First hitting the market in 1958, the Piper PA-24 Comanche was a radical departure for Piper. Until then, the company had built mostly rag-and-tube taildraggers. Instead, the Comanche was a thoroughly modern design focused on speed and good looks, and targeting the high-performance piston-single market being tapped by the Beech Bonanza and Cessna 210, among others.
Piper’s sleek, roomy all-metal design featured an oval-section fuselage, tapered laminar-flow wing and sharp-edged styling. The looks still turn heads today.
A South African company is even building an all-composite lookalike for the kit-built crowd, the Ravin. More important for the discriminating used aircraft buyer, the Comanche lends itself to upgrading, and owners who bring the airplane up to the state-of-the-art tend to hang onto them forever. There’s no shortage of mods that step the aircraft up in speed and looks.
Piper Comanche Model History
In its first production year, two models were offered: the 180-HP PA-24-180 Comanche and a 250-HP version, the PA-24-250. The 180 had a carbureted Lycoming O-360, while the 250 sported a carbureted Lycoming O-540; each turned a constant-speed prop. Flaps were manual and the gear was (and still is) a simple electromechanical design. The airframes of these Comanches essentially were the same—it’s possible to upgrade the 180 to the larger engine—although the 250 boasted a significantly higher gross weight: 2800 pounds versus 2550 pounds for the 180. Piper didn’t distinguish between the 180 and 250 in its serial number records, but total production for 1958 was 336, comparing favorably to the 396 J35 Bonanzas Beech cranked out that year.
The basic Piper Comanche airframe proved successful and wasn’t changed much during its production run. Still, there were some notable improvements over the years. The early airplanes were equipped with hand brakes. But after 1960, most Comanches were delivered with optional toe brakes.
The original airplane had a 60-gallon fuel system. In 1961, Piper offered an optional 90-gallon system, which gave the Comanche 180 seriously long legs: nine hours, provided the load consisted of only the pilot, one passenger and a little luggage. Range remains one of the Comanche’s strong points and many have been fitted with even more fuel capacity in tip tanks and fuselage tanks to give it impressive endurance. In 1961, the gross weight of the 250 was boosted by 100 pounds. Electric flaps replaced the manual ones in 1962 models.
Production of both the 180 and 250 ended after the 1964 model year. The 180, which obviously came second to its bigger brother in load carrying and was not selling as well as the 250, was dropped altogether while the 250 was upgraded to the 260.
Piper Comanche Model Evolution
The 1965 Comanches are transition airplanes in that they have the earlier fuselage mated to the later 260-HP engine, albeit with a carburetor. The big engine gives these airplanes excellent climb performance, as much as 1500 FPM. In 1966, the Comanche B, with a fuel-injected 260-HP Lycoming IO-540-D4A5, a boosted gross weight (now 3100 pounds) and two more seats were added to the lineup, starting with serial number 24-4300. These and later Comanches can be spotted by the extra cabin window and rear baggage door on the left side, which doubles as an emergency exit. The airframe dimensions are identical, but the internal fuselage structure was changed to accommodate the additional window. The added seats are in the baggage compartment.
The Comanche C was rolled out in 1969, with further refinements, including another gross weight increase and a distinctive “shark nose” cowl starting with serial number 24-4804. The 100-pound rise in gross gave the airplane a hefty 1427-pound useful load. The airplane also gained cowl flaps and an aileron-rudder interconnect. By the time these models were introduced, the Piper Comanche’s production run was about to end without warning, so this variant is comparatively rare.
Piper Comanche Turbo and 400 hp Models
A turbonormalized version of the Comanche C was offered alongside the normally aspirated model in 1970. Dual turbochargers allow operation at altitudes up to 25,000 feet. The Rajay system essentially had a “second throttle” wastegate control the pilot used to manually set boost at altitude. Piper did the turbo 260 installation properly by providing check valves and a turbo oil sump. Upon shutdown, this allows the oil to drain from the hot turbos instead of remaining inside them and cooking.
A side benefit of the standard turbo installation is that it’s quieter than the normally aspirated Comanche C. The -N1A5 engine, beefed up to handle the boost pressure and higher temperatures at altitude, is just as robust as the normally aspirated engine; both have a 2000-hour TBO. Also, as with the fuel injection system, earlier airplanes can have a turbo added.
