Let's talk Comanches

The other thing you might appreciate Bryan is that the high wing loading makes it a nice stable IFR platform, and it handles turbulence very well. Very easy to fly approaches by the numbers. Maintain 80 mph on final, cross the threshold at 70 and she lands like a butterfly with sore feet. 10 kts over and you're in the next county.

This is something often overlooked. The Comanche is a great handling airplane and a great IFR platform. Even without an autopilot it flies like it is on rails. Ours has an old single axis autopilot, but doesn't even need altitude hold really. Its easy to maintain altitude +/- 25 feet without even trying.
 
Like I said, the only thing that comes to my mind is that purely mental block of having a "go places" plane and flying it just for fun.

In an ideal world I'd have a Decathlon to go with the Mooney, but I don't, so I do fly the Mooney for short fun flights often. I don't find having to manage the gear, prop, and cowl flaps to be too onerous when local flying, and the low fuel burn (especially when pulled way back puttering about down low) of the IO360 is nice.
 
The 180 is the sweetest flying and landing of the Comanches. 135-140kts on 10gph. 900-950 useful load.
The 250 is a great climber and will get right up and likes to cruise in the low teens. 155 or so on 13 gph and around 1100-1150 useful.
The 260 is about the same as the 250, but a couple mph faster. Some nice upgrades including fuel injection on most all.
The 260B is same as the 260 but has individual back seats that can be removed and an option for 5th and 6th seats in the baggage compartment, but not useful for more than toddlers. Removing the back seats makes it great for dogs.
The 260C got an updated panel and a different cowling for improved cooling drag. These birds are generally 160kts on the same fuel as the 260's.
The 400 and 260TC are the unicorns and are very niche aircraft.

I have flown them all and worked on most of them. My ride is the Twin Comanche. The deal with the corrosion is that Lock Haven treated all the aluminum sheets and pieces with zinc chromate before they were fastened together to make the airframe. Thus, corrosion is really not a significant issue on Comanches in general. Where you do see it is the steel doodads in the landing gear.

Comanches are a great traveling machine. The ones with 90 gallons of fuel are five to six hours with reserve. The Comanche has a great wing that likes high altitude and the plane gets really efficient up in the teens. Fuel flow drops much faster as a percentage than the speed drops.

Comanches have a great community with regular Zoom seminars, get-togethers, and people always working on solutions to any maintenance problem that might arise. The link that was given to the Airworthy Comanche forum is a good place to start learning and asking questions. Lots of long time owners and mechanics who have been working on them for years are generous about sharing there information. On FB there is the "Piper Comanche" group which is member only, but anyone interested in Comanches is welcome. The Piper Flyer Association has a dozen or so articles on Comanches, many of which I have written. They will nick you about $50, but there is a lot of good reading on their website and the magazine is good too.

On caution, like all complex aircraft, get a good pre-buy log review and inspection. You don't want to be the next one with the dreaded $20K first annual inspection.
 
You may want to consider a Bellanca Viking and/or an older Bo as well as they're the competitors to the Comanche.
 
Seems like a lot of engine for such a low speed.

I feel the same way about my 1/2 ton pickup. ;)
Not planning to trade it for one of those slippery little jelly bean cars any time soon. :D
 
Last edited:
You may want to consider a Bellanca Viking...as well as they're the competitors to the Comanche.

Well, that's another way to deal with the concern about aluminum "corrosion protection" :D

635f2836-4561-4c91-a194-dda6220e9a93.jpg
 
Last edited:
I've only been in a Comanche a handful of times but loved it each time. Very fast, climbs like a beast, and felt very solid. To me it felt like Piper took the Mooney and "tweaked" it a bit to make it just a bit more comfortable through and through
 
Most of my flying is for fun but the Grumman is almost a dedicated fun plane. The option to take the family on a trip ceased mid summer when my 13 year old out grew me.
Comanche "seems" to be a good fun plane but also have the option to do the longer flights more comfortably too.

I'd like to buy the Cirrus from dad but frankly, I can't justify the cost to maintain it.

I feel like the Comanche also has a bit of swagger to it that the other Pipers and Cessnas lack. Its kind of cool and looks like a low rider. It's Gangsta!

You mean a big time YouTube Influencer like you can't swing the SF50? ;)

:D
 
I'd like to buy the Cirrus from dad but frankly, I can't justify the cost to maintain it.

That's why partnerships are nice.

I'm in a partnership with two other guys. I could buy one myself, but I don't fly it that much, plus it makes it much more affordable. One partner makes a big swing in costs, cutting capital and fixed costs in half. Having three makes it a bit lower, after that you start hitting diminishing returns.
 
Not after your satire vids they won't be.
 
I've only been in a Comanche a handful of times but loved it each time. Very fast, climbs like a beast, and felt very solid. To me it felt like Piper took the Mooney and "tweaked" it a bit to make it just a bit more comfortable through and through

They put the tail back on the right direction. :yikes:
 
Dog-**** ugly. And that's coming from someone who flies a Comanche.
My dad took the photo at Grants Pass, Oregon, in 2003. This is from a 2006 for-sale listing:

Unique 4-PLACE EXPERIMENTAL- IFR Amateur-built (1967 Mooney Super-21E fuselage, Beechcraft Musketeer Vertical fin & rudder, Mooney-Aerostar-based wing, Cessna 337 "Skymaster" rear-engine, Beech tip-tanks). Flown over 1200 hours since first licensed in 1983 by the seller. Cruises 180 mph at 10-11 gph, with 94 gallons fuel. Continental IO-360

Comoonchey2.jpg
Not long thereafter it was involved in a fatal crash in eastern Washington State. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/45882
 
Back
Top