I can't argue with Ed about the thrown-together look of the A.C. high-rider. But, I have some hundreds of hours on the lowriders, dating back to 1987 when I bought one. It was my only aircraft for about six years.
The pitch handling of the lowrider with no HS was awful, and potentially dangerous in turbulence. At the time, I didn't know any better. I thought that was just the way gyros were: forward stick in turns, nosing up in updrafts, down in downdrafts... the works.
Only when I started flying FW ultralights (partly out of growing disgust with the A.C. in turbulence) did I even learn what a pitch-stable aircraft felt like.
When I put the factory HS on my lowrider A.C. in the mid-90's, the change in handling was amazing. Yet, we still had a PPO fatality near here, by a gyro newbie who had the HS on his A.C. lowrider (but also had a 532, a pod and aux tanks). The factory HS was not enough to completely PPO-proof the lowrider. See photo. The circle drawn on the picture on the left is where the prop chopped the rotor.
As awkward-looking as the highrider is, it has had zero PPO accidents. Its arrangement of masses is pretty much the same as a Dominator, so that good record is no surprise. I doubt that using light blades on the high-rider would be a problem, though it would pay to check the VCG location with a double hang-test after the switch.
I grew to like the look of my tandem Dominator with its pod. The fact that was such a sweet-handling machine probably colored my opinion.