1969 Twin Comanche for Sale

siegelaviation

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
14
Location
Prairie Village, Kansas
Display Name

Display name:
siegelaviation
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] 1969 Twin Comanche for sale

Aircraft has been featured in AOPA Flying Magazine as well as past LoPresti advertisements. Aircraft is in EXCELLENT condition aesthetically and mechanically.

Total Time: 5550
SMOH: 1700/1200
Props: 225/225 (SNEW)
Equipment: NDH, always hangared, no corrosion (zinc chromated), Robertson STOL mod, all LoPresti speed mods, tip tanks, Hoskins fuel management. Garmin GMA-340 audio, GTX-327 transponder with TDR-950 #2 transponder, GNS530/420, STEC55X autopilot,KCS-55A HSI, KI-229 RMI, WX-500 stormscope. All AD'S c/w. Asking $180,000, but seller is motivated. Make an offer! Email me at buyer@siegelaviation.com if interested.

Michael Siegel
[/FONT]
 
Sounds over priced to me...of the 45 Twin Commanche aircraft on Trade a Plane right now 39 have an asking price listed, none are nearly as high...the highest asking price of that sample set is $149.5K...the average asking price for those 39 aircraft is $100K...23 of the aircraft with an asking price listed are asking below the average asking price. There appears to be a very nice CR with mid time engines with an asking price of $107.5K listed on TaP.

Len
 
Len Lanetti said:
Sounds over priced to me...
Looks to me like the seller is trying to recoup more of the mountain of cash he poured into avionics and other goodies than the market typically will allow.
 
It is a superb airplane that should not be grouped together with the other aircraft on TAP or Controller. That being said, the seller lost his medical and serious offers will be considered.
 
I agree way over priced!
Could buy a nice Aztec with many more features than a Twinkie for that price.
 
siegelaviation said:
Like I said, you CAN offer LOWER than the asking price. What aircraft buyer has ever offered the asking price of the seller?
Michael, in the off chance your comment was in reponse to me I can only say that initial purchase price is only part of my consternation of owning a twin. Maintaining the twin to an acceptable condition is a very real concern for me. I am simply not in the position to be confident I could follow through on that. Perhaps if I used the twin strictly for business I could rethink my position.

A fat budget helps but too there is the complexity of the machine which gives me the willies. If I were to own a twin I would feel most comfortable by developing and adhering to a tight progressive mx schedule. That would have to include a network of people who are all on board with the single goal of high dispatch rate of both plane and pilot. To that end I doubt if I'll ever own a twin due primarily to the fact that I would have little control of those other people's mindsets and level of performance.

I suppose I am too jaded at this point in my life. Or perhaps it is my ignorance of what it entails to be a twin owner.
 
siegelaviation said:
It is a superb airplane that should not be grouped together with the other aircraft on TAP or Controller.

First let me say that I am sorry that the owner lost his medical. That will be a sad day for each of us. That said, business is business.

It very well may be a superb airplane but it is over priced. From a logical standpoint there is no reason to say that one example aircraft available for sale should not be compared to other, similar, aircraft for sale.

The one thing that strikes me is the times on the engines. First I note that their is a wide variance in the engine times. Some see that as a good thing others not. To me it is a neutral, especially since the ad states NDH which I take at face value until something triggers me to think otherwise. Second, while there is time left before the recomended TBO these engines are past the halfway point (one of them much more so than the other) and there is no guarentee that the TBO will be made (acknowledged that the O320 is a reliable engine which if opperated half way well should make TBO and that under Part 91 that TBO is only a line drawn in sand). It is also unknown when and where the "remans" where done and to what level the overhaul was accomplished. Of the when and where the when is, at this point, probably the most important as it could have been a long time ago given that the average plane is flown way less than 100 hours a year.

I see no mention of new accessories (mags, harnesses, carbs, exhaust, alternators) and so I'm thinking they were replaced with the engines. So they are several years old at a minimum, near the end of their life expectancy. Now the new owner will have some choices to make. At one end of the choice spectrum the new owner can replace accessories onsie-twosie on condition or do the engine(s) in the near futures and all of the accessories at the same time on the other end of the choice spectrum. Obviously there are a lot of intermediate choices available to the new owner but the fact is that more money will have to be spent over and above the very high acquisition cost.

