Compare the colour pic above vs this one of a similar doored airframe
I found this pic somehow illustrating the difference. The colour pic is a door-less aircraft. The b&w shows a partially retracted doored-airframe vs a door-less retracted unit.
Doors do add complexity, but the EDP is the biggest problem.
Complexity can be dealt with if you can jack up the aircraft and power the hydraulic system for troubleshooting…that is no easy feat when you have an EDP. If I bought that aircraft I would also buy a pair of tall jacks and a hydraulic mule. Those items unfortunately rule out a lot of otherwise useful maintenance arrangements, pushing you towards expensive dealerships who do not have the time or the will to deal with this kind of airplane unless in exchange for $$$$
Cessna improved the 210 over the years and progressively eked out the bugs until it became, arguably, the best all-around SEP sold in numbers.
The gear door system is one part that they did away with from 1979. A lot of earlier 210’s had their doors removed via STC, thinking that would solve their problems. Surprise: it did not. If you look at it carefully why should it? Door removal only took the doors themselves and their actuators, but those were only a fraction of the problem.
Knowing the system intimately, and my airplane has doors, I can say the issue is getting someone to take the time to troubleshoot and adjust it properly. Nothing a regular mechanic with the right tooling and a copy of the maintenance manual cannot do. Cessna still supports most of the parts. Once you do it right, it will not require readjustment for years.
A lot of airplane owners simply expected their airplane to go on for ever with minimal maintenance until misadjustments or misspeced parts (Cessna brought several improvement SB’s that some owners neglected to implement) caused untimely gear retractions. We are not talking multi-AMU SB s but rather 100$ SB’s.
Personally I think one of the reasons our airplane is faster than other P210s is the gear doors, maybe just 5kts but that is plenty on a long trip.
They also keep the wheel wells cleaner, and , best of all: the airplane is sleeker and more beautiful
You may want to read here for more insight about how some owners went through the pain of installing them back.
Quite a good primer on Mx on the type
https://www.avweb.com/ownership/a-letter-to-cessna-210-owners/
172driver wrote:
AFAIK, there also is no STC for the removal of the doors on the early models.
Correct, only from 1970 on.
I find that gear door system amazing. And it really looks good without the open wheel wells.
Yes, and that system is the crux of the issue. It’s extremely complicated, prone to malfunction and difficult to repair or adjust properly. AFAIK, there also is no STC for the removal of the doors on the early models. There is one for the later models and almost all later C210s have the doors removed. It costs a couple of knots but makes mx one hell of a lot easier and thus cheaper.
Well, that plane is for sale the 2nd time in a few years, and actually has risen in price from the first attempt. I hope someone will buy it who knows how to deal with it. For the price it is a lot of airplane and it is very decently equipped too.
Sometimes you have to jump over these things in order to get something extraordinary. I missed out on a M22 Mustang a few years back because it was sold VERY quickly. And while a lot of what has to be said about this old plane would have applied to it even more brutally (by now there is less than 10 of them flying or so I reckon) it still is tempting to buy such a capable airplane for comparatively few money.
172driver wrote:
I would NOT buy this or any early C210
Me neither. With the Comanche it’s the same. Lots and lots of things have been improved over the decades, and the last one (6 seats 260 hp) just comes with lots of initial problems fixed. There’s a lot less to consider. It’s less hassle.
However, flying is not always about arriving at the destination, or not alone. There are even planes from the 1930ies that are amazing travelling machines that – if I had the time for all maintenance involved – would be tempting 
I find that gear door system amazing. And it really looks good without the open wheel wells.
@172driver what passion over a 60 year old timer :)
I do think any complex old timer requires a willingness to learn about the maintenance challenge. The E-Series early Bonanzas have a host of technical peculiarities but have a devoted following, and I sometimes wonder (probably due to Lew Gage’s and ABS expertise on these) whether they are a more satisfying airplane than the later muscle car versions.
On an early 210 it is the condition of the saddles, hydraulic packs are not beyond the wit of man to overhaul and maintain.
Agree with Antonio and have said that further up the thread. The early gear system is ridiculously complex and prone to malfunction. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I would NOT buy this or any early C210.
