The April 2004 PLANE&PILOT has a review of the 1974 Piper Pathfinder.
A table at the end of the article compares the 74 Pathfinder to the 74
Skylane.

I don't think Jay is going to be flying over Pike's Peak (14,110 feet)
unless he gets a Cessna. :-)
Service Ceiling PA28-235 ... 13,550
Service Ceiling C182.........17,700

Some other interesting numbers stand out in the comparison.

On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:06:16 GMT, john smith > wrote in
Message-Id: >:

>I don't think Jay is going to be flying over Pike's Peak (14,110 feet)
>unless he gets a Cessna. :-)
>Service Ceiling PA28-235 ... 13,550
>Service Ceiling C182.........17,700

He should be glad he didn't purchase a Charger:
http://www.trade-a-plane.com/unprotected/perf/perf_1475B.html

Cessna doesn't reveal the Skylane's useful load:
http://skylane.cessna.com/spec_perf.chtml


Is the Piper or Cessna able to carry the most payload with full tanks?

Larry Dighera wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:06:16 GMT, john smith > wrote in
> Message-Id: >:
>
>
>>I don't think Jay is going to be flying over Pike's Peak (14,110 feet)
>>unless he gets a Cessna. :-)
>>Service Ceiling PA28-235 ... 13,550
>>Service Ceiling C182.........17,700
>
>
> He should be glad he didn't purchase a Charger:
> http://www.trade-a-plane.com/unprotected/perf/perf_1475B.html
>
> Cessna doesn't reveal the Skylane's useful load:
> http://skylane.cessna.com/spec_perf.chtml
>
>
> Is the Piper or Cessna able to carry the most payload with full tanks?

keeping in mind that these are 1974 models...
Pathfinder 182
average equipped new list price $36,490 $30,475
current values $63,000 $79,000
price appreciation factor 172% 259%
gross weight (lbs) 3,000 2,950
empth weight (lbs) 1,550 1,645
useful load (lbs) 1,450 1,305
horsepower 235 230
power loading (lbs/hp) 12.8 12.8
wing loading (lbs/sqft) 17.6 16.9
total fuel capacity (gal) 82 79
payload, max fuel (lbs) 958 831
cruise speed, 75% (kts) 133 139
best rate of climb SL (fpm) 800 890
Vso 52 50
takeoff run (ft) 850 705
landing run (ft) 1,040 590

> >>I don't think Jay is going to be flying over Pike's Peak (14,110 feet)
> >>unless he gets a Cessna. :-)
> >>Service Ceiling PA28-235 ... 13,550
> >>Service Ceiling C182.........17,700

We've never had any reason to fly higher than 12,500 -- even when we flew to
the Grand Canyon. But we were still climbing pretty smartly when we leveled
off, so I wonder about that ceiling. (Doubt I'll be finding out anytime
soon, however. I don't have an oxygen system.)

> current values $63,000 $79,000

Pfffft! What year are these prices from? I haven't seen a decent
Pathfinder go for less than $80K since we bought ours in 2002. There are
several for sale in T-A-P for $95K+.

> useful load (lbs) 1,450 1,305

Yep, that's what makes the Pathfinder such an awesome plane. To be able to
haul four 200 pounders, full tanks, AND baggage is a wonderful thing.

> best rate of climb SL (fpm) 800 890

Totally bogus. We routinely see 1000+ fpm. Although, to be fair, our
Pathfinder has every speed mod ever made for it, so I don't know what a
stock bird would do.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 20:40:26 GMT, john smith > wrote in
Message-Id: >:

