WTB: Twin Comanche

[timwinters]

I'm sniffing around at twinkies. Let me know if you know of a good one out there for sale.

I'll also be looking for a good twinkie A&P for a pre-buy if I get close to buying.

 

[wabower]

Somehow that just don't sound right, if you know what I mean.

I'll also be looking for a good twinkie A&P for a pre-buy if I get close to buying.

 

[timwinters]

Somehow that just don't sound right, if you know what I mean.

And here I thought for sure my original statement would be the joke getter...

I'm sniffing around at twinkies.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I'm sniffing around at twinkies. Let me know if you know of a good one out there for sale.

Tim,

Any particular things you're looking for? What's your budget?

I guess on the "any particular things" I mean not only things that you'd like to see installed in the panel already (whether it's generic like "IFR GPS" or specific like "Garmin 430W"), but also if there are any particular models or mods that you're interested in, since many of them are no longer available.

For example:
1) What model of Twinkie? The "A" models ('64-'66) have only two side windows. The "B" models ('67-'68) add a third side window. The "C" model has a more modern switch style and moves the engine switches to the left wall of the airplane from the bottom of the panel. The PA-39 AKA "C-R" ('70-'72) changes to counter-rotating engines.

2) Do you want tip tanks? Oxygen? Turbos?

3) Are you looking for any or all of the Miller mods? (200hp engines+dorsal fin/wet wing aux tanks/long nose+baggage/long nacelles+baggage)

4) Do you want the Robertson STOL kit? (Adds a larger dorsal than the Miller engine mod, reduces Vmc to 75mph and Vyse to 95mph, adds stall fences and changes ailerons to flaperons)

Out of all the above things, what you get is what you get - None of it can be changed/retrofitted any longer except the counter-rotating right engine.

5) Additional airframe mods you could add later if you wanted: Knots2U speed mods (gear lobes, gap seals, wing root fairings and fillets, etc.), speed brakes, one-piece windscreen, etc.

I've been watching the Twinkie market for a long time... Narrow it down a little more, and I'd love to help you shop. But I want a ride.

I'll also be looking for a good twinkie A&P for a pre-buy if I get close to buying.

I would ask on the Delphi Comanche forum, but if you can get Bob Weber of Webco Aircraft in Newton, KS, I think he's probably one of the best-respected Comanche specialists anywhere in the country.

 

[wabower]

Wow. Hell of list. The only two questions I could think of are Why? and What Color?

Tim,

Any particular things you're looking for? What's your budget?

I guess on the "any particular things" I mean not only things that you'd like to see installed in the panel already (whether it's generic like "IFR GPS" or specific like "Garmin 430W"), but also if there are any particular models or mods that you're interested in, since many of them are no longer available.

For example:
1) What model of Twinkie? The "A" models ('64-'66) have only two side windows. The "B" models ('67-'68) add a third side window. The "C" model has a more modern switch style and moves the engine switches to the left wall of the airplane from the bottom of the panel. The PA-39 AKA "C-R" ('70-'72) changes to counter-rotating engines.

2) Do you want tip tanks? Oxygen? Turbos?

3) Are you looking for any or all of the Miller mods? (200hp engines+dorsal fin/wet wing aux tanks/long nose+baggage/long nacelles+baggage)

4) Do you want the Robertson STOL kit? (Adds a larger dorsal than the Miller engine mod, reduces Vmc to 75mph and Vyse to 95mph, adds stall fences and changes ailerons to flaperons)

Out of all the above things, what you get is what you get - None of it can be changed/retrofitted any longer except the counter-rotating right engine.

5) Additional airframe mods you could add later if you wanted: Knots2U speed mods (gear lobes, gap seals, wing root fairings and fillets, etc.), speed brakes, one-piece windscreen, etc.

I've been watching the Twinkie market for a long time... Narrow it down a little more, and I'd love to help you shop. But I want a ride.



I would ask on the Delphi Comanche forum, but if you can get Bob Weber of Webco Aircraft in Newton, KS, I think he's probably one of the best-respected Comanche specialists anywhere in the country.

 

[timwinters]

Kent,

I'm looking for a second bird. I fly a lot of solo x/c trips so I'm looking for a good efficient x/c bird and one with good short field performance. The twin comanche and RV-7 are two that are at the top of my list. Yeah, I know, quite a disparity between the two but they would both work for my typical mission. But, I'd rather have a comanche.

Budget: Just about any comanche would be in my budget. Just looking for the right plane at the right price.

Equipment: I'd like for it to be equipped with an IFR GPS but, again, if it's the right plane at the right price.

