Paul kgyy wrote:
There is some scuttlebutt that the plane is a widowmaker, but I don't
know the reason, though an acquaintance of mine died in one. I believe
the NTSB decided that he mismanaged the fuel transfer while flying an
instrument approach in snow, which may have nothing to do with the
flying characteristics.

The TwinCo is not inherently more dangerous than any other twin.
Back in the days when it was a common twin-trainer and the FAA
required more agressive VMC training/demos... when done improperly
in this airplane will result in a flat spin, not recoverable especially
at the low altitudes these were done at back then. After a few spin
accidents the VMC was raised and the FAA modified VMC demo and
training recommendations to enhance safety.


I think it depends how much you fly it. A twin requires an extra layer
of competence, apart from double the engine maintenance cost.
Remember, if you lose an engine on takeoff and are not current in
engine-out procedures, the second engine will just take you to the
scene of the crash.


True enough. Its a great airplane though, I own a Comanche single
but have some time in the TwinCo. The airframe is very solid (as all
Comanches) and the zinc-chromating Piper used back than (unlike
the Cherokees) will make it last forever if properly cared for.
The main thing is that these planes are getting older and so
there are more potential 'dogs' out there. You have to be
careful to make sure you are buying one that has been maintained
and even upgraded over its lifetime.