>Larry Dighera wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:06:16 GMT, john smith > wrote in
>> Message-Id: >:
>>
>>
>>>I don't think Jay is going to be flying over Pike's Peak (14,110 feet)
>>>unless he gets a Cessna. :-)
>>>Service Ceiling PA28-235 ... 13,550
>>>Service Ceiling C182.........17,700
>>
>>
>> He should be glad he didn't purchase a Charger:
>> http://www.trade-a-plane.com/unprotected/perf/perf_1475B.html
>>
>> Cessna doesn't reveal the Skylane's useful load:
>> http://skylane.cessna.com/spec_perf.chtml
>>
>>
>> Is the Piper or Cessna able to carry the most payload with full tanks?
>
>keeping in mind that these are 1974 models...
> Pathfinder 182
>average equipped new list price $36,490 $30,475
> current values $63,000 $79,000
> price appreciation factor 172% 259%
> gross weight (lbs) 3,000 2,950
> empth weight (lbs) 1,550 1,645
> useful load (lbs) 1,450 1,305
> horsepower 235 230
> power loading (lbs/hp) 12.8 12.8
> wing loading (lbs/sqft) 17.6 16.9
Service Ceiling (ft) 13,550 17,700
> total fuel capacity (gal) 82 79
> payload, max fuel (lbs) 958 831
> cruise speed, 75% (kts) 133 139
> best rate of climb SL (fpm) 800 890
> Vso 52 50
> takeoff run (ft) 850 705
> landing run (ft) 1,040 590

The Skylane carries about 150 pounds less, at 4-1/2% greater speed, to
a 3,150' higher altitude, with a substantially shorter landing run due
to the Pathfinder's more pronounced ground-effect, and it has two
doors. If the Pathfinder were loaded 150 pounds lighter, it would
reduce the difference between it and the Skylane. If the performance
numbers were the sole criteria in selecting between the two, who could
argue against the Skylane? It even has better sagebrush clearance and
a rain porch, and for photography and pipeline work, ...

Have you got any cabin dimensions?

On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 21:25:11 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote in Message-Id:
<XIL3c.100119$PR3.1812564@attbi_s03>:

>I don't have an oxygen system.

You don't need one below 14,500'.

On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 23:36:31 GMT, Larry Dighera >
wrote in Message-Id: >:

>On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 21:25:11 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote in Message-Id:
><XIL3c.100119$PR3.1812564@attbi_s03>:
>
>>I don't have an oxygen system.
>
>You don't need one below 14,500'.

.... for 30 minutes.

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 23:36:31 GMT, Larry Dighera >
> wrote in Message-Id: >:
>
> >On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 21:25:11 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> > wrote in Message-Id:
> ><XIL3c.100119$PR3.1812564@attbi_s03>:
> >
> >>I don't have an oxygen system.
> >
> >You don't need one below 14,500'.
>
> ... for 30 minutes.

....on a day with low enough pressure to reduce the cabin altitude by 500'.

-- David Brooks

I suspect that the 182's shorter landing performance has more to do with its
better flaps and consequent lower approach speed than with ground effect.

