Rear passenger legroom in arrow

I currently fly a 1969 140 and am considering buying an Arrow. Is there
more leg room for rear passengers in the Arrow than the 140? Is there a
difference in the pre 72 and post 72 Arrows with the longer fuselage as far
as legroom. I'm tall and need the seat back which doesn't leave any leg room
in the 140. I've been told the PA-28 line is all about the same but I have a
hard time believing a true 4 seater would have as little leg room in back as
the 140.

In a previous article, "Dahlin" said:
in the 140. I've been told the PA-28 line is all about the same but I have a
hard time believing a true 4 seater would have as little leg room in back as
the 140.


Don't know about the Arrow, but since it's the same fuselage, I assume my
experience with the PA28-161, -181 and -236 would apply. All of these
aircraft have more leg room in the back than a -140. I'm a tall and wide
person and I've sat in the back of a -236 for a hour long flight, and it
was *not* fun. Possible, but not fun.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Why don't companies make second-person shooter games? I mean, we
have first-person, and third-person. Why not second-person?
-- Joe Moore

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:00:53 -0400, "Dahlin"
wrote:

I currently fly a 1969 140 and am considering buying an Arrow. Is there
more leg room for rear passengers in the Arrow than the 140? Is there a
difference in the pre 72 and post 72 Arrows with the longer fuselage as far
as legroom. I'm tall and need the seat back which doesn't leave any leg room
in the 140. I've been told the PA-28 line is all about the same but I have a
hard time believing a true 4 seater would have as little leg room in back as
the 140.

I can't speak for the Arrow, but for the PA28-180, 1972 still has the
short fuselage, 1973 has the stretch.

-Nathan

Dahlin wrote:
I currently fly a 1969 140 and am considering buying an Arrow. Is there
more leg room for rear passengers in the Arrow than the 140? Is there a
difference in the pre 72 and post 72 Arrows with the longer fuselage as far
as legroom. I'm tall and need the seat back which doesn't leave any leg room
in the 140. I've been told the PA-28 line is all about the same but I have a
hard time believing a true 4 seater would have as little leg room in back as
the 140.




I haven't been in a 140, but the club I belong to owns a 67 Arrow and
the leg room in the rear is virtually non-existent, especially if the
front seaters have legs longer than 20". After owning a Skylane, the
Arrow is terribly cramped, especially in the rear. It really is
suitable only for kids.


Matt

Matt Whiting wrote in
:

I haven't been in a 140, but the club I belong to owns a 67 Arrow and
the leg room in the rear is virtually non-existent, especially if the
front seaters have legs longer than 20". After owning a Skylane, the
Arrow is terribly cramped, especially in the rear. It really is
suitable only for kids.

There was a "stretch" somewhere along the line. I know my 1977 turbo Arrow
III has it. Back seats are "ok" (none of them are going to be great).
Don't have my data books here to know exactly when the extra 18" or so were
put in.

According to "The Cherokee Tribe" by Terry Lee Rodgers (Cherokee Pilots'
Association, no date given), the Arrow 180 and 200 has a fuselage length of
24' 2" through 1971. The Arrow II has a length of 24' 7" starting in 1972.
The Arrow III has a length of 27'! I have trouble believing that last
number. Any Arrow III owners able to confirm that the tapered-wing Arrows
are over two feet longer?

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)

I don't have to like Bush and Cheney (Or Kerry, for that matter) to love
America

"Dahlin" wrote in message
...
I currently fly a 1969 140 and am considering buying an Arrow. Is there
more leg room for rear passengers in the Arrow than the 140? Is there a
difference in the pre 72 and post 72 Arrows with the longer fuselage as
far
as legroom. I'm tall and need the seat back which doesn't leave any leg
room
in the 140. I've been told the PA-28 line is all about the same but I have
a
hard time believing a true 4 seater would have as little leg room in back
as
the 140.

Bob Chilcoat wrote:
: According to "The Cherokee Tribe" by Terry Lee Rodgers (Cherokee Pilots'
: Association, no date given), the Arrow 180 and 200 has a fuselage length of
: 24' 2" through 1971. The Arrow II has a length of 24' 7" starting in 1972.
: The Arrow III has a length of 27'! I have trouble believing that last
: number. Any Arrow III owners able to confirm that the tapered-wing Arrows
: are over two feet longer?

It's True. About 14" added to cabin. "Spacious" rear seat, from a lightplane
standard. Even roomier than "economy" class airline seats!
(The Arrow 3 in question is not mine. It is a '77 Arrow 3, though. Boy,
would I like to have those 72 gal fuel tanks!)
--
Aaron Coolidge

"Bob Chilcoat" wrote in message ...
According to "The Cherokee Tribe" by Terry Lee Rodgers (Cherokee Pilots'
Association, no date given), the Arrow 180 and 200 has a fuselage length of
24' 2" through 1971. The Arrow II has a length of 24' 7" starting in 1972.
The Arrow III has a length of 27'! I have trouble believing that last
number. Any Arrow III owners able to confirm that the tapered-wing Arrows
are over two feet longer?


Terry used the manufacturing years instead of the model years. In
order to avoid confusion, the 5 inch fuselage stretch began with the
'73 model year, some of which were manufactured in late '72.

For the OP, this 5 inch stretch was almost entirely confined to the
back seat area. There is a big difference in rear seat legroom when
you go from a '72 model to a '73 model. And BTW, the -140 fuselage was
never stretched, so they all have crappy rear seat legroom, even after
'73.

I'm not sure if the 27' length for the Arrow III is correct. I'm
suspecting that the increase in overall length might have something to
do with the T-tail that was introduced with the III model. I believe
it sits back farther since it's mounted on the top of a rear-slaning
vertical stab. I know that interior space from the Arrow II to the
Arrow III was not noticably different.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

Bob Chilcoat wrote:
According to "The Cherokee Tribe" by Terry Lee Rodgers (Cherokee Pilots'
Association, no date given), the Arrow 180 and 200 has a fuselage length of
24' 2" through 1971. The Arrow II has a length of 24' 7" starting in 1972.
The Arrow III has a length of 27'! I have trouble believing that last
number. Any Arrow III owners able to confirm that the tapered-wing Arrows
are over two feet longer?

According to the pretty picture in the POH for my '79 model
t-tail Arrow IV, the length is 26' 11.9"

Room in the back is ok, not great.

What light planes DO have nice backseats? Also, if you are below 200hp, you
are unlikely going to need much room back there.

I am just shy of 6'3". Most planes become 3 seaters with me up front.

So far, I see a 182 is okay for a small person behind me, a Cirrus is okay
as well.

I would have to adjust my seat for a Mooney to work well. Haven't seen the
long Arrows, but the regular ones - forget about it. 172, no soap.

Diamond wins by far in this category because the front seats have adjustable
rudders, not seats. The back seats are rather spacious. Unfortunately, the
new ones have gotten heavy and now you really only need 3 seats.

Have not yet tried the back seat of the Lancair.