Which model: Any would be fine. CR would be great. but again...

I'm thinking that since there were only 2000 made I may not want to be too narrow in scope.

Thanks for the offer of assistance! And, yes, rides will be given. :smile:

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Wow. Hell of list. The only two questions I could think of are Why? and What Color?

Can you tell I've wanted one for a while?

And of course the "Why" is that it's the most efficient twin short of the much-more-expensive DA42 TwinStar. Roughly 165 knots on 16gph for a mostly-stock model. Speed mods, turbos, etc. can improve on that.

 

[wabower]

Yeah, we had a turbo-slink for a while, great for trips to West Virginia, not so great for the trips back home. I didn't know how good we had it until my partner decided we needed an Aerostar.

Can you tell I've wanted one for a while?

And of course the "Why" is that it's the most efficient twin short of the much-more-expensive DA42 TwinStar. Roughly 165 knots on 16gph for a mostly-stock model. Speed mods, turbos, etc. can improve on that.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I'm looking for a second bird. I fly a lot of solo x/c trips so I'm looking for a good efficient x/c bird and one with good short field performance.

Well, R/STOL would certainly help. Sounds like you're into the same sort of thing I am, though - You want to go places, but you don't want to be restricted in WHERE you go.

If you have the $$$, I'd take a look at this one: http://www.controller.com/listingsd...HE/1966-PIPER-TURBO-TWIN-COMANCHE/1161981.htm

Looks like a new ad, there's no pix on it yet but it's been for sale for a while and it's a VERY good-looking plane - New-ish paint and interior, and a very nicely re-done panel. Most importantly, it's got a fairly unique combo of mods: Miller 200hp, Turbo, and STOL. The 400 ponies will get you off a shorter runway and help your climb to a more-efficient altitude to make use of the turbos, and the STOL will significantly shorten your takeoff and landing rolls and reduce your accelerate-stop distance.

The original asking price on it was $130,000 but I've seen asking prices on it as low as $110K and you might even be able to pick it up for $99K or $95K or something because it hasn't sold in a while.

I'm thinking that since there were only 2000 made I may not want to be too narrow in scope.

Maybe not, but there's plenty of them for sale, so you can pick and choose a little bit at least. Were I in a position to buy soon, I'd probably set up a "point system" or something with what the various mods were worth to me, and find the bird that had as many of the things I wanted at the price that made the most sense. Also, there are a few things you can use to narrow the field without being too picky - For example, turbo or N/A?

 

[AdamZ]

Tim there are two twinkies for sale at Wings KLOM. I'll try to scan you the ads if you pm me your email address.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

If you have the $$$, I'd take a look at this one: http://www.controller.com/listingsd...HE/1966-PIPER-TURBO-TWIN-COMANCHE/1161981.htm

Hmm. THink they would trade even up for a 195?

 

[SCCutler]

You think Kent knows his twinks?

Gotta say, if that one he cites is all it claims to be, with no signif hickies, it's a deal-do!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

You think Kent knows his twinks?

Gotta say, if that one he cites is all it claims to be, with no signif hickies, it's a deal-do!

I don't think it's all the seller claims it to be - I seriously doubt you can really get 230 knots on 18gph, even at 20,000 feet. 215 is more realistic (doing the calc starting from 200 knots on the 160hp turbo). However, that's still amazingly good.

Oh, and I found some pics of it (downloaded from previous ads), since none of the current ads have pics:

 

[wabower]

I believe the lad may have done some serious homework. Do you need to buy it so you'll have something to fly?

You think Kent knows his twinks?

Gotta say, if that one he cites is all it claims to be, with no signif hickies, it's a deal-do!

 

[timwinters]

That's a nice bird, Kent. I've been checking Controller but didn't see that one for some reason.

 

[SCCutler]

I believe the lad may have done some serious homework. Do you need to buy it so you'll have something to fly?

Ooh, snap!

I think I am back into reliable airplane territory, Wayneley. Spent part of the day yesterday at el aeropuerto, investigating why the Mighty Bonanza was reticent to initiate noisome engine activity (or, you could say, was very hard to start).

So, mag timing was almost spot-on... but plug gaps... lessee, spec is around nineteen thousandths, and these look like... dunno, maybe, the Mississippi River? .040 at least.

So we installed a new set of properly gapped plugs I had and, while I reserve judgment until after a few flights, it started first try, two blades, and it has been quite a while since *that* happened, so I am soundly encouraged.

Going to change back to fine-wire plugs at the earliest reasonable opportunity.