Mike
MU-2

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 20:40:26 GMT, john smith > wrote in
> Message-Id: >:
>
> >Larry Dighera wrote:
> >> On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:06:16 GMT, john smith > wrote in
> >> Message-Id: >:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I don't think Jay is going to be flying over Pike's Peak (14,110 feet)
> >>>unless he gets a Cessna. :-)
> >>>Service Ceiling PA28-235 ... 13,550
> >>>Service Ceiling C182.........17,700
> >>
> >>
> >> He should be glad he didn't purchase a Charger:
> >> http://www.trade-a-plane.com/unprotected/perf/perf_1475B.html
> >>
> >> Cessna doesn't reveal the Skylane's useful load:
> >> http://skylane.cessna.com/spec_perf.chtml
> >>
> >>
> >> Is the Piper or Cessna able to carry the most payload with full tanks?
> >
> >keeping in mind that these are 1974 models...
> > Pathfinder 182
> >average equipped new list price $36,490 $30,475
> > current values $63,000 $79,000
> > price appreciation factor 172% 259%
> > gross weight (lbs) 3,000 2,950
> > empth weight (lbs) 1,550 1,645
> > useful load (lbs) 1,450 1,305
> > horsepower 235 230
> > power loading (lbs/hp) 12.8 12.8
> > wing loading (lbs/sqft) 17.6 16.9
> Service Ceiling (ft) 13,550 17,700
> > total fuel capacity (gal) 82 79
> > payload, max fuel (lbs) 958 831
> > cruise speed, 75% (kts) 133 139
> > best rate of climb SL (fpm) 800 890
> > Vso 52 50
> > takeoff run (ft) 850 705
> > landing run (ft) 1,040 590
>
> The Skylane carries about 150 pounds less, at 4-1/2% greater speed, to
> a 3,150' higher altitude, with a substantially shorter landing run due
> to the Pathfinder's more pronounced ground-effect, and it has two
> doors. If the Pathfinder were loaded 150 pounds lighter, it would
> reduce the difference between it and the Skylane. If the performance
> numbers were the sole criteria in selecting between the two, who could
> argue against the Skylane? It even has better sagebrush clearance and
> a rain porch, and for photography and pipeline work, ...
>
> Have you got any cabin dimensions?
>
>
>
>

Larry Dighera wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 20:40:26 GMT, john smith > wrote in
> Message-Id: >:
>
>
>>Larry Dighera wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:06:16 GMT, john smith > wrote in
>>>Message-Id: >:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I don't think Jay is going to be flying over Pike's Peak (14,110 feet)
>>>>unless he gets a Cessna. :-)
>>>>Service Ceiling PA28-235 ... 13,550
>>>>Service Ceiling C182.........17,700
>>>
>>>
>>>He should be glad he didn't purchase a Charger:
>>>http://www.trade-a-plane.com/unprotected/perf/perf_1475B.html
>>>
>>>Cessna doesn't reveal the Skylane's useful load:
>>>http://skylane.cessna.com/spec_perf.chtml
>>>
>>>
>>>Is the Piper or Cessna able to carry the most payload with full tanks?
>>
>>keeping in mind that these are 1974 models...
>> Pathfinder 182
>>average equipped new list price $36,490 $30,475
>> current values $63,000 $79,000
>> price appreciation factor 172% 259%
>> gross weight (lbs) 3,000 2,950
>> empth weight (lbs) 1,550 1,645
>> useful load (lbs) 1,450 1,305
>> horsepower 235 230
>> power loading (lbs/hp) 12.8 12.8
>> wing loading (lbs/sqft) 17.6 16.9
>
> Service Ceiling (ft) 13,550 17,700
>
>> total fuel capacity (gal) 82 79
>> payload, max fuel (lbs) 958 831
>> cruise speed, 75% (kts) 133 139
>> best rate of climb SL (fpm) 800 890
>> Vso 52 50
>> takeoff run (ft) 850 705
>> landing run (ft) 1,040 590
>
>
> with a substantially shorter landing run due to the Pathfinder's
> more pronounced ground-effect

If you are floating in ground effect, your approach speed is too fast
for your landing weight!

> Have you got any cabin dimensions?

Cabin dimensions found in the PIM's I have for each aircraft do not
include baggage compartment volumes for either aircraft.

"john smith" > wrote in message
...
Pathfinder 182
( . . . )
> takeoff run (ft) 850 705
> landing run (ft) 1,040 590
Manliness 100 .001

--
Jim Fisher

How does this rate on the manliness scale?

http://www.mach3graphics.com/misc%20graphics/jpg/AN225%20&%20MU2J.jpg

Mike
MU-2


"Jim Fisher" > wrote in message
. ..
> "john smith" > wrote in message
> ...
> Pathfinder 182
> ( . . . )
> > takeoff run (ft) 850 705
> > landing run (ft) 1,040 590
> Manliness 100 .001
>
> --
> Jim Fisher
>
>
>

Another photo of a manly high wing.

