the same and seems like operating costs would be similar.

Does it come down to preference or are there factors that would send someone in one way or the other?
 
Your MX will be much happier with the Piper. Mine will work on them, but he curses them all the time.
 
Are backseaters a factor?
 
Interesting question that I won't be able to answer, but typically aren't the available Comanches a little older?
 
The Mooney will be significantly faster. I have also found maintenance to be very inexpensive on my C. Everything is mechanical, simple systems, very little to go wrong. In 250 hours of flying in the last 9 months I've had zero maintenance down time and it's only actually had to visit the A&P twice for an AD inspection.
 
Last edited:
The operating costs will be comparable. The Mooney might be a bit easier when it comes to parts. The Piper will have a bit more room. The Mooney will be a bit faster. My suggestion is to fly them both and then make your decision. Honestly, it would be hard to go too far wrong - assuming both airplanes have been properly maintained. Engine times and avionics will play a big factor in your decision. If one or the other has a significanly lower time engine and/or significantly better avionics your decision will probably be made for you. Look for one that has the traditional 6-pack panel mod. Personally, I'm a Mooney fan and I've got a lot of time in C models. They're great airplanes, but there's nothing wrong with Comanches.
 
Last edited:
Biggest benefit to the Comanche is it was alodined inside and out at the factory prior to assembly. Airframe corrosion really isn't a factor. Not sure the Mooney can say the same.
 
Both seem like good airplanes,

Are you guys sure Mooney parts and maintenance is cheaper than Pipers? There is a warehouse here in Florida and I hear that it's fairly cheap to get replacement parts depending on what it is.

I tend to worry about engine outs on the really older Mooney's/Pipers
 
Mooney still manufactures parts in their texas facility. There have been times when parts were hard to come by, but right now, and for the foreseeable future parts availability seems to be a non-issue.
 
I grew up with Mooneys. They were worked on by many many mechanics and although they are tightly cowled , they are not a big problem.....if the mechanic is well versed on them. If he isn't then you don't want him screwing with it anyway! I'd fly them both then decide. Personally id try to find a super 21, or a later 201. You have to decide yourself. All of them are getting old so you must proceed with caution.
 
FloridaPilot said:
I tend to worry about engine outs on the really older Mooney's/Pipers
Click to expand...

In what context?

Most have been overhauled several times and thus have younger engines/parts. However, anything can fail at anytime. You're kidding yourself if you believe anything is bulletproof and thus need to be trained and prepared to handle the situation if the fan out front decides to quit.

The glide ratio on a Mooney is very good, can't speak to the Comanche as I've never flown one.

Cheers,
Brian
 
If you're already wedded to the idea of a mooney then don't sit in a comanche. There won't be any going back to brand M
 
Two small to medium pax and bags? Mooney C model.

Three medium pax, or two big pax and a few more bags? Comanche 180.

<edit: (note I did not use the "B" word! :D )>
 
JHW said:
If you're already wedded to the idea of a mooney then don't sit in a comanche. There won't be any going back to brand M
Click to expand...

Between the Mooneys, Comanches, and Bo's, which has the best outward visibility? I've never flown a Mooney, but in my brief time in a Bo and a Comanche, I thought the glareshield in the Bo I flew was very high and thought the windows were undersized in the Comanche.
 
15 post to get to a bonanza. I think you guys are slipping.

Someone should've suggested he buy a bonanza in the first three posts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
kyleb said:
Between the Mooneys, Comanches, and Bo's, which has the best outward visibility? I've never flown a Mooney, but in my brief time in a Bo and a Comanche, I thought the glareshield in the Bo I flew was very high and thought the windows were undersized in the Comanche.
Click to expand...
Of those, Bo has the best visibility, hands down. Windows are huge and wrap up into the roof more than the others.