I also see no mention of the condition of the paint or the interior. This does not necessarily mean they are good or bad, original or upgraded. It could simply be that the person creating the listing failed to include this information. I note that there is no picture of this aircraft on the apparent aircraft broker website link that is part of the signature line of the post. I would think that an aircraft broker would want to put the aircraft in the best light possible so, while it could have been simply forgotten, we don't know anything about what the condition of the paint and interior. Best case is that it is unknown but the fact that it is not present leads me to think negatively.

On the flip side there is a large quantity of twin aircraft on the market at reduced prices due to the current cost of fuel. Specifically, the research presented here shows that there is a significant number of this particular make and model of aircraft which, on average, are $80K cheaper (talking just asking prices, we will ignore wiggle room for the purposes of this discussion, using the assumption that all sellers will wiggle equally - which is probably not the case but is outside our scope).

There are specific examples of what appear to be nice to very good, maybe not superb but none the less fine Twin Comanches available. In looking at the specific examples you will see aircraft with asking as much as $100K below the asking price of the aircraft presented here. Going up the scale a notch there are a number of aircraft with asking prices about $80K under the asking price of the aircraft presented here. You can do a lot to an aircraft for $80 - $100 large. The nice thing is you can do what you want and it can be on a schedule that spans several years.

Len
 
Last edited:
Richard said:
Michael, in the off chance your comment was in reponse to me I can only say that initial purchase price is only part of my consternation of owning a twin. Maintaining the twin to an acceptable condition is a very real concern for me. I am simply not in the position to be confident I could follow through on that. Perhaps if I used the twin strictly for business I could rethink my position.

A fat budget helps but too there is the complexity of the machine which gives me the willies. If I were to own a twin I would feel most comfortable by developing and adhering to a tight progressive mx schedule. That would have to include a network of people who are all on board with the single goal of high dispatch rate of both plane and pilot. To that end I doubt if I'll ever own a twin due primarily to the fact that I would have little control of those other people's mindsets and level of performance.

I suppose I am too jaded at this point in my life. Or perhaps it is my ignorance of what it entails to be a twin owner.

Richard- I was not replying to your post. I was replying to everyone that felt this aircraft was way overpriced. -Michael
 
Len Lanetti said:
I also see no mention of the condition of the paint or the interior. This does not necessarily mean they are good or bad, original or upgraded. It could simply be that the person creating the listing failed to include this information. I note that there is no picture of this aircraft on the apparent aircraft broker website link that is part of the signature line of the post. I would think that an aircraft broker would want to put the aircraft in the best light possible so, while it could have been simply forgotten, we don't know anything about what the condition of the paint and interior. Best case is that it is unknown but the fact that it is not present leads me to think negatively. Len

Len:

I am in the process of getting both pictures from the seller and copies of the logs so I can digitize them and make them available to potential buyers. I do not like to talk about paint and interior until I have visually confirmed that they are in excellent condition.

Michael
 
Pretty plane. Mr. Siegel has already confirmed, no one is going to be insulted if an offer is made below the asking price, and that's a good thing to recall.
 
Thanks Spike! That's right. A selling price is just a starting point for negotiations. The aircraft that stay on the market are the ones that the seller refuses to budge on the price. Those are those poor airplanes sitting out on the ramp collecting dust and rust. :(
 
Let's see. If I sold my plane, and my house, moved back in with mom and dad, placed my extra kidney on ebay....
 
siegelaviation said:
Thanks Greg for the optimism!

I'm sorry Michael. It is just that people tend to put more money into airplanes than they can ever hope to get back out of it. It doesn't keep them from trying. I hope you get your price, but it is my opinion that it will be very difficult to do so.
 
Y'know, it may be a *lot* better than it appears and reads, but I still see it as a $100,000 to $115,000 airplane.

For $170,000, I see a smokin' Baron, or an awfully decent Seneca.
 
Spike for that matter a bunch of us just looked at a sweet Aztec with known Ice, 200hrs on new engines, 0 time props, new interior from 04, and TONS more useful load, sweet avionics stack and great leather! - all for just over 100K
 
Last edited:
or 17 pretty nice gliders, 5 really nice gliders or one 50:1 super glider with a motor!
 
My web program for listings will only allow a certain size picture to be uploaded. I will rescan the pics and see what I can do. It really is a stellar aircraft.

Michael
 
Back
Top