I think the main problem with a PA24-250 is that of age. It would be too galling for words to run to the expense of a c of a machine, and then find oneself grounded by airframe part availability problems. I reckon that Piper's appetite to produce spares for 50 year old machinery must be fading by now.
Also, I'm just not sure that I'd choose to buy another aircraft with carbs, and therefore carb-heat. It's just so much damned easier to have fuel-injection that doesn't need that kind of silliness. Given that the mission capability for that kind of aircraft is likely to be IFR, why choose an aircraft where you have to worry about carb-icing?
The bar-room chat about comanches (twin and singles) has always been that they were tedious machines to land consistently. I've never flown one, so can't confirm or deny that, and It would be interesting to hear from someone who has?
Last edited by wsmempson; 6th Jun 2016 at 21:31.
Reason: feckin' illiteracy