When we were thinking of moving up from our Grumman Cheetah to a retractable, we tried both Comanches and Bonanzas (we had already had a lot of experience in rented Mooneys). The Comanche cabin was more spacious, but the windows were tank slits by comparison, and made the cabin seem dark. We were spoiled by the Cheetah's big windows, and thus the Bonanza won out.
 
kyleb said:
Between the Mooneys, Comanches, and Bo's, which has the best outward visibility? I've never flown a Mooney, but in my brief time in a Bo and a Comanche, I thought the glareshield in the Bo I flew was very high and thought the windows were undersized in the Comanche.
Click to expand...
for front seaters, if the comanche has been retrofitted with a 1-piece windshield that curves over the top, it's pretty much a wash. For back seaters the bo is significantly better both for windows and for footroom. The comanche is wide, it's wider than any of the other choices except the lance/saratoga.

versus any of these, the mooneys feel small and have a sensation of staring out the end of a tunnel. At least that's how they feel to me
 
JHW said:
If you're already wedded to the idea of a mooney then don't sit in a comanche. There won't be any going back to brand M
Click to expand...

Yeah it was the opposite for me. I'm oversized at 5'10" and 240. I flew a Comanche many hours before ever flying a Mooney. I now own an M20C and can't see myself ever going back to a Comanche. The Mooney fits like a vintage sports car. And the cheap speed is addicting. With 1015lbs useful, I've carried three full size adults. Those in the back seat probably weren't as comfortable as I am in the front left, but then again, they were riding for free.

Just my $0.02
 
With that class of plane, I've always thought the PA24 is the best bang for the buck. Comfy, simple, nice handling, speedy, not shabby looking ether.
 
Last edited:
Forward visibility in the Mooney depends a bit on the model. I feel like I've got great visibility in my C model. As they get newer the panel gets higher though. I have a hard time seeing over the panel in my friends S model.

I haven't flown a comanche or bo to compare though.
 
The Comanche is more space wise like an M20F (long body), but slower since it has the 180 HP engine instead of the 200. The M20C is smaller than the Comanche.

My instructor had a '62 Comanche 180 that his father had bought brand new. Personally, I think the Comanche is a better plane, but I would buy a 250 or 260. The 180 is underpowered to me. The benefit of a Comanche 250 over an M20F is it's faster and the parallel valve engine is cheaper to own and more reliable.

Either way, having flown both, I'd go Comanche.
 
I don't know if the comanche offered a manual or automatic gear setup. The manual gear on the mooney is pretty inexpensive to maintain. The automatic gear has a few expensive parts that can go bad, but I don't think it's any worse than any other model.

I've never sat in a comanche but from the outside, the front windshield appears to be much wider at the top. I would assume the interior would feel more spacious, especially around the head. From that I would guess the mooney is probaby a few knots faster whereas the comanche may feel a little larger.
 
rbridges said:
I don't know if the comanche offered a manual or automatic gear setup. The manual gear on the mooney is pretty inexpensive to maintain. The automatic gear has a few expensive parts that can go bad, but I don't think it's any worse than any other model.

I've never sat in a comanche but from the outside, the front windshield appears to be much wider at the top. I would assume the interior would feel more spacious, especially around the head. From that I would guess the mooney is probaby a few knots faster whereas the comanche may feel a little larger.
Click to expand...

That's why I say operating costs are similar, they both have Johnson gear handles.
 
Jaybird180 said:
That's why I say operating costs are similar, they both have Johnson gear handles.
Click to expand...

No, they don't. Comanches have an electric motor and transmission that pushes down and pulls up the gear assisted by bungees. The early Comanches had Johnson bar flaps, but the gear has always been electric.

Very solid system, but there is a 1000hr ad that can be expensive if the bird hasn't been properly maintained.

Jaybird, if you want a close look at a 250, and maybe get some right seat time, shoot me a pm. I'm up at DMW.
 
Last edited:
Chip Sylverne said:
No, they don't. Comanches have an electric motor and transmission that pushes down and pulls up the gear assisted by bungees. The early Comanches had Johnson bar flaps, but the gear has always been electric.

Very solid system, but there is a 1000hr ad that can be expensive if the bird hasn't been properly maintained.

Jaybird, if you want a close look at a 250, and maybe get some right seat time, shoot me a pm. I'm up at DMW.
Click to expand...

If I'm up in the area, I'll give you a buzz. Thanks for the gouge on the Comanche gear.
 
also don't fall for the idea that the mooney manual gear is perfect. The only way to get the gear down is with that big bar and there have been cases of it breaking off in your hand. There is no perfect retractable gear, only different flavors of issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top