Meanwhile, the ultimate in wretched excess, or perfection, depending on your point of view, has to go to the Piper Comanche 400. It was introduced in 1964 and discontinued only a year and 146 airplanes later. This beast had a normally aspirated, fuel-injected, eight-cylinder Lycoming IO-720-A1A fitted with a three-blade prop. The airframe is essentially identical to the 250, except the 400 uses the Piper Aztec stabilizer.
The Comanche’s engine gulps huge amounts of fuel (20 to 22 GPH at 75 percent cruise, held in optional 130-gallon tanks), has a TBO of 1800 hours and costs north of 50 grand to overhaul. On the other hand, the 400 offers spectacular performance—at least for 1964 technology—with max cruise in the 185-to-195-knot range.
When compared to a Comanche B, the 400 has a gross weight 500 pounds higher. However, the empty weight is also higher, by 337 pounds. That extra payload has to go for fuel to feed the IO-720, meaning that for flights of more than 300 miles, the 400 actually has less payload available than the 260.
In 1972, there were two single-engine Comanche models still in production—the 260 and turbo 260. Their excellent build quality with total corrosion proofing before assembly and compound curve panels meant that the underlying cost structure was greater than emerging designs from either Piper or its competitors.
Then Tropical Storm Agnes drove the Susquehanna River out of its banks and wiped out Piper’s Lock Haven factory. This gave Piper a reason to pull the plug on the airplane, choosing to concentrate on the more-popular, less-expensive and higher-profit PA-28 line, including the Arrow being produced at the Vero Beach site.
Several years ago, there was some thought given to resurrecting the design at the hands of the legendary Roy LoPresti, but like the SwiftFury, it came to nothing. LoPresti did create some interesting aerodynamic mods for the airplane, however.
Piper Comanche Handling
Myths abound about the Comanche being difficult to land smoothly because of a tendency to float during the flare, then settle sharply. Some owners dispute this, others confirm it. Piper Comanche experts tell us the attitude window for a smooth arrival is smaller than that of many modern spam cans, but no different from some high-performance aircraft or taildraggers.
One remedy is to add the Knots2U wing root fillets, which eliminate the vortex striking the stabilator when flaps are used. The International Comanche Society (ICS) reports the best way to learn to land—and fly—this machine is to get some dual from an expert in the type, not the local flight school.
Fly it like it’s meant to be flown, and you’ll wonder what the barroom chatter was all about.
In flight, handling is responsive and pilots report that the Piper Comanche is a sheer delight to fly. As an instrument platform, it’s stable and responsive. At busy airports, there’s no problem keeping approach speeds right in the flow.
With practice and with gear down, finals for a precision approach can be flown at 130 knots and, with the gear up, even faster. The aircraft can then be slowed in the last few hundred feet to land short and turn off at the first taxiway.
There’s a bit of a tendency for the Comanche to wheelbarrow during crosswind takeoffs, caused by pilots holding down the nose to prevent a premature departure. This, in turn, is due to the airplane’s tail-low stance when sitting on its gear.
Some pilots pump up the main gear oleos to reduce the tendency, or install a smaller nosewheel tire to reduce the static angle of attack on takeoff.
Piper Comanche Performance, Loading
The Comanche 180 has less-than-stellar speed but long legs for its class. Burning 8 to 10 GPH, it will cruise at about 140 knots. An American General Tiger with fixed gear goes just as fast and another contemporary retractable, the Mooney M20C or M20E, will outrun the 180. The 180 can climb at 700 to 900 FPM after using more than 2200 feet to clear a 50-foot obstacle. The 250 and 260 are better performers. Speeds are up around 155 to 160 knots at cruise, burning about 12 GPH. Still, these speeds trail contemporary designs of similar vintage and power, such as the P35 Bonanza.
As you would expect from aerodynamics 101, the extra 10 GPH the Comanche 400 burns yields only about 10 to 15 extra knots. The 400 will, however, climb like nobody’s business: 1600 FPM. Not many singles can match it.
The 180’s load-carrying capacity is ample but modest. With a gross weight significantly lower than later Piper Comanches, cabin payload with full standard fuel (60 gallons) is about 660 pounds, making it a three-person airplane. The 250 can haul 750 pounds with full standard fuel, while the 260s and 400 can lift up to 1000 pounds.