http://www.mach3graphics.com/misc%20graphics/jpg/AN225%20&%20MU2J.jpg

Mike
MU-2


"Jim Fisher" > wrote in message
. ..
> "john smith" > wrote in message
> ...
> Pathfinder 182
> ( . . . )
> > takeoff run (ft) 850 705
> > landing run (ft) 1,040 590
> Manliness 100 .001
>
> --
> Jim Fisher
>
>
>

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> How does this rate on the manliness scale?
>
> http://www.mach3graphics.com/misc%20graphics/jpg/AN225%20&%20MU2J.jpg
>

It's be better if the MU2 was in the back and honking...

On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:55:57 -0800, "David Brooks"
> wrote in Message-Id:
>:

>> >You don't need one below 14,500'.
>>
>> ... for 30 minutes.
>
>...on a day with low enough pressure to reduce the cabin altitude by 500'.


Thanks.


§ 91.211 Supplemental oxygen.
(a) General. No person may operate a civil aircraft of U.S.
registry—

(1) At cabin pressure altitudes above 12,500 feet (MSL) up to and
including 14,000 feet (MSL) unless the required minimum flight
crew is provided with and uses supplemental oxygen for that part
of the flight at those altitudes that is of more than 30 minutes
duration;

Larry Dighera > wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 23:36:31 GMT, Larry Dighera >
>
>>On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 21:25:11 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
>>
>>>I don't have an oxygen system.
>>
>>You don't need one below 14,500'.
>
>... for 30 minutes.

There's a really big difference between the FARs and your body's
requirements. Just because you are allowed doesn't mean you should.

What's that other plane trying to intimidate you?

Michael

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> How does this rate on the manliness scale?
>
> http://www.mach3graphics.com/misc%20graphics/jpg/AN225%20&%20MU2J.jpg
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
>
> "Jim Fisher" > wrote in message
> . ..
> > "john smith" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > Pathfinder 182
> > ( . . . )
> > > takeoff run (ft) 850 705
> > > landing run (ft) 1,040 590
> > Manliness 100 .001
> >
> > --
> > Jim Fisher
> >
> >
> >
>
>

On 10 Mar 2004 23:29:43 -0700, Blanche >
wrote in Message-Id: >:

>There's a really big difference between the FARs and your body's
>requirements. Just because you are allowed doesn't mean you should.

I'm sure you are correct about the difference between individual
tolerance to hypoxia. I recall reading that General Yeager was able
to withstand operating at 20,000' without oxygen.

AN225, a one of a kind, six engine monster.

Jay, you could put your Pathfinder (full fuel, four 200lb people and
baggage), AND the Mighty Grape, AND your motel inside and bring the lot to
OSH where you could probably get a lot more for your aviation suites.

Mike
MU-2


"Michael 182" > wrote in message
news:WiU3c.2937$bP2.32194@attbi_s53...
> What's that other plane trying to intimidate you?
>
> Michael
>
> "Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
> hlink.net...
> > How does this rate on the manliness scale?
> >
> > http://www.mach3graphics.com/misc%20graphics/jpg/AN225%20&%20MU2J.jpg
> >
> > Mike
> > MU-2
> >
> >
> > "Jim Fisher" > wrote in message
> > . ..
> > > "john smith" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > Pathfinder 182
> > > ( . . . )
> > > > takeoff run (ft) 850 705
> > > > landing run (ft) 1,040 590
> > > Manliness 100 .001
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jim Fisher
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

> Jay, you could put your Pathfinder (full fuel, four 200lb people and
> baggage), AND the Mighty Grape, AND your motel inside and bring the lot to
> OSH where you could probably get a lot more for your aviation suites.

Yeah, I saw that monster a few years ago -- I think at OSH?

It was parked nose-to-nose with our own C-5 Galaxy -- quite a sight!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Larry Dighera wrote:
>
> I'm sure you are correct about the difference between individual
> tolerance to hypoxia. I recall reading that General Yeager was able
> to withstand operating at 20,000' without oxygen.

