Kyle Boatright wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Jay Honeck wrote:


After 1973, there is simply no better fixed-gear aircraft than a
-235/-236. It is the ultimate expression of the Cherokee line, and we
have found very few mission parameters that our Pathfinder won't meet
or exceed.

It depends on your mission. I'll take a 182 over a 235 any day.

Matt


There are several performance measures where the PA-235/236 generally
trounces the C-182.

The first is price. The Pipers are $10k less expensive due to Cessna having
more brand loyalists. $10k buys a lot of avgas, a decent panel update, or a
very nice paintjob and a few aftermarket speed mod's.

A second is useful load. All of the Pipers have a ~1400 lb useful load,
which is anywhere between 100 and 400 pounds more than various iterations of
the 182.

A third is that the Piper has a Lycoming engine, whereas the Cessna has a
Continental. Lycomings tend to need less top end work than Continentals.

The speeds of the various models are comparable. The Cessnas probably have
a higher ceiling and can get in and out of shorter fields.

For me, the Piper is the clear winner, but if you're playing at being a bush
pilot or flying in high density altitudes, the Cessna may be a better
choice.

I fly into a number of grass strips and fields with narrow runways and
lots of snow in the winter (well MOST winters anyway!). The Skylane is
far superior in these conditions. Also, I can much more easily find
emergency landing areas when I can see downward. The Arrow I fly now is
a real pain in this regard.

Does the 235 had a different fuselage design than the other Cherokee
family members? I find the Chrokee 180s and the Arrow I currently fly
to be very tight in shoulder width compared the the 182 I owned. And
having only one door that opens the cockpit to rain (at least it is on
the passengers seat!) is a real pain in bad weather. Nothing as nice as
running through the rain to my 182 and then loading up in a leisurely
manner under the protection of the wing. And you just can't beat having
two large doors.

If you fly into only improved fields, over friendly terrain and are a
fair weather flier (Jay's mission profile), then I won't argue that a
235 is probably a good choice. If you fly in inclement weather, over
hostile terrain where finding an emergency landing area may be tricky,
like more room, etc., then the 182 is a better choice.

To say that one airplane is "best" is just stupid as it all depends on
your mission.

Matt