The straight roofline giving the Piper Comanche its distinctive crewcut looks also reduces visibility upwards, although it’s not as bad as some airplanes and does provide welcome shade in hot climates. The cabin itself is roomy and comfortable with good width, if a bit drafty and noisy, say some owners. Legroom is good for both pilots and passengers, and the cabin is definitely more spacious than the Arrow that followed. The fifth and sixth seats, when available, are suitable only for children or the smallest of adults.
The panel is what one would expect from a circa-1960s airplane, with good space for instruments but early, unrestored models will look dated by modern standards. The early panel layout doesn’t conform to the later standard “T” configuration, so it may be unfamiliar to recently trained pilots. But the panel—as with most other Comanche characteristics—often has found itself the subject of owner upgrades.
Piper Comanche Maintenance and ADs
Piper Comanche owners give the maintenance burden mixed reviews. The Comanche is one of the best-built metal singles available, and it can be well maintained at lower cost than aircraft of lesser performance due to the widespread use of generic parts. There’s also a good supply of aftermarket and PMA’d parts for commonly needed items. While the airplane isn’t intrinsically difficult to service, system age cannot be ignored: Even the newest Comanche is approaching 40 years of age.
The aircraft are relatively complex—certainly when compared to, for example, a Cessna 182—so they shouldn’t be thought of as cheap to maintain. However, with care, costs will be more than manageable and once a system or component is properly repaired, it can be expected to stay that way for a while. The trick—as it is with any older aircraft—is finding a shop or technician experienced in the type. If you find the right person and keep them happy, you’ll be happy.
The landing gear system certainly is not complicated but a review of service difficulty reports indicates it’s a top sore spot, along with general airframe corrosion, and engine/prop issues. Those familiar with the Comanche maintain major causes of gear-system problems are poor maintenance or rigging by mechanics unfamiliar with it. Pilots who don’t understand the undercarriage and its various procedures, particularly the emergency extension procedure, also are a source of problems.
The ICS can help on both counts, with a list of qualified instructors and shops familiar with the airplane. Aftermarket gear warning systems are also a good investment to supplement the system originally installed.
Recurring ADs on any aircraft can run up the cost of operation, and Comanches are no different. One on the landing gear (AD 77-13-21) mandates replacement of landing gear bungees every 500 hours or three years to prevent landing gear collapse after manual extension. There’s also an AD on the vertical fin attachment (AD 75-12-06). A prop inspection (AD 2005-18-12) is the most oft-complained about, costing nearly $1000 every 500 hours or five years.
Also, a different prop AD (AD 97-18-02) can prove costly for 250/260 owners. As one result, many have opted to replace their old Hartzells for new two-or three-blade Hartzell or MacCauley propellers, which terminates the AD. Apart from the aforementioned ADs, Comanches are unremarkable; most other ADs are minor and/or shotgun directives that apply to many airplanes.
Piper Comanche Mods and Clubs
There are so many mods available for the Piper Comanche line that probably no two aircraft are alike today. You can modify its engine, its look, its handling, its panel and its features. Check a copy of the Comanche Flyer magazine or the ICS Web site (www.comancheflyer.com) for details. For instance, it’s possible to retrofit the Lycoming O-540 engine into a Comanche 180 of 1960 or later vintage; there’s at least one published report of this being done on a Form 337, although we don’t know of any shops offering the mod. Aside from the engine and prop, it involves the engine mounts, some baffling, controls and the exhaust system. The result is essentially a Comanche 250 with a low gross weight. Also, the carbureted O-540 found in the Comanche 250 may be upgraded to fuel injection.
LoPresti Speed Merchants (www.speedmods.com) offers, among other mods, the “Wholey Cowl” originally dreamed up for the Comanche’s resurrection, along with a three-blade “SynchroPulse” prop. Both are available for the 250 (which requires some additional mods) or the 260. Cowlings are also offered by Aviation Performance Products (www.aviationperformanceproducts.com), which claims that its Eagle XP cowling increases speed, economy and improves maintenance access. The company also offers a stainless steel dual exhaust system. These mods are available for all Comanches except the 400.
Knots2U (www.knots2u.com) also offers aerodynamic mods including a wing fillet helping out the airplane’s landing characteristics, a dorsal fin kit, speed brakes and much more. Meanwhile, Met-Co-Aire (www.metcoaire.com).
