Looking for a twin comanche

[Tim Winters]

Hello, all,

I'm the FNG.

I joined this morning and am shopping for a twin comanche. Please let me know if you know of one.

I'll also be looking for recommendations for comanche familiar A/Ps if/once I get close to purchasing.

I look forward to getting to know the folks here.

[Kristin Winter]

Hi Tim,

Welcome aboard! Twinkies are a wonderful plane. I have a 1969 C model. Have you given any thought to the flavor of Twinkie for which you might be looking? Comanches have all been so customized at this point, that there are hardly any two alike.

[David Pyle]

Tim,

I try to help folks find Comanches. Certainly this is a good place to start and to get answers to your questions. There are always a few ICS member airplanes for sale. I look at TAP and Controller which are the highest traffic for sale Web sites. There are over 60 TCs listed.

It would be good to know your selection criteria, budget and location as well as pilot experience. Everyone will tell you how important a pre buy inspection is, but you can usually cull the good from the not good enough before you get to that.

Dave Pyle dap8@comcast,net
I'm in Houston.

[N3322G]

Hi Tim and welcome,

As the owner of a 1970 PA39, I think you are pursuing the right plane and have come to a great source of information.

I don't know if you saw the December issue of the magazine - it is on this website at http://www.comancheflyer.com/NS/index-flyersN.php - the PDF is a fast way to find what you think you recall seeing in the magazine - in this case, two Twin Comanches are up for sale. I don't know the planes personally but it gives you a start and a bit of a range of what is out there.

Kristin's Twin is featured in this issue and her sense of humor rivals yours - it seems by your photo and 'Miss Dubious'. Check out her photos carefully. Depending upon where the Twin you 'find' is located, several folks do good Comanche pre-buys and Kristin is one of them - so is Matt Kurke.

Again, welcome and I look forward to meeting you and your Twin-to-be.

[ComBE]

Hi and welcome!

I used Kristin services to find a plane and I learned with every email or phone call from her !!

[David Pyle]

Kristin is an expert. Following her guide lines will assure a no fault acquisition. There are 64 TC's at the major listing sites. Their asking prices range from $65K to $150K and prices appear to have stabilized. Good sign. There are three in nearby MO. (They are three of the most expensive.) Pilot experience is important because if you are not twin rated insurance can be a hassle.

Twin Comanches are great airplanes and there are good ones for sale. One in the FLYER is a Miller conversion. Highly prized. Price is $139K.

[Jay]

Hi Tim:

I own a '65 Twinkie. Kristin is right about customization, That means you get lots of choices when you buy a Comanche! Mine for example has the Robertson STOL kit plus turbos and tip tanks. Kristin's Maggie isn't a turbo, but she is de-iced. Pat's (Flagship winner at the last convention) is a PA39 (counter rotated engines) with 10 fuel tanks and a great racing history. If you have any questions on which version might fit your mission, this is the place to ask.

Popular mods include the Roberston, counter rotation for PA30s, Tips, Turbos, Miller twins (like the one Dave refers to) converted from the stock IO-320s with 160 HP a side to IO-360s making 200 HP, new cowlings from Knots 2 U or Lopresti, and various other speed mods. Miller also did nose modifications that give you an extended nose with a baggage compartment in it.

Most have updated avionics, some are WAY updated, I know of three that have Aspen units and GNS-480s and there is at least one flying with a GNS-600.

A good read to start with is the AOPA Air Safety Foundation's "Piper Comanche and Twin Comanche". Covers quite a few safety areas as well as providing a concise primer on key systems.

Good luck in your hunt,

Jay

[Tim Winters]

Thanks, folks, for the responses and advice thus far. A little more detail...

I fly a lot of x/c missions, most are solo (with my dog). I'm looking for an efficient machine. Two I really like are twinkies and RV-7's. Yeah, I know, quite a disparity between them but they're both fast, efficient and great short field performers. I lean towards the twinkie because it would be a better, more stable, IFR platform.

Insurance is not a problem. I already have acceptable quotes. I have no twin time but well over 1000 hours total...all in my 172 and 182.

I'm currently based at a 2800' grass strip but plan to run the bird in and out of the strip I hope to build on my farm this year so a stol conversion would be a plus (as an aside, how does twinkie gear hold up on grass?).

Cosmetics aren't my #1 consideration. Well maintained is #1. Good avionics is #2. Auto pilot #3. TTAF and SMOH #4.

Just about any twinkie would be workable...but sure...a Turbo Miller Conversion with a STOL kit like the Ft. Lauderdale bird would be nice...I might take a serious look at that one.

Budget? Almost all would be within my budget but the right plane (well maintained) at the right price is the key.

