Before I purchased my Comanche i looked at a Mooney. It is a very different airplane. I guess the overwhelming issue that I had was the cockpit was small in the Mooney. Very small even by Cessna 172 standards. In order to sit with another person in the front the co-pilot had to put their arm around me. When I was trading up from a Piper Archer, i wanted to carry more and go faster. Not 5 knots faster, materially faster. When you look around at different rides, there are not many airplanes that do both. The Comanche has a great useful load AND goes faster.
there is not much that I can say that is bad about the airplane. the common remark is that it is a difficult airplane to land. when you compare this airplane to a Cessna 172, yes it is a more challenging airplane to land. Bottom line, nail your speeds, and your landing will be fine.
I wrote an article for the Flyer titled "Why A Comanche"? I have it posted on my blog at
www.twincomanche.blogspot.com.
I really think the Comanche shines on long cross countries. It is such a stable platform, handles the bumps well, and it is roomy. Great speeds and great economy. I have taken my plane from NJ to Oshkosh, Florida, Michigan - I love the airplane. Wouldn't trade it for anything else.
Oh, one last thing - chicks dig Comanches.
Scott Ducey