Other popular modifications include new gear wiring harnesses from Comanche Gear (www.comanchegear.com), one-piece windshields from Webco (www.webcoaircraft.com) and so on. These mods generally are applicable to all Comanches.
For a time recently, renowned attorney F. Lee Bailey—who souped up the PA-30 Twin Comanche into the Bailey Bullet—even contemplated remanufacturing single-engine Comanches. The result, in his words, using modern avionics, instrumentation, soundproofing and environmental systems, would have been a “better than new” Comanche costing less than a brand-new, comparable single.
Alas, wiser heads—along with, perhaps, a healthy respect for general aviation’s economy—sidelined the project.
The point is the Comache’s list of mods, modifiers and parts resources is long and best accessed from involvement with the ICS and its members and publications. Speaking of ICS, owners tell us the group is an exceptionally good resource for Comanche owners. It offers a magazine as well as other resources and can be reached at 405-491-0321 or via the website at www.comancheflyer.com. The ICS also offers a technical support service when you and your mechanic need someone to talk to.
Piper Comanche Owner Feedback
I was 63 years old when I got my pilot license. I am now 73. My first and only aircraft has been my Comanche 250, which spent most of its life in Texas. The first owner—an elderly 84-year-old pilot—had tears in his eyes as the plane left his sight.
It had been completely updated with fresh paint, leather interior and speed mods. According to my instructor at the time, it had a nice set of instruments. Of course, I did not know how to fly when I purchased the Comanche, so I didn’t knew what the instruments were for, but I was soon to learn.
I have since flown the Comanche 800 hours, flew to AirVenture at Oshkosh, Wisconsin, several times, flew around the United States and even flew along the New York Hudson River corridor and around the Statue of Liberty. I thought I was dreaming.
I brought this Comanche into the age of modern avionics, upgrading from Garmin GNS530 and GNS430 navigators to Garmin GTN750 and GTN 650 touchscreen units, in addition to a Stormscope, satellite weather, S-TEC 60 autopilot with GPS steering, HSI and a J.P. Instruments color engine monitor with fuel computer.
The throttle quadrant has been upgraded to vernier controls and the cabin windows were replaced with thicker, tinted glass. I also added air-bag shoulder harnesses.
With a 90-gallon fuel capacity and 13-15 gallon-per-hour fuel burn, it’s an efficient 155-knot airplane. The long 38-foot wingspan gives it a great platform for flying and positive control at all levels. The cabin space is more than a Beech A36 Bonanza and sitting up high gives a great forward view during flight. The Lycoming 540 aspirated engine is bullet-proof, according to fellow flyers.
Because of its classic vintage, the Comanche is easy to understand mechanically. You will find that many aviation mechanics are well-versed in working on the airframe, plus it is well supported by ICS members. Parts, for the most part, are readily available by Piper vendors and Comanche aftermarket specialists.
As for mission capability, we recently flew from Fond du Lac, Minnesota, to Muskogee, Oklahoma, in 3.5 hours. At 8500 feet we saw speeds of 178 knots burning 13.5 GPH at 60 percent power. As seniors, my wife and I enjoy these kinds of flights in the Comanche and certainly don’t miss the hassles of airline terminals and TSA security checks.
The Comanche Society and our Comanche owner friends have made our social life from medicine come alive. We had numerous fly-ins and some experiences would never have happened if it wasn’t for our Comanche. It’s a great aircraft and lots of fun. We call it our magic carpet ride.
Dr. Robert Fox
Muskogee, Oklahoma
I just thought I’d write to let you know how much I like my Comanche 400, N64400. The Comanche has a laminar flow wing with flush rivets that make the airplane really slippery. It started out with an efficient, 180-horsepower powerplant that gave the first Comanches respectable speeds. In fact, the Comanche was the fastest production airplane manufactured with a 180-horsepower engine. But Howard Piper had other plans. Patterned after the P-51 Mustang, Mr. Piper installed a 400-HP engine into his slick Comanche. The results are impressive.
Here’s an airplane that has a lot of flexibility. For example, with 400 HP under the cowling, it can climb at over 1600 FPM at its gross weight of 3600 pounds. It will cruise at 16,000 feet at over 170 knots true airspeed and burn about 14 GPH. Or, you can stay at 9000 feet, burn roughly 21 GPH and cruise at 200 knots true airspeed. The 400 Comanche carries 130 gallons of fuel (124 usable) so, at altitude, easy math proves the airplane has long legs. I’ve flown from Las Vegas, Nevada, to Eastern Iowa at 17,000 feet, nonstop several times and still had over an hour of fuel remaining. Pull the throttle back to 50 percent power (200 horsepower) and you’ll reduce the fuel burn to just 16 GPH and still see 165 knots true airspeed.
