I am looking at upgrading (yes, going from a spam can to a tube/fabric/wood machine can be thus) to a BSV. Had the same questions a lot of folks have about them and wandered through the VikingPilots fora...which led to a local gent (thank you, Mark S) offering to spend both time and fossil fuel to let me experience how the Viking flew.
WOW. It was a day when students weren't flying. We did. What would have been a jolting, uncomfortable ride in a 172 was quite different in a high wing-load, powerful airframe. Almost forgot what it felt like to fly a high-perf ride through the potholes in the sky. Not to mention taking a little over 15 minutes chock to chock to fly 25 miles away for a nice lunch...then hand-flew the full approach back to KPNE via ARD and the GPS transition.
I found, once trimmed, it's rock steady in both pitch and enough aileron authority and feedback to anticipate any roll correction. Coordination with that big rudder was a no-brainer. And, oh, a 149 MPH maneuver speed says a lot about the robustness of the structure. Not to mention cruise was almost 70% faster than my 172K when trimmed and running at 70%. Yikes; that can cut a significant time off my future 39N-KEWB trips.
That the interior of the one I'm looking at reminds me of my grandmother's parlor (crushed velour, etc...only thing missing was flocked wallpaper) for a 1978 ride, there are no tears, rips, stains, etc., and the controls seem logically placed (albeit the cockpit is NOT the most spacious...but then, it's not a cabin-class bird, either).
Yeah, I need to visit Dave Pasquale (drag the books and plane out to him; it was taken care of at Witmer's for most of its life, sold originally from Miller), and investigate further. Is it perfect? Nope. I love the Malibu. Remember when there was an emergency AD that forbade flying in IMC?
172 seat track recurring AD? Titan cylinders? NO plane is perfect.
But this one just might be a reasonable high-performance ride to displace the 172 from my hangar. We'll see.