Nearly all of the pilots in the Great War could. Only some of the German aircraft
had oxygen systems, and I've not heard of any Allied aircraft that did. Ceiling
on the S.P.A.D. was 6,000 meters, according to Nordhoff and Hall.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

I must have missed OSH that year. I would really like to see the AN225 and
have always liked the *biggest* anything. Anyway, you might show this:

http://www.metal-club.org/12-Cylinder.html

to your mechanic for his new boat.

Mike
MU-2


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:QW%3c.8032$mM.66712@attbi_s02...
> > Jay, you could put your Pathfinder (full fuel, four 200lb people and
> > baggage), AND the Mighty Grape, AND your motel inside and bring the lot
to
> > OSH where you could probably get a lot more for your aviation suites.
>
> Yeah, I saw that monster a few years ago -- I think at OSH?
>
> It was parked nose-to-nose with our own C-5 Galaxy -- quite a sight!
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

Holy crap -- that's an ENGINE!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Mike Rapoport ) wrote:

> Another photo of a manly high wing.
>
> http://www.mach3graphics.com/misc%20graphics/jpg/AN225%20&%20MU2J.jpg

That Russian aircraft had better watch the MU2's wake turbulence.


--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 01:18:12 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> wrote in Message-Id:
. net>:

>I suspect that the 182's shorter landing performance has more to do with its
>better flaps and consequent lower approach speed than with ground effect.

The PA28's flaps are considerably closer to the pavement than the
Cessna's. That might increase ground effect. I agree, that a heaver
load at a higher speed is a significant contributor to the PA28's
longer landing run also.

Perhaps there are errors in the specifications posted:

> >john smith > wrote in Message-Id:
>:
> >keeping in mind that these are 1974 models...
> > Pathfinder 182
> >average equipped new list price $36,490 $30,475
> > current values $63,000 $79,000
> > price appreciation factor 172% 259%
> > gross weight (lbs) 3,000 2,950
> > empty weight (lbs) 1,550 1,645
> > useful load (lbs) 1,450 1,305
> > horsepower 235 230
> > power loading (lbs/hp) 12.8 12.8
> > wing loading (lbs/sqft) 17.6 16.9
> Service Ceiling (ft) 13,550 17,700
> > total fuel capacity (gal) 82 79
> > payload, max fuel (lbs) 958 831
> > cruise speed, 75% (kts) 133 139
> > best rate of climb SL (fpm) 800 890
> > Vso 52 50
> > takeoff run (ft) 850 705
> > landing run (ft) 1,040 590
>


TAP proffers these considerably different numbers:

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/unprotected/perf/perf_1475B.html
PIPER PA28-235 PATHFINDER
Engine: LYC O-540-B4B5 75% Cruise: 133 kts Wingspan: 32.00 ft
Horsepower: 235 Stall: 52 kts Length: 24.08 ft
Rec'md TBO: 2000 hrs Range: 915 nm Height: 7.25 ft
Srv Ceiling: 14500 ft Empty Wt: 1435 lbs
Std Fuel: 50 gal Gross Wt: 2900 lbs
Max Fuel: 84 gal
Takeoff (over 50 ft obstacle): 1040 ft
Landing (over 50 ft obstacle): 1060 ft
Takeoff: 600 ft
Landing: 550 ft

Here are Plane and Pilot magazine's numbers:
http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/content/specs/00cessna182s.html
2000 Cessna 182S

