Oh boy. Here we go. A Wikipedia expert. You notice there’s not one Shrike in flight loss there? Of course you didn’t. You understand the vendetta that Australian had and the back story where he conflates all the old plane issues and does not differentiate gross over stress and, well never mind. I ain’t got time for this. Show what you don’t know.

So my wife and I have been trying to find a replacement for our wonderful mini-van model... which we've now owned three ~ and run up to some pretty high mileage. We were NOT originally mini-van people. Who knew?? We have been looking for three years, and don't decide on these things lightly ~ even though we could. We finally decided on the Honda Pilot... not because of the name. Quite the contrary. I even rented one (which we never do) and drove it all over to test it out. Like anything, it has its pluses and minuses, but I liked it... even over the fancier luxury brands. It's really her car. The one she prefers is of course one of the top models. We had finally decided to get a 2022 'Elite', and ultimately come to find out that the reliability of the thing is essentially abysmal - or at the very least, highly questionable. Honda is not supporting the issues. In fact, also discovered there's a class action law suit over the car right now. People are in an uproar over it. I found a website: https://www.piloteers.org/ where you can read all about it. Again, who knew?? They say Honda has always been a respected brand with great reliability and good customer service. Now they say, buyer beware, it's not your father's Honda. I've only owned one Honda automobile, and believe it or not, I found many things that were cheaply made over time and those had to be totally restored @ 9,000 miles. It was an Acura NSX.

Why am I telling you all this crap? If you can afford it, buy what your heart tells you to buy and what you are going to be most satisfied with. Keep an open mind. If you can afford a Twin Commander or a Navajo, money may not be the issue... particularly if you've owned an MU-2. As some have mentioned here (including myself in the past), consider what your wife likes if you want additional harmony in the purchase. However, make sure YOU are happy with it though, because no matter what you get, YOU are going to be working on it, taking it to get work done on it, and writing the checks for it. People will tell you all kinds of mumbo jumbo that isn't true. The truth is, they've ALL got their pros and cons, and junk you're going to have to deal with, and it's ALL expensive. I just laugh at people on here that are comparing speeds within 5 knots, fuel burns within 10 gallons an hour, and different maintenance issues. You're one ATC vector away from all that collapsing my friend. If you're THAT price sensitive over satisfaction in your purchase, go buy a Cessna 172 and be happy.

Both the Commander and the Navajo are good planes with very different issues. They both are going to burn about the same amount of fuel, and cost close to the same to overhaul the IO/TIO-540 Lycs, and the expensive 3-blade Hartzells. They're both going to probably need avionics upgrades. They are both GREAT planes! Both are good short-field steeds too. You CAN get parts for BOTH! With the issues of the later Shrikes, I personally would go for the 500B and just restore it, or choose from the examples that come up for sale regularly. A good, solid 500U or 500S might be OK too, if you do a good spar inspection before you plunk the dough down. Central Airlines has a bunch of spare 500B's they'll never need sitting on the north end @ Mosby, MO you could choose from. Most have their TKS mod already. Have them build you up one, and then take it to Byerly to make it perfect and do the finish work.

You can find good Navajos too if you look and don't waste time. The cartels are buying them up for cash like hotcakes for their network (especially the short bodies), so you better not waste time there. That's a fact. I've watched and followed a crap-ton of them leave in the last three years to the south under obvious circumstances. Several bought right out from under me. They'll come after the Chieftains soon ~ some already have. No, I'm not kidding. I currently have a good -310 Navajo that I just replaced the entire instrument panel in and did a bunch of other work on ($100K). About to do the interior, unless I sell it to a mapping company. These mapping companies are the other ones sucking the life out of the Navajo/Chieftain market. Navajos are a good weather plane too, and there are a lot of great mods for them to reduce problems and long-term costs.

The point of all this ~ if there is one - BUY WHAT YOUR HEART DESIRES! A great deal of this airplane stuff is about emotion and passion. You've done your homework (I hope). You know your desires (because most of this aviation stuff is about wants, not "needs"), you know where your passion and your billfold lies. If YOU LOVE IT, your spouse probably will too. But make no mistake... there will be problems, and you will be dealing with and paying for them, no matter which one you choose. What Bruce said about taking planes 1,000+ miles to get quality work done these days... is also a sad fact of the times. There's just not good, quality, reasonable, trustworthy shops on every corner anymore. Keep that in mind if you have a specialty airframe. It can add great cost and hassle to your bottom line of ownership.

Hope that dissertation muddied the water up for you a little more. I don't know what came over me here this morning. ???

Good luck, best wishes in your decision, and God bless. ~ ME

Great points Mark. Thanks for sharing this.

I still lust after a Shrike.

