Warrior cruise RPM settings

This is one reason I no longer lease back my airplane -- because people ran
it without regard for fuel burn, and the FBO charged me for the waste. When
I fly it, I get 150knots at 10.5 gph, but I saw renters burn 40 gal every
three hours. Nuts.

Seth
Comanche N8100R

"Nick" wrote in message
...
When I used to rent a Warrior 160hp, I would usually fly it with the
throttle firewalled.

Does the Warrior you fly have wheel pants on? If not that would cost you
a least 5 knots.

Nick
PA28-180 'D'

lardsoup wrote:
I rent a Warrior from a local FBO and usually set the RPMs to 2400 in
cruise. It gets about 110kts at
2400. But that seems too slow. Heck I've been getting 110kts from one
of
their C152s. Rereading the
POH I see that the cruise RPM settings can be 2500 or 2600. So I'm
curious.
Where do others run their
Warriors while in cruise. I'm not concerned about fuel burn because fuel
is
included in the rental price
and my typical flight is around 2 hours. I know an old Warrior is no
SR-71,
but I want to at least try for
some more speed. Thanks.

Seth Masia wrote:
This is one reason I no longer lease back my airplane -- because people ran
it without regard for fuel burn, and the FBO charged me for the waste. When
I fly it, I get 150knots at 10.5 gph, but I saw renters burn 40 gal every
three hours. Nuts.



I generally run at 65-75% power, with whatever fuel burn keeps the mags from
loading up. And if I'm flying something with a constant speed prop, I try to
run the power at whatever combination will allow the slowest RPM (for reduced
noise). 2100 RPM is quite a bit easier on my ears than 2400 RPM.... and I can
still pull 65% power if I don't go too high.

I never saw much sense in running balls to the wall on a rental. Sure, I'm
paying for it, but I'm also depending on it.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

I generally run at 65-75% power, with whatever fuel burn keeps the mags from
loading up. And if I'm flying something with a constant speed prop, I try to
run the power at whatever combination will allow the slowest RPM (for reduced
noise). 2100 RPM is quite a bit easier on my ears than 2400 RPM.... and I can
still pull 65% power if I don't go too high.

What does "mags loading up" mean?

Thanks,
John

I get 150knots at 10.5 gph,

Hmmpf. Gotta get me one of those Comanches. The Lance I fly burns 16gph
at that speed and I'm carrying two extra empty seats... Is that a
PA-24-180?

This is one reason I no longer lease back my airplane

I can think of several other reasons not to leaseback a Comanche - fuel
being the least of them grimace

wrote:
I get 150knots at 10.5 gph,

Hmmpf. Gotta get me one of those Comanches. The Lance I fly burns 16gph
at that speed and I'm carrying two extra empty seats... Is that a
PA-24-180?

According to Clarke's book, the PA-24-180 cruises at ~130 knots. The 250 hp
version cruises at ~157 knots. That plane has an O-540 in it. There's also a 260
hp model that gets a couple knots more out of an O-540. Post-1966 models are
fuel injected.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

Mine's the 250. I lean it pretty aggressively, and cruise high. Of course,
I'm based at 5300 feet.

Seth

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:yIS0f.2531$ar6.1471@trndny01...
wrote:
I get 150knots at 10.5 gph,
Hmmpf. Gotta get me one of those Comanches. The Lance I fly burns 16gph
at that speed and I'm carrying two extra empty seats... Is that a
PA-24-180?

According to Clarke's book, the PA-24-180 cruises at ~130 knots. The 250
hp version cruises at ~157 knots. That plane has an O-540 in it. There's
also a 260 hp model that gets a couple knots more out of an O-540.
Post-1966 models are fuel injected.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your
neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

Sounds like you should have charged more for wet fees.
I know the several Warrior II (PA28-161) planes I rented, both the
owners and FBO made money off them. As for flying with the throttle
firewalled (75% power or less depending upon altitude) versus reduced
throttle there wasn't much difference in economy even with proper leaning.

I would believe most owners (including myself) are more concerning with
proper leaning, cold shock, and sloppy pilot landings & takeoffs. Those
factors will bite into an owners & FBO's pocketbook.

Nick
PA28-180



Seth Masia wrote:
This is one reason I no longer lease back my airplane -- because people ran
it without regard for fuel burn, and the FBO charged me for the waste. When
I fly it, I get 150knots at 10.5 gph, but I saw renters burn 40 gal every
three hours. Nuts.

Seth
Comanche N8100R

"Nick" wrote in message
...

When I used to rent a Warrior 160hp, I would usually fly it with the
throttle firewalled.

Does the Warrior you fly have wheel pants on? If not that would cost you
a least 5 knots.

Nick
PA28-180 'D'

lardsoup wrote:

I rent a Warrior from a local FBO and usually set the RPMs to 2400 in
cruise. It gets about 110kts at
2400. But that seems too slow. Heck I've been getting 110kts from one
of
their C152s. Rereading the
POH I see that the cruise RPM settings can be 2500 or 2600. So I'm
curious.
Where do others run their
Warriors while in cruise. I'm not concerned about fuel burn because fuel
is
included in the rental price
and my typical flight is around 2 hours. I know an old Warrior is no
SR-71,
but I want to at least try for
some more speed. Thanks.

"Nick" wrote

I would believe most owners (including myself) are more concerning with
proper leaning, cold shock, and sloppy pilot landings & takeoffs. Those
factors will bite into an owners & FBO's pocketbook.

How does cooling shock show up, in a diagnostic/ overhaul/ shortening of
engine life, if you know what I mean? What parts suffer, and how do you
know other than tearing down the engine? (short of having it seize on you)

I have my guesses, but am probably at least partially wrong, and possibly
totally wrong. g
--
Jim in NC

Cooling shock is, IMHO, an overblown issue in normally aspirated airplanes.
Coming east over the mountains, I regularly descend from 13,000 to land at
5300 -- and my cylinders are still tight 500 hours over TBO. It's a plain
vanilla O-540, severely understressed, and I baby it by running lower rpm
most of the time.

Seth
Comanche N8100R

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Nick" wrote

I would believe most owners (including myself) are more concerning with
proper leaning, cold shock, and sloppy pilot landings & takeoffs. Those
factors will bite into an owners & FBO's pocketbook.

How does cooling shock show up, in a diagnostic/ overhaul/ shortening of
engine life, if you know what I mean? What parts suffer, and how do you
know other than tearing down the engine? (short of having it seize on you)

I have my guesses, but am probably at least partially wrong, and possibly
totally wrong. g
--
Jim in NC

On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:44:27 -0700, Seth Masia wrote:

Cooling shock is, IMHO, an overblown issue in normally aspirated airplanes.
Coming east over the mountains, I regularly descend from 13,000 to land at
5300 -- and my cylinders are still tight 500 hours over TBO. It's a plain
vanilla O-540, severely understressed, and I baby it by running lower rpm
most of the time.

IIRC, Rod Machado also has the same sentiment about the subject. His take
is if shock cooling was a major factor, twins used for training should
constantly have a problem with once engine dying before the other....but
as he sees it, most training twins see TBO or better for both engines.

Greg