SPECIFICATIONS
Base Price: $227,900
Engine make/model: Lycoming IO-540-AB1A5
Horsepower@rpm@altitude: 230@2400@SL
Horsepower For Takeoff: 230
TBO hours: 2000
Fuel Type: 100/100LL
Propeller type/diameter (in.): McCauley CS three-blade/79 in.
Landing gear type: Tri/Fixed
Max ramp weight (lbs.): 3110
Gross weight (lbs): 3100
Landing weight (lbs.): 2950
Std. empty weight (lbs.): 1928
Useful load - std. (lbs.): 1182
Payload - full std. fuel (lbs.): 654
Usable fuel - std. (gals.): 88
Oil capacity (qts.): 9
Wingspan (ft.-in) 36
Overall length (ft.): 29
Height (ft.-in): 9 ft. 4 in.
Wing area (sq. ft.): 174
Wing loading (lbs./sq. ft.): 17.8
Power loading (lbs./hp.): 13.5
Wheel track (ft.): 9
Wheel size: 6.00 x 6
Seating capacity: 4
Cabin doors: 2
Cabin width (in.): 42
Cabin height (in.): 48.5
Baggage capacity (lbs.): 200
PERFORMANCE
Cruise speed (knots):
Altitude Speed
80% power: 6000 140
65% power: 8000 130
55% power: 10,000 121
Max range (with IFR reserve) (nm):
75% power: 6000 820
65% power: 10,000 910
55% power: 10,000 968
Fuel consumption (gph):
75% power @ 6000 ft.: 12.5
65% power @ 8000 ft.: 11.1
55% power @ 10,000 ft.: 9.5

Estimated endurance (65%) (hrs.): 7.0
Stall speed (gear, flaps up) (kts.): 56
Stall speed (gear, flaps down) (kts.): 50
Best rate of climb (fpm): 924
Best rate of climb (@8,000 ft.) (fpm): 565 (est.)
Service ceiling (ft.): 18,100
Takeoff ground roll (ft.): 795
Takeoff over 50-ft. obstacle (ft.): 1514
Landing ground roll (ft.): 590
Landing over 50-ft. obstacle (ft.): 1350


---------------------------------------------

1968 PIPER CHEROKEE 235C (N9474W)

SPECIFICATIONS
Engine make/model: Lycoming O-540-B4B5
Horsepower@altitude: 235@SL
Horsepower for takeoff: 235
TBO hours: 2000
Fuel type: 100/100LL
Propeller type: Hartzell CS
Landing gear type: Tri/Fixed
Max ramp weight (lbs.): 2900
Gross weight (lbs.): 2900
Landing weight (lbs.): 2900
Std. empty weight (lbs.): 1467
Useful load - std. (lbs.): 1433
Payload - full std. fuel (lbs.): 929
Usable fuel - std. (gals.): 84
Oil capacity (qts.): 12
Wingspan (ft.): 32
Overall length: 23 ft. 9 in.
Height: 7 ft. 1 in.
Wing area (sq. ft.): 171.6
Wing loading (lbs./sq. ft.): 17
Power loading (lbs./hp): 12.4
Wheel size (in.): 6.00 x 6
Seating capacity: 4
Cabin doors: 1
Cabin width (in.): 44
Cabin height (in.): 47
Baggage capacity (lbs.): 200
PERFORMANCE
Cruise speed (knots):
ALTITUDE SPEED
75% power: 8000 136
65% power: 8000 130
55% power: 8000 122
Max range (with reserve) (nm):
75% power: 813*
65% power: 879*
55% power: 949*
Fuel consumption (@.42lbs./hp/hr.)(gph):
75% power: 12.3*
65% power: 10.7*
55% power: 9.0*
Estimated endurance- 65% (hrs.): 6.5*
Stall speed - flaps up (kts.): 57
Stall speed - flaps down (kts.): 52
Best rate of climb SL(fpm): 825
Best rate of climb, 8000 ft. (fpm): 500*
Service ceiling (ft.) 14,500
Takeoff ground roll (ft.): 800
Takeoff over 50-ft. obstacle (ft.): 1360
Landing ground roll (ft.): 680
Landing over 50-ft. obstacle (ft.): 1300
* calculated



Have you any idea of the correct figures? Plane and Pilot only shows
a 1 knot difference in Vs.