 

[Aztec Driver]

I don't think it's all the seller claims it to be - I seriously doubt you can really get 230 knots on 18gph, even at 20,000 feet. 215 is more realistic (doing the calc starting from 200 knots on the 160hp turbo). However, that's still amazingly good.

Oh, and I found some pics of it (downloaded from previous ads), since none of the current ads have pics:

That would be 200 MPH, around 160 knots, and 230 mph is red line for these birds.

 

[wabower]

Well, it may not fall into the same category as G. Ford's "our long national nightmare is over" speech, but glad to hear it will at least make some noise when asked. Wish I could afford fine-wires.

Ooh, snap!

I think I am back into reliable airplane territory, Wayneley. Spent part of the day yesterday at el aeropuerto, investigating why the Mighty Bonanza was reticent to initiate noisome engine activity (or, you could say, was very hard to start).

So, mag timing was almost spot-on... but plug gaps... lessee, spec is around nineteen thousandths, and these look like... dunno, maybe, the Mississippi River? .040 at least.

So we installed a new set of properly gapped plugs I had and, while I reserve judgment until after a few flights, it started first try, two blades, and it has been quite a while since *that* happened, so I am soundly encouraged.

Going to change back to fine-wire plugs at the earliest reasonable opportunity.

 

[Aztec Driver]

I'm sniffing around at twinkies. Let me know if you know of a good one out there for sale.

I'll also be looking for a good twinkie A&P for a pre-buy if I get close to buying.

I'd sell you mine, but I don't have the funds to buy that really nice one, so it would leave me with nothing. And nobody wants a bird with no autopilot anyway, so I guess I'll keep it and upgrade it as I get money.

They are nice planes, efficient and reasonable to operate. I am curious as to your including both twins and singles into your mission profile. If it is more for single passenger cross country, I would think the RV would be a better choice, unless you need some more cargo than just one passenger.

 

[SCCutler]

Well, it may not fall into the same category as G. Ford's "our long national nightmare is over" speech, but glad to hear it will at least make some noise when asked. Wish I could afford fine-wires.

As it works out, Wayne, I have what appear to be eleven sound and serviceable fine-wire plugs, ripe for cleaning, gapping and reinstallation, with a twelfth added in. The eleven fine-wires and one massive were in the plane when I bought it, and were replaced when the plane was in the shop not too long thereafter and an intermittent vibration was being troubleshot (it was ultimately determined to be a busted motor-mount). That shop offered me the opportunity to buy fine-wires for $1,200.00, on which opportunity I passed.

Yes, it is true: I am learning all about airplane ownership, and all it takes is money.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

That would be 200 MPH, around 160 knots, and 230 mph is red line for these birds.

Redline is indicated - You'd never get 200 knots indicated out of any Twinkie. However, this is from the ICS web site:

The PA-30C Turbo is the fastest Twin Comanche. It uses the Rajay manual turbocharging system, and has 75-percent power cruise true airspeeds of 209 knots. At 24,000 feet, Piper claimed 214 knots as possible.

The C-model and PA-39 Twinkies are "knots" birds, not "mph" birds, so I don't think the knots here is a mistake. Besides, a normally aspirated Twin Comanche will easily do 160 knots, as you know. With the turbos up high, they should *indicate* roughly the same airspeed as you do down low, but the *true* airspeed will be a fair bit higher.

Really, I don't think there are official performance figures of any kind for a Miller + Turbo machine - I'd really like to fly one and see what it'll do.

They are nice planes, efficient and reasonable to operate. I am curious as to your including both twins and singles into your mission profile. If it is more for single passenger cross country, I would think the RV would be a better choice, unless you need some more cargo than just one passenger.

You said it - Efficient, nice... I don't know about Tim, but my reason for wanting a twin is the big cold body of water just a little ways east of the home 'drome. It'd be nice for peace of mind when doing a lot of flying in (or over) low IMC conditions as well.

Right now, I'm trying to decide how I'm going to get to KCAD for the skiplane weekend. Fly the 182 4.5 hours down and around the lake and the city (and risk being grounded by ice), or spend the $$$$$$$$$$$ to get checked out in the Seneca ($295/hr for the plane, $50/hr for the instructor, who knows how many hours...) so that I can shoot straight there in 1.1 hours.

 

[timwinters]

I am curious as to your including both twins and singles into your mission profile. If it is more for single passenger cross country, I would think the RV would be a better choice, unless you need some more cargo than just one passenger.

