Buying a twin Comanche

brien23

brien23

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,439
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Display name:
Brien
The good the bad and the ugly side of buying a Twin Comanche. What area should one look at that might be specific to the twin Comanche.
 
Those with 180 HP engines has practically no single engine performance
 
I don't believe Piper ever sold a 180 hp Twin Comanche.

They were built with 160 hp engines. The turbo versions are manual boost controlled turbo-normalized, so also nominally 160 hp. There are Miller conversions with 200 hp engines.

I have a few hours in one our club used to lease. Very nice flying twin, and impressively fast and fuel efficient compared to my Aztec. The only drawback where I live is no boots, unlike the Seneca or Aztec - obviously not an issue in some other parts of the continental USA.

The CR prop versions built late in the production run are supposed to have somewhat tamed the single engine handling, but I don't think any of the Twin Comanches are any worse than a 310 or Baron if they are mis-handled.
 
Last edited:
There is a member named Kristin who is a pilot, maintenance engineer and aviation professional on this forum who owns and flies a Twin Comanche. You might want to try to PM her.
 
GRG55 said:
There is a member named Kristin who is a pilot, maintenance engineer and aviation professional on this forum who owns and flies a Twin Comanche. You might want to try to PM her.
Click to expand...

is that the same person who's over on the piper forum? if so she seems a lot more active over there but I've always been curious about the twinkie, wait that sounds wrong....always wanted to check out a twin comanche as well.
 
Paging @Kristin if she's around...

The engines are pretty much bulletproof, which is nice. Don't know a ton of what to check on the airframe.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Paging @Kristin if she's around...

The engines are pretty much bulletproof, which is nice. Don't know a ton of what to check on the airframe.
Click to expand...

Kristin is still active on the forums, but not as much since she started a flying gig in Alaska.

Best place for advice on Comanches (of both single and twin breeds) is at Airworthy Comanche Adelphi forum where Kristin is the host.

Plenty of others there can offer guidance.

As far as airframe issues, the Comanches have a unique gear system that needs to be checked out by a Comanche expert. Someone who can look at it and tell whether the previous ADs were done properly or just pencil whipped.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
eman1200 said:
is that the same person who's over on the piper forum? if so she seems a lot more active over there but I've always been curious about the twinkie, wait that sounds wrong....always wanted to check out a twin comanche as well.
Click to expand...

Yes, I believe it is the same person...avatar pic is the same, or it least it was. I'd try to benefit from her experience if I was looking for a Twin Comanche, or similar.

As for Comanche landing gear, one of the Comanche owners I know mentioned getting parts and advice from this outfit in Florida:
http://www.comanchegear.com/
 
Last edited:
Big issues are gear studs, gear cables, and the horizontal bearings. A couple of ad's on the tail. Simpler issues are gear bungee replacement, heater ad.
 
unsafervguy said:
Big issues are gear studs, gear cables, and the horizontal bearings. A couple of ad's on the tail. Simpler issues are gear bungee replacement, heater ad.
Click to expand...

Just a point of clarification. The tail AD affects single Comanches, specifically 180/250/260. It does not the twinkie, nor the 400.

That said, your point is def noted. The airframe is not on the "friendly" side of my mx spectrum, as you note. Many old bits, 4 bladders, problematic hard-to-find fuel selectors, wonky gear motors and that whole weathered gear conduit business others have already alluded to, with invasive, damage-prone repetitive inspections (both tail and gear, not the fault of the airplane they're repetitive, that's the FAA).

My co-worker owns a twinkie, latest bug a wingtip tank that won't feed due to electrical elves running rampant through the system and not opening the valve (you need electrical power to feed out the tiptanks, yikes). Also has tips that vapor lock the aux bladder if you run the tip dry to engine cough, since the tip lines run through the aux system. Ruh roh.

It's a project to keep that thing on tip top dispatch rate, which according to experts such as @Kristin, requires A&Ps well-versed/practiced in the type, imposition I find antithetical to dispatch rate, but one an AP owner can find workable in order to have a strong XC cruiser.

All that said, great performance, bulletproof engines, both single and twinco. A real shame they stopped manufacturing/supporting the type as early as they did (flood happens).
 
hindsight2020 said:
My co-worker owns a twinkie, latest bug a wingtip tank that won't feed due to electrical elves running rampant through the system and not opening the valve (you need electrical power to feed out the tiptanks, yikes). Also has tips that vapor lock the aux bladder if you run the tip dry to engine cough, since the tip lines run through the aux system. Ruh roh.
Click to expand...
Has your co-worker checked the grounds for the solenoid on the back of the spar? I had that problem too, cleaning the grounds solved it. "Vapor lock the aux bladder"? Never heard of that, but if you run the tip dry air can be trapped in the fuel line and on the next flight could stop the engine when you change over. There's a purge procedure during preflight, is that what you mean?

dtuuri
 
dtuuri said:
Has your co-worker checked the grounds for the solenoid on the back of the spar? I had that problem too, cleaning the grounds solved it. "Vapor lock the aux bladder"? Never heard of that, but if you run the tip dry air can be trapped in the fuel line and on the next flight could stop the engine when you change over. There's a purge procedure during preflight, is that what you mean?

dtuuri
Click to expand...

Forgive me for paraphrasing his description of the problem, but your scenario sounds very much plausible. Regarding the electrics problem with the tip valves, I'll def mention your resolution to my coworker. Thanks for the "tip", see what I did there :D ..I amuse myself sometimes.
 
hindsight2020 said:
Forgive me for paraphrasing his description of the problem, but your scenario sounds very much plausible. Regarding the electrics problem with the tip valves, I'll def mention your resolution to my coworker. Thanks for the "tip", see what I did there :D ..I amuse myself sometimes.
Click to expand...
I think I used star washers for better contact too.

dtuuri
 
the tail ad that does apply is 94-13-10. there are a lot of planes out there that never had the kit put in. if the kit is not installed, the repetitive inspection still applies. the inspection is no big deal, but if movement is found, the fix is not really fun to do.

also 74-13-03 requires repetitive inspection of the stab bolts.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top