The eight-cylinder engine runs extremely smoothly. Those extra two pulses really make a difference because a smooth engine is a happy engine.
My Comanche 400 is pretty well equipped, which brings its empty weight to 2080 pounds. With full fuel (800 pounds), that still leaves over 700 pounds of useful load.
It’s a great airplane mated to a great engine—the perfect combination that only a visionary like Howard Piper could have developed.
Rick Mascari
via email
I am the second owner of a 1966 B-model Comanche that I purchased in 1985 and have 4000 hours in the airplane. The Comanche 260 is fun to fly, fast, responsive and stable for IFR. It lands safely and usually smoothly, with the correct speed and an exaggerated flare. Strong crosswinds and short field landings are straightforward.
Useful load, long range and weight and balance capabilities are great, in my view. The strong airframe has taken me through extreme turbulence, heavy rain and unintentional icing that accumulated nearly 0.5 inches on the airframe. The onboard XM Weather system has eliminated dangerous weather mistakes that were common decades ago.
This Comanche has most of the available speed kits. It has many faring and gap seals, a VNE increase, Lopresti engine cowl, plus a three- blade propeller.
Generally, I see cruise speeds of 165 kts burning 13 GPH lean of peak, or over 170 knots at 15 GPH rich of peak. Given the value of the airframe, all these aftermarket mods don’t make much sense, but when you own a plane for 30 years, these things happen. Unmodified Comanches fly the same, just a little slower. Like other airplanes of this era, the interior is loud and drafty. The interior trim, instrument panel, seats and doors fit poorly.
I own another more modern pressurized airplane, but for fun, the Comanche is my first choice. For the purchase price of a Cessna 172 you get a complex, high-performance transcontinental airplane.
The landing gear and stabilator are unique to Comanches, and a knowledgeable mechanic is required. With a Comanche expert doing the maintenance, these systems have been trouble-free for me, but not cheap. Other systems and accessories on the aircraft are common to many other airplanes. Parts are primarily through boutique suppliers and rarely a problem to source. The engine is reliable, smooth, easy to start and well supported. The engine should make TBO with perhaps only a cylinder or two replaced along the way.
Expensive recurring items are the gear AD at every 1000 hours and the tail AD (who knows the interval?), plus fuel bladder service every 10 years. You’ll want to budget $2000 for each of the recurring groups. Base annual inspections should run approximately $3000.
Insurance is $1450 yearly for the $85,000 hull value on my airplane. I figure it costs around $125 hourly to fly, which includes fuel, oil, insurance, maintenance, ADs, engine reserves, avionics repairs (not upgrades) and hangar, amortized over 150 flight hours per year.
Bill Ritter
Odessa, Texas
I have over 30 years experience owning, flying, maintaining and modifying aircraft, including Piper Comanches. The old boys that I learned to fly with would say that if you can shut the door on whatever you got into a Comanche, it would fly away without a problem. I would prove that time and again in my Comanche 250.
In flight, the Comanche is smooth, stable and tight, with a climb rate that is impressive and difficult to prevent. As for range, even an old 250 model with 60 gallons of fuel will generally go from Western Massachusetts to North Carolina in 3.5 hours with one hour of fuel remaining. If you want to coax Comanche 260 speeds from a 250 model, try using the 260’s power settings. The engines are identical, but with a different propeller redline.
The AD list is pretty long, but most of the items are one-time fixes, followed by future inspection. I’ve found that many aircraft are compliant. The number of available aftermarket mods for the plane is extensive; some are overpriced and pointless in my view, while others are fairly cheap and offer great results. Products from Knots2U and Webco are respected.
The mods that can offer the most speed include relocating the brakes to the inside of the gear forks, gap seals, wheel well slippers and wingroot fairings, both front and rear. Since it’s important that the flight controls are properly rigged (while assuring the landing gear and landing gear doors are retracted fully and fit flush.) This should be the first step before any aftermarket mods are installed. I’ve found that landing gear bungees generally need replacement at every annual inspection.