Most trips are just me and bags for a week. Well, and my dog. I lean towards the twinkie because I view it as a safer IFR platform. I have a 182 that'll carry more than I ever need to pack in it (and that I plan to keep) so I could always take that when carrying capacity is needed.

The RV would be a lot more fun, but the twinkie would be more practical. (IMO). Basically, I'm looking for an efficient x/c bird.

Edit: Oops, I see Kent beat me.

 

[timwinters]

One question for the group. I've only owned Continental engines.

What's the reputation of the Lycoming IO-320 160 HP motors in the stock Comanches and the Lycoming IO-360 200 HP used on the Miller conversion.

Any "gotchas" that one needs to keep an eye out for with either of these engines?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

What's the reputation of the Lycoming IO-320 160 HP motors in the stock Comanches and the Lycoming IO-360 200 HP used on the Miller conversion.

Any "gotchas" that one needs to keep an eye out for with either of these engines?

I can't give you a Charlie Melot-style answer, but the stock 160's at least are known for being pretty bulletproof, and I hear stories about owners running them in the 2400-3000 hour range before overhaul. I think the 200's have a good rep too.

FWIW, the stock engines are the Lyc IO-320-B1A (I thought they might have used the C1A as well later on, but the TCDS does not reflect this). I'm not sure what the Miller engines are.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Dammit, you guys talking Twinkies....

But what would I do with a Twinkie? If you don't need it for traveling, there isn't much point. IOW, I wouldn't want to take it up to just bore holes in the sky.

Hmm. Come to think of it, I don't really do much of that anyway.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I'm not sure what the Miller engines are.

Upon further exploration, I found the Miller 200hp engine STC - They're the Lyc IO-360-C1C.

 

[TMetzinger]

Is there a FIKI Twinkie?

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Is there a FIKI Twinkie?

Not that I have ever seen.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Is there a FIKI Twinkie?

Yes, but they are exceedingly rare.

Also, there wasn't really such a thing as FIKI approval when the Twinkie was around, so there isn't anywhere that it'll say "approved for flight into known icing conditions" but at least one Twinkie-owning aviation lawyer has dug into the issue enough to conclude that if a Twinkie is properly protected (wings, tail, props, windscreen) that it is legal for FIKI.

 

[TMetzinger]

Good point - I really meant to ask if they came with deice equipment.

Ted, is your AzTruck FIKI or just "deicing equipped"?

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Kent, since you have been doing the research, how much will insurance run you if you end up buying one?

 

[timwinters]

Is there a FIKI Twinkie?

Mods,

That's a lewd, crude, offensive statement if I've ever heard one.

 

[timwinters]

Kent, since you have been doing the research, how much will insurance run you if you end up buying one?

I was quoted $2k / year and I don't even have a twin rating. Of course, there were requirements for training, etc. etc.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Mods,

Hey!!! I are one,

That's a lewd, crude, offensive statement if I've ever heard one.

and I approved of that post.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

I was quoted $2k / year and I don't even have a twin rating. Of course, there were requirements for training, etc. etc.

Wow. It sure is becoming enticing to trade in the 195. My insurance on it isn't much less than that.

 

[wabower]

You got Multi rating?

Wow. It sure is becoming enticing to trade in the 195. My insurance on it isn't much less than that.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

You got Multi rating?

Smarta...... well you know.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Kent, since you have been doing the research, how much will insurance run you if you end up buying one?

$5800/year, I think that was before I had the multi rating (or even the Commercial) and $120K hull value. That was also from Avemco - They're great for budgeting because they'll give you a quote same-day (actually, same-phone call!) and they tend to be the most expensive.

There were a few very easily do-able things that would knock off 25% of that number - They wanted 25 dual time in type plus the rating at that point, but an extra 2 hours of dual would knock 5% off, doing the King Practical Risk Management DVD would knock 5% off, 50 time in type would knock 10% off, 100 complex would knock 5 or 10 off, etc.

I was quoted $2k / year and I don't even have a twin rating. Of course, there were requirements for training, etc. etc.

Wow! That's quite a bit lower. Where'd you get the quote from? What hull value? What total/multi/complex/type time do you have?

 

[Aztec Driver]

Dammit, you guys talking Twinkies....

But what would I do with a Twinkie? If you don't need it for traveling, there isn't much point. IOW, I wouldn't want to take it up to just bore holes in the sky.

Hmm. Come to think of it, I don't really do much of that anyway.

Heck, why not? My partner and I do it all the time. Can't stay proficient without it.

 

[Aztec Driver]

Redline is indicated - You'd never get 200 knots indicated out of any Twinkie. However, this is from the ICS web site:

True that - my bad, sorry.