[Zach Grant L1011jock]

Tim,
2800' of smooth grass is not a problem for a twinco that is not loaded up to max gross (as long as the ends are relatively clear). The landing gear is stout, and should do just fine on the grass (just stay ahead of things. Check regularly for anything getting loose, and fix it immediately. The rougher the surface the more things are going to wear). The one caution is that if there are many ruts or other mounds etc other than smooth rolling type, the props only have a nominal 11" tip clearance if the struts are all extended at 2.75". Any further extension of the mains or compression of the nose and you loose clearance quickly (keep the big nose tire for sure). This is not a problem, just something to consider. It does sound as if you can benefit from a Robertson modified bird. Everyone calls these STOL kits, but Robertson is quick to point out they are "high lift kits". They do not claim to decrease stall speed, just make it safer to fly closer to the stall, and they do have more drag for a steeper approach with less float, but you still need to be on speed.

The twinco likes to be light. For that reason, I would suggest looking for an earlier model year (63/64) non turbo, and not a Miller. The Miller adds significantly to the empty weight, and although the performance in climb is very nice, it doesn't have the light weight numbers the straight PA-30 has. I have owned an early ('63) PA-30 normally aspirated with tip tanks and no other real mod, flown lots of others, and currently partner in a '67 turbo C/R robertson with alky props, LoPresti Cowls, gap seals, heavy duty brakes,...on and on. The normally aspirated '63 twin was some 400+ pounds lighter empty weight than the '67 (both were weighed, not calculated). It was noticably easier to move around on the ground (though it still liked its power tow), but that lower empty weight translated into some pretty amazing numbers. Solo with almost full tanks (120 gal with the tips) landing and T/O distances were easy in the 1st 800' of one of the local airports runways (only turnoff without backtaxiing before the full length parallel was built). With 5 kts or better of headwind down the runway, only light brakeing was necessary.

I hope this gives you a bit to chew on. PA-30's are great airplanes, but for your mission, I hate to say it, the RV7 might be a better fit. Feel free to PM me with any questions. I am one of the ICS technical advisors, as well as the Comanche Flyer Foundation Director of Training.

Zach

[Kristin Winter]

Last June I went into a private, 2400' dirt strip with Maggie. The airplane probably weighed about 3250 lbs at arrival, with Matt Kurke thinking light thoughts and contributing white knuckles in the right seat. The party was already in full swing, so I had an audience. We were down and stopped in less than 1500 feet, and I didn't really work it.

I learned latter than I had a big audience because I guy who had come in a Cub was running around and telling everyone to watch the twin which would probably not make it. He loudly exclaimed that "He will never make it." My most gallant host pointed out that "he" was a she and that she would probably get it stopped in less distance that the guy managed with the Cub. He was right, though clearly the Cub driver was not in best form.

The Twinkie is a great instrument platform. If you like to go distances and have a good bladder, I recommend tip tanks. I have gone from the SF area to ICT non-stop, and still had 22 gallons on landing. I was burning 11 gph at 16,000 and getting 145kt true.

Zach's point about weight is a good one. However, with the '66 B model, you can pull out the back seats which leaves more space for the dog, if it is a good sized animal. Though for medium and smaller dogs, the back bench seat of the earlier models has merit. I have a standard poodle and he fits on a bench seat just fine.

I would avoid a turbo. You don't need the weight and a normally aspirated twin had more umph on take off.

The gear will hold up anywhere if maintained well. If not maintained well it will not hold up on smooth concrete. A good pre-buy is a must, or you are asking for a $20K first annual, or more.

You have a lot of options for someone qualified to held you evaluate the aircraft on the market and help you get a good plane. Zach is in Indie, there is a good shop up in Rockford, Newton, KS, and Clifton, TX. Matt is in FL, though travels some. I am in Cal, and travel some. If you have questions, you can email me at kristin_winter at comcast dot net.

[N8632Y]

Tim,
To add to the others, the later models have a couple changes, mainly, another window aft, your dog might like, or dislike having a window to look out of.
Also the later models lost the back bench style seat and went without the "wall" SO if you took out the back seats, and I can in my '69, then your dog has alot of room, he can see you easier, just a couple of thoughts.

steve (previous dog owner)

[David Pyle]

Tim

With the good advice here and your criteria what's next? I think Charlie Tripp's may be for sale and as I wrote there are three listed in MO. When you identify those of interest I would suggest you maintain private contact with us for a preliminary valuation. I use NAAA to establish market value but others may have another opinion.

[Jay]

Al Powers (Slimdredger on this forum) is the guy you need to talk to. He has a beautiful counter rotated, normally aspirated Robertson Twinkie that, if I recall correctly, he routinely flies in and out of a 2,500 foot turf strip.

I've had my Robertson in and out of an 1,800 foot paved strip (500 lbs. under gross), and my maintenance base has a 2,400 foot paved strip where I generally make the mid field turnoff on landing. Gas is relatively cheap there, so I usually take off with 120 gallons on board. As one of our European brethren posted once, most Americans are spoiled by 5,000 foot concrete runways.

If you don't have a mission that requires lots of high altitude (as in IFR in the Western US with 10,000 foot and higher MEAs) then an early model normally aspirated Robertson twin might be the ticket.

Jay

[SLIMDREDGER]

[Scott Ducey]