After years of distance-traveling in my airplane (to places I never would have visited if it weren’t for my Comanche), I believe a full-featured autopilot is perhaps the most useful avionics system you can buy.
The Comanche market has two price points, really. Consider that you can buy a cream puff in the $125,000 to $150,000 range, and an airplane that needs serious work for $19,000. Either way, a realistic budget should be around $100,000. If you wanted to start out with a cheaper airframe, buy a 180-HP model and do a 260-HP conversion with fuel injection. In my opinion, there is no reason to own a 180 Comanche unless you are consumed with fuel range and can tolerate the vibration from the engine being so far out from the firewall. Converting the engine from four cylinders to six can be signed off with a logbook entry.
Before buying, examine the logs for entries that indicate the airframe has a history of good landing gear system maintenance and repair. With the plane on jacks, swing the gear and look for loose fits and bushings.
All of the fuel bladders should be replaced with new ones. If not, the selling price should be adjusted to reflect a cost of $1500 per bladder.
While Comanche engines are generally dependable, beware of top-end overhauls that were accomplished without replacing the cylinders with new ones. While many Comanches sport three-blade propellers, some could have old clamp-style propellers. A prop can cost $15,000-plus.
Cabin and cowling door repairs are often neglected, so be sure to inspect them for shoddy repairs and improper cabin door seals. A competent tech can generally rig a cabin door in an afternoon.
Even heeding all of my advice, expect to spend money to acquire and keep an aging Comanche.
Don Gagnon
Montague, Massachusetts
Mods, Clubs
There are so many mods available for the Comanche line that probably no two aircraft are alike today. You can modify its engine, its look, its handling, its panel and its features. Check a copy of the Comanche Flyer magazine or the ICS Web site (www.comancheflyer.com) for details. For instance, its possible to retrofit the Lycoming O-540 engine into a Comanche 180 of 1960 or later vintage; theres at least one published report of this being done on a Form 337, although we dont know of any shops offering the mod. Aside from the engine and prop, it involves the engine mounts, some baffling, controls and the exhaust system. The result is essentially a Comanche 250 with a low gross weight. Also, the carbureted O-540 found in the Comanche 250 may be upgraded to fuel injection.
LoPresti Speed Merchants (www.speedmods.com) offers, among other mods, the Wholey Cowl originally dreamed up for the Comanches resurrection, along with a three-blade SynchroPulse prop. Both are available for the 250 (which requires some additional mods) or the 260. Cowlings are also offered by Aviation Performance Products (www.aviationperformanceproducts.com), which claims that its Eagle XP cowling increases speed, economy and improves maintenance access. The company also offers a stainless steel dual exhaust system. These mods are available for all Comanches except the 400.
Knots2U (www.knots2u.com) also offers aerodynamic mods including a wing fillet helping out the airplanes landing characteristics, a dorsal fin kit, speed brakes and much more. Meanwhile, Met-Co-Aire (www.metcoaire.com).
Other popular modifications include new gear wiring harnesses from Comanche Gear (www.comanchegear.com), one-piece windshields from Webco (www.webcoaircraft.com) and so on. These mods generally are applicable to all Comanches.
For a time recently, renowned attorney F. Lee Bailey-who souped up the PA-30 Twin Comanche into the Bailey Bullet-even contemplated remanufacturing single-engine Comanches. The result, in his words, using modern avionics, instrumentation, soundproofing and environmental systems, would have been a better than new Comanche costing less than a brand-new, comparable single.
Alas, wiser heads-along with, perhaps, a healthy respect for general aviations economy-sidelined the project.
The point is the Comaches list of mods, modifiers and parts resources is long and best accessed from involvement with the ICS and its members and publications. Speaking of ICS, owners tell us the group is an exceptionally good resource for Comanche owners. It offers a magazine as well as other resources and can be reached at 405-491-0321 or via the website at www.comancheflyer.com. The ICS also offers a technical support service when you and your mechanic need someone to talk to.
Owner Feedback
I was 63 years old when I got my pilot license. I am now 73. My first and only aircraft has been my Comanche 250, which spent most of its life in Texas. The first owner-an elderly 84-year-old pilot-had tears in his eyes as the plane left his sight.
It had been completely updated with fresh paint, leather interior and speed mods. According to my instructor at the time, it had a nice set of instruments. Of course, I did not know how to fly when I purchased the Comanche, so I didnt knew what the instruments were for, but I was soon to learn.
