Looks like there are two 400 Comanches for sale that are priced similar to a V35. One is right at $100K and another is at $110K. I've always heard them called a poor mans P51. Anybody ever flown one?

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetai ... 144576.htm
http://www.chooseyouritem.com/airplanes ... 74119.html

Bryan,
haven't flown one. Knew a guy in OKC @ PWA that flew one. He swore that it would outrun anybody's Bonanza.

I thought that with that much HP it probably could, it just looked so outdated compared to a V-tail.

You might find this interesting.....

http://www.comanchepilot.com/Tech_Artic ... anche.html

Isn't that the 8 cylinder? They had one at San Jose for the AOPA Convention last year. Pretty impressive, both for what's there, and for what it must demand (in AMU's)!

John

They fly great. There aren't many of them. The engines are very pricey. They burn lots of gas.

There is one based on my field (yes, it is mine ).

The first time I saw it with the cowl off required a double-take. The 720 Lycoming is monstrous. I expect they are fast as well as thirsty.

The rumor I heard was that Bill Piper built it for himself because he wanted a "hotrod". I think he and Don Gumm would have been friends.

-MO

Hi Mark, I didn't know Bill Piper but a hangar neighbor and friend at CNO did have one of the nicest Turbo 400 Comanches I've seen. We both flew for the Orange county Sheriffs Aero Sqdn together and yes when we flew like missions he was somewhat quicker, but I am not turbo'd and didn't burn near as much fuel while carrying a much more versatile load. Don

Don -

Agreed, no matter how big the motor - it still looks like a Comanche.

What is it they say ... "Beauty may be skin deep, but Ugly is to the bone".


Mike -

22 GPH? My guess is that is a very conservative fuel burn number for that thing. I bet is is more like 32. My buddy's Saratoga II TC burns more like 24GPH.

I know you meant ... LOP


-MO

IIRC the 720 is literally two IO0360s with a common crankshaft. 2x12=24 GPH sounds about right for 75% ROP. LOP that would be a bit more than 20 gph using the 14.9 HP/gph formula so 100 ROP might be 1-2 gph less than that 24 figure..

There's always something sexy about an overpowered hotrod - even if it's a Comanche

Aviation Consumer's Used Aircraft Guide calls this one "the ultimate in wretched excess"

They quote 185-195 knots at 20-22 gph for the NA version. 145 were built 1964-65 when gas was cheap and women were, um, well,

Over the years I've read the Comanche Flyer newsletter at many a family function at my inlaws house. Many times I've read that because of the drag of the airframe being constant if you fly a 180, 250, 260 and 400 hp models side by side at the same speed they will have similar fuel burns. With that being the case imagine the range of a 400 if the pilot could keep from pushing the throttle all the way in. With a 10 gph burn and 130 gallons of fuel the plane could get you a long, long way. At 150 knots I'm guessing around a 12 gph burn based on a stock injected 260's numbers. That's 10 hours plus reserve. For a long distance flyer this could make a lot of sense.

There has always been a question that bounces around my mind and depending on where I'm at in my flying I find myself on both sides of the concept. For example. Let's say my comfort level, or desire is a plane that will cruise at 160 knots at 12 gallons per hour and carry 4 people. Is it better to have a smaller displacement under the hood that will meet these needs when flogging it, or to have extra cubes and run the engine easy pretty easy? The 400 Comanche kind of represents the extreme end of this question that I often ponder.

In an airplane, there's a big advantage in a bigger engine, especially if the bigger engine doesn't add much weight. The advantage comes from being able to produce enough power to generate best range IAS at a higher altitude. This doesn't mean it will go further but it will get there faster ignoring the wind. The downsides besides extra weight are the extra friction losses of a larger engine.

My Comanche 260C is a great plane and the 400 is faster with less payload, but the issue with all Comanches is parts availability, such as gear motors/transmissions. The good news at least for the 400 is that it is not atypical for the owner to have a supply of such hard-to-find parts in their hangar.

The idea of the 400 was that you could fly it more like a turboed aircraft using the ability to maintain climb up to 20k or so to get into an area of 'TAS gain' and reduced fuel flows. Don't think that that really worked, but the idea was not to fly down low at brutal power settings.

Haven't had a chance to fly one, saw one taking off once and it accellerates quite impressively (with the rudder pretty much at full deflection).

As I understand engine parts are actually readily available as Lycoming still sells them new for the various Excalibur conversions and some obscure brasilian ag-plane. It is the airframe parts that require good contacts as piper has abandoned that red-headed step-child and the low number of airframes makes the used parts supply scarce.

Boy, I interpreted that subject line very differently until I read the thread.

Having lived in Albuquerque for a number of years, I know a lot of Sandia, Isleta, Zuni, Navajo, Jemez, Apache, and Havasupai, but no Commanches.