There are faster airplanes out there. There are twins that are more efficient and economical to operate.

But for me nothing has the ramp presence of a 500S. Out of the 79 different types of airplanes I've flown, they're easily one of the nicest flying to boot. The Navajo and Baron simply don't compare.

I'm not the least bit afraid of an inflight spar failure. The S-models difficulties in regard to corrosion are well documented and no different than the bugaboos one deals with on other airplanes. Spar carry-though on the the D-18. Cylinder issues with any large bore Continental. Poor quality control combined with a thinner gauge aluminum than should have been used on the PA-38, resulting in a twisting of the wing under load that combined with it's longitudinal stability characteristics and certain CG ranges, can make the Tomahawk unrecoverable in a spin.

Who cares? None of these are show stoppers for a professional, proficient aviator with the right resources. I always cringe when somebody says:

"I'd never fly a _______ because of _________."

But I'm probably guilty of that myself on occasion.

Right now I'm enjoying the Stearman when the weather cooperates and looking forward to spring in the Pacific Northwest. And I'm squirreling away funds and working on preparing my wife for the reality of an additional airplane at some point in the next three years. That she'll be able to travel in it may be my saving grace.

She's not much for the open cockpit acro.

And Bruce (As always) is right. Somebody could gift you a nice airframe and you'd still be underwater making a capable traveling airplane.

Bruce is fully aware that there is a Commander after which I lust. As he has pointed out, residual value would be that of a boat anchor in the Sahara Desert. What I fear most is the downtime its maintenance would require. I have no use for a hangar queen.

In the end, my cautious nature will rule the day, and I will pass.

Jg

My wife and kids loved our Navajo CR for the creature-comforts and I appreciated the weather capabilities, but ultimately persistent electrical-gremlins soured me.

For all of its ’cabin class’ equipment, the bus set up and wiring left much to be desired. The best de-ice equipment in the world is only as good as the electricals that operate it.

Maybe I just got unlucky in a super-clean airframe with a hidden achilles heal.

I don’t have much to say that has not been said on this or another thread. Beech talk was a great source of I formation for me, as I was in your shoes last year. I cut my multi teeth in a 500B and have flown and maintained them for many years. There are airplanes you fly, and there are airplanes you wear. The commander the latter. They commander was always home for me, short unimproved fields, hauls a load, a pleasure to fly.

When it was time to buy a family hauler including in-laws, I needed 7+seats. Also my wife was not happy in the back on the commander. As the nacelles restrict the view of the horizon, making her more prone to airsickness. I guess she felt more boxed in. The long boded commander weren’t a good option. Due the age and scarcity of parts and engines. ( and I do love the geared engines). Loading the commander, 4 adults, two kids in car seats, dog, food and bags for a 5 day trip was tight. Not a weight problem, but space. Extended baggage a must for Commander.

I looked at the 421 and the Cheiftain. For the mission the Cheiftain checked the boxes. I did not have any PA31 experience, and never a fan of a post LockHaven Piper. We settled on a ‘75 31-350 Panther, I am very pleased with the airplane. Passengers enjoy the airplane. Hauls a load,very comfortable, lots of room. Love the TIO-540J2BD’s. The Cheiftain is not known for is handling, but gets the job done. It does not have the pilots door, I wish it did.

Not exactly apple to apples, and I don’t have any C model experience, but here are some observations. Maintenance is a wash, obviously non turbo’s less maintenance. The advantage to PA31 is that there a countless airplanes being parted out. Twin Commander has parts but can be expensive. Cheiftain tight on fuel with 192 gal, shrike much more efficient. Navajo has better engine access for mx. Don’t need a ladder the check fuel and oil. Navajo has more factory items, boots, a/c, baggage, turbos. Cargo door big plus. Navajo VGs help, commander not needed. Better pilot visibility in Commander. Also a stretch, but I do the think about that in a crash, best to have the mass of engines and fuel in front and below you, than above and behind.

In short, I think that Commander is a pilot’s airplane. The Navajo, a passenger’s airplane.

Ryan

You fellas are awful generous - I am wrong all the time, just ask my wife

Speaking of mistakes, I enjoy passing mine along lessons learned. I bought a Shrike and unfortunately have had some real challenges due to a particularly dishonest seller but it’s coming along. Had a nice flight to Nashville yesterday, my copilot caught the video of me missing the touchdown markers in search of the elusive greaser …

https://youtu.be/jQ3Ua4RUElw

Great video, awesome ride you have there!

I really appreciate all of the comments. In the end, it really does come down to which airplane can be maintained at or near my home base. In the case of the Navajo I have experienced mechs at both bases. The Commander would require a longish flight.

I close on the MU2 this week and I already miss it, but she’s headed to a great home out west.