I have since flown the Comanche 800 hours, flew to AirVenture at Oshkosh, Wisconsin, several times, flew around the United States and even flew along the New York Hudson River corridor and around the Statue of Liberty. I thought I was dreaming.
I brought this Comanche into the age of modern avionics, upgrading from Garmin GNS530 and GNS430 navigators to Garmin GTN750 and GTN 650 touchscreen units, in addition to a Stormscope, satellite weather, S-TEC 60 autopilot with GPS steering, HSI and a J.P. Instruments color engine monitor with fuel computer.
The throttle quadrant has been upgraded to vernier controls and the cabin windows were replaced with thicker, tinted glass. I also added air-bag shoulder harnesses.
With a 90-gallon fuel capacity and 13-15 gallon-per-hour fuel burn, its an efficient 155-knot airplane. The long 38-foot wingspan gives it a great platform for flying and positive control at all levels. The cabin space is more than a Beech A36 Bonanza and sitting up high gives a great forward view during flight. The Lycoming 540 aspirated engine is bullet-proof, according to fellow flyers.
Because of its classic vintage, the Comanche is easy to understand mechanically. You will find that many aviation mechanics are well-versed in working on the airframe, plus it is well supported by ICS members. Parts, for the most part, are readily available by Piper vendors and Comanche aftermarket specialists.
As for mission capability, we recently flew from Fond du Lac, Minnesota, to Muskogee, Oklahoma, in 3.5 hours. At 8500 feet we saw speeds of 178 knots burning 13.5 GPH at 60 percent power. As seniors, my wife and I enjoy these kinds of flights in the Comanche and certainly dont miss the hassles of airline terminals and TSA security checks.
The Comanche Society and our Comanche owner friends have made our social life from medicine come alive. We had numerous fly-ins and some experiences would never have happened if it wasnt for our Comanche. Its a great aircraft and lots of fun. We call it our magic carpet ride.
Dr. Robert Fox
Muskogee, Oklahoma
I just thought Id write to let you know how much I like my Comanche 400, N64400. The Comanche has a laminar flow wing with flush rivets that make the airplane really slippery. It started out with an efficient, 180-horsepower powerplant that gave the first Comanches respectable speeds. In fact, the Comanche was the fastest production airplane manufactured with a 180-horsepower engine. But Howard Piper had other plans. Patterned after the P-51 Mustang, Mr. Piper installed a 400-HP engine into his slick Comanche. The results are impressive.
Heres an airplane that has a lot of flexibility. For example, with 400 HP under the cowling, it can climb at over 1600 FPM at its gross weight of 3600 pounds. It will cruise at 16,000 feet at over 170 knots true airspeed and burn about 14 GPH. Or, you can stay at 9000 feet, burn roughly 21 GPH and cruise at 200 knots true airspeed. The 400 Comanche carries 130 gallons of fuel (124 usable) so, at altitude, easy math proves the airplane has long legs. Ive flown from Las Vegas, Nevada, to Eastern Iowa at 17,000 feet, nonstop several times and still had over an hour of fuel remaining. Pull the throttle back to 50 percent power (200 horsepower) and youll reduce the fuel burn to just 16 GPH and still see 165 knots true airspeed.
The eight-cylinder engine runs extremely smoothly. Those extra two pulses really make a difference because a smooth engine is a happy engine.
My Comanche 400 is pretty well equipped, which brings its empty weight to 2080 pounds. With full fuel (800 pounds), that still leaves over 700 pounds of useful load.
Its a great airplane mated to a great engine-the perfect combination that only a visionary like Howard Piper could have developed.
Rick Mascari
via email
I am the second owner of a 1966 B-model Comanche that I purchased in 1985 and have 4000 hours in the airplane. The Comanche 260 is fun to fly, fast, responsive and stable for IFR. It lands safely and usually smoothly, with the correct speed and an exaggerated flare. Strong crosswinds and short field landings are straightforward.
Useful load, long range and weight and balance capabilities are great, in my view. The strong airframe has taken me through extreme turbulence, heavy rain and unintentional icing that accumulated nearly 0.5 inches on the airframe. The onboard XM Weather system has eliminated dangerous weather mistakes that were common decades ago.
This Comanche has most of the available speed kits. It has many faring and gap seals, a VNE increase, Lopresti engine cowl, plus a three- blade propeller.
