Hello all I am in a pickle I currently have the plane I do truly love a 1955 Bonanza F35 with E225 I purchased this plane and ferried it 2 1/2hrs home and then ran out of money preparing it for annual ( Airframe is great ) Prop failed the AD Inspection due to corrosion in the Hub but bought a near new HCA 2MV20 4A1 Hartzell Prop for it and a Jasco Alternator and New Slick mags and harness after all this I have had a former friend pass away and his widow has offered me his piper PA24-250 Comanche with a low airframe time of 2900hrs and engine time of only 780hrs I love the fact that the Comanche has the huge fuel capacity for long range flights as my intended purpose is flying from North TX to Southern Louisiana. Ok no with all that said I will open it up to the fine folks on here help me decide what to do. As for the price of the Comanche well lets just say its a steal. Pros and Cons please.

Comanche 250 is a great plane, full fuel a 4 people n go.

I am not an expert but I did look into the Comanche a lot when I was narrowing down my list of potential aircraft a few years back. My IA manages a small fleet of 6 Comanches for a weather mod operation here in Texas so I picked his brain a lot. My father in law also owned one for many years and I talked to him a bit about them. They seem to be great planes, fast, economical, fly good etc. The biggest drawback is getting parts for them from what I am told. Some of the parts are manufactured but some are not produced and you have to hunt them down from salvaged planes. There are also a few significant AD's on them if I remember right. The other thing I did not like is the fuel sump, all fuel comes out of one drain and you have to be in the plane to switch tanks to check everything. Seemed like a hassle... In the end I bought a V-Tail Bo and never looked back (except to waive as I pass other planes, or to acknowledge the ladies that line up on the ramp when I taxi by...)

Some sorta tail AD which is not bad, and also you want to make sure the exhaust mod has been done $$. My hanger neighbor has one and loves it, but he had to do the exhaust mod because the floor by his feet got extremely hot.
All I hear when he gets on the whiskey is how much he loves that damn Piper.

Thank you gentlemen I have talked to several of our local guys including 3 instructors 1 that used to sell used planes and my IA and they all seemed to love the Comanche I like the fuel and the weight issues as the Bo has a narrow CG I know of the Tail AD and the 1000Hr Gear AD which was just completed in 2014 however not with the Exhaust issue. This plane was previously owned by and A&P-IA that passed away in fall of 2014 she needs a little TLC from sitting she is very original even the seat are original and in good shape. I really appreciate your input as I am only rookie at this In the past I was a partner in a 68 Piper arrow 180 and loved it.

Stan I just noticed that you were from Bridgeport not that far from me up here in Vernon.

Parts are not usually a problem. Webco in Newton, KS is a favorite place to Comanche parts and I don't think there is anything they can't get.


Comanches have a history of gear ups. The 1000 hour landing gear AD is important, but failure to select gear down seems to most of the problem.


It is different, but not too much of a hassle. Some folks attach a catch bottle, go inside, sump each tank in turn, then return the catch bottle contents to a tank. It is actually easier and less messy than dealing with traditional sumps.

A major difference is the engine. The Comanche has a Lycoming O-540 which is a very reliable engine with few problems. Having flown that 800 hours and a TSIO-520 in a T210 for 1000 hours, I'd take the Lycoming engine in general.

I flew a 260B Comanche for 800 hours, an honest 165 knots. Very economical nice flying airplane.

Mike C.

Tricky to land well. That stabilator won't fool any of your passengers into thinking you're Chuck Yeager.

Webco was already referenced -- they're the go-to, and very clever people.

I'd take a Lyc 540 over an E225 any day.

I'd take the ergonomics/interior of the Bonanza any day.

Parked next to one another, it's funny how... "big" a Bonanza seems. They seem similar on the inside... except the quasi-claustrophobic windshield "brow"

I hope it has toe brakes.

Thanks Mike for the comments I have read about the narrow AOA window on smooth landings. The Panel is much like to old original Bo Panel but that's one thing I will really miss about my old BO she has a beautiful panel that I absolutely love see below

I wish the Comanche was as nice as my current Bo but weight and distance means a lot to me main reason for plane TX to Houma, LA and to Chattanooga, TN Work and see the Kids. Also I had just Purchased a Very Nice Low time MV prop for the Bo 0 Since Prop shop Service and check (Piece of mind NO AD) still at prop shop haven't even picked it up yet.

Put 1300 hrs on my PA 24-250. Good airplane . Insurance on my $55000 Comanche was $100 less than my $165000 F33A. Tricky to land smooth every time but the small nose wheel stc help. simple systems give it a shot good luck

A buddy has a '58 250 Comanche that he's in the process of resurrecting from the dead. It was in much worse shape than we initially thought, and the engine quit on us right as we were rotating during takeoff on a 3000' strip. Got the issue sorted out and flew straight home where the airplane was shop-bound for nearly six months.

The time that I got to fly in the airplane with him - it was a horse and very, very roomy. Seemed to ride well in choppy winds. I'll end up getting my commercial in the airplane, and may do my instrument ride in it depending on how everything goes.

Lots of mods for the airplane and they have a very active owner's club. I will say that at least 50% of the airports that I have traveled to in the past six months have a derelict Comanche sitting off to the side. Sad, as they are really nice airplanes...coming from a person who is Wichita faithful.

The Comanche is a good airplane. I had a PA39 Twin Comanche for 8-9 yrs. As I recall,
There are a couple of problem areas that are not a problem if attended to correctly.
1. Landing gear inspection AD. It has Part A and B and must be done per the MM. It rarely is. That's why you see gear collapses on Comanches. Not a huge deal to do it right, but, for some reason, people can't seem to read a MM.

2. Stabilator tail AD. Relatively easy one time fix.

Webco, Comanche Gear, etc all support the airplanes and do a good job. FYI, on a lot of the airplanes, the skins were coated with Zinc Chromate on the interior side before they were attached to the stringers. Not much corrosion on those.

Please feel free to correct me if my memory is not exact.

Robert

The Comanche is probably one of the best bang for the buck a/c in its class. They can be bought and maintained very economically and the 250's run at 150-160kts on about 14gph. I have quite a bit of time on one and always enjoyed flying it. Parts availability doesn't appear to be an issue, the have a great owners group and dedicated magazine and loyal following. If you ever decide to step up to twin, it would be an easy transition (both flying and mx) to a Twin Comanche.

They do take some time learning to land as they have a laminar flow wing and stop flying rather abruptly. You simply learn to hold airspeed accurately on final and fly it down to the runway with a very small amount of flare. They land almost identically to an SR22.

I would have considered a Comanche or Twin Comanche several years ago but there are no FIKI options and that was an absolute requirement for me.

nice plane, good cruise speed but they are hard to land smoothly.
gary