According to the owner of the airplane, who was the non-flying pilot seated in the right seat, prior to takeoff an engine runup was completed with no anomalies observed, and in addition, the wind sock indicated a calm wind. The owner reported that he and the pilot flying briefed the procedures for a short-field takeoff, back taxied to the end of the runway, and applied the brakes. The pilot flying increased the engine power, released the brakes, and began the takeoff roll. He attempted to rotate; however, the stall warning sounded, and he lowered the nose to accelerate more. The pilot flying again attempted to rotate, the stall warning horn sounded, and at this point the owner took the controls, calling for an aborted takeoff. The owner reduced engine power and applied the brakes; however, the airplane continued off the end of the runway and struck a ditch. A postaccident fire ensued, and the pilots and passenger egressed the airplane without injury. During the accident sequence, the airplane incurred substantial damage to the wings and fuselage. The owner reported no preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. According to the airplane’s pilot operating handbook, the flaps should be set to the second notch, or 25° for a short field takeoff. After the accident, a Federal Aviation Administration inspector examined the airplane and noted that the flaps were in the first notch, or 10° position. Further, the owner acknowledged that, “…it is possible that the flaps were not set correctly on takeoff.” Given this information, it is likely that the pilot did not properly configure the airplane, which is why the airplane was unable to become airborne during the short field takeoff attempt.