Generally, I see cruise speeds of 165 kts burning 13 GPH lean of peak, or over 170 knots at 15 GPH rich of peak. Given the value of the airframe, all these aftermarket mods dont make much sense, but when you own a plane for 30 years, these things happen. Unmodified Comanches fly the same, just a little slower. Like other airplanes of this era, the interior is loud and drafty. The interior trim, instrument panel, seats and doors fit poorly.
I own another more modern pressurized airplane, but for fun, the Comanche is my first choice. For the purchase price of a Cessna 172 you get a complex, high-performance transcontinental airplane.
The landing gear and stabilator are unique to Comanches, and a knowledgeable mechanic is required. With a Comanche expert doing the maintenance, these systems have been trouble-free for me, but not cheap. Other systems and accessories on the aircraft are common to many other airplanes. Parts are primarily through boutique suppliers and rarely a problem to source. The engine is reliable, smooth, easy to start and well supported. The engine should make TBO with perhaps only a cylinder or two replaced along the way.
Expensive recurring items are the gear AD at every 1000 hours and the tail AD (who knows the interval?), plus fuel bladder service every 10 years. Youll want to budget $2000 for each of the recurring groups. Base annual inspections should run approximately $3000.
Insurance is $1450 yearly for the $85,000 hull value on my airplane. I figure it costs around $125 hourly to fly, which includes fuel, oil, insurance, maintenance, ADs, engine reserves, avionics repairs (not upgrades) and hangar, amortized over 150 flight hours per year.
Bill Ritter
Odessa, Texas
I have over 30 years experience owning, flying, maintaining and modifying aircraft, including Piper Comanches. The old boys that I learned to fly with would say that if you can shut the door on whatever you got into a Comanche, it would fly away without a problem. I would prove that time and again in my Comanche 250.
In flight, the Comanche is smooth, stable and tight, with a climb rate that is impressive and difficult to prevent. As for range, even an old 250 model with 60 gallons of fuel will generally go from Western Massachusetts to North Carolina in 3.5 hours with one hour of fuel remaining. If you want to coax Comanche 260 speeds from a 250 model, try using the 260s power settings. The engines are identical, but with a different propeller redline.
The AD list is pretty long, but most of the items are one-time fixes, followed by future inspection. Ive found that many aircraft are compliant. The number of available aftermarket mods for the plane is extensive; some are overpriced and pointless in my view, while others are fairly cheap and offer great results. Products from Knots2U and Webco are respected.
The mods that can offer the most speed include relocating the brakes to the inside of the gear forks, gap seals, wheel well slippers and wingroot fairings, both front and rear. Since its important that the flight controls are properly rigged (while assuring the landing gear and landing gear doors are retracted fully and fit flush.) This should be the first step before any aftermarket mods are installed. Ive found that landing gear bungees generally need replacement at every annual inspection.
After years of distance-traveling in my airplane (to places I never would have visited if it werent for my Comanche), I believe a full-featured autopilot is perhaps the most useful avionics system you can buy.
The Comanche market has two price points, really. Consider that you can buy a cream puff in the $125,000 to $150,000 range, and an airplane that needs serious work for $19,000. Either way, a realistic budget should be around $100,000. If you wanted to start out with a cheaper airframe, buy a 180-HP model and do a 260-HP conversion with fuel injection. In my opinion, there is no reason to own a 180 Comanche unless you are consumed with fuel range and can tolerate the vibration from the engine being so far out from the firewall. Converting the engine from four cylinders to six can be signed off with a logbook entry.
Before buying, examine the logs for entries that indicate the airframe has a history of good landing gear system maintenance and repair. With the plane on jacks, swing the gear and look for loose fits and bushings.
All of the fuel bladders should be replaced with new ones. If not, the selling price should be adjusted to reflect a cost of $1500 per bladder.
While Comanche engines are generally dependable, beware of top-end overhauls that were accomplished without replacing the cylinders with new ones. While many Comanches sport three-blade propellers, some could have old clamp-style propellers. A prop can cost $15,000-plus.
Cabin and cowling door repairs are often neglected, so be sure to inspect them for shoddy repairs and improper cabin door seals. A competent tech can generally rig a cabin door in an afternoon.
Even heeding all of my advice, expect to spend money to acquire and keep an aging Comanche.
Don Gagnon
Montague, Massachusetts
