Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)

Call me fickle, self-oriented, greedy, snobby, what have you, but I do
not fly and will not own a fixed-gear plane.

That's the goofiest thing I've read here in a long time.

Atlas, our fixed-gear Piper Cherokee 235 Pathfinder, will absolutely
walk away from an Arrow in a head-to-head speed race, (I've never raced
a Cardinal RG, but I've over-taken older Mooneys and Bonanzas, too) has
a 1460 pound useful load, and burns that sweet car gas. In every
measurable way, the Pathfinder is superior to the Arrow, except one --
fuel burn. With the money you're talking about, that hardly matters.

Do what you want, but IMHO if you've got the kind of money you're
talking about spending, you'd be crazy not to get a Lancair or a
Cirrus.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Do what you want, but IMHO if you've got the kind of money you're
talking about spending, you'd be crazy not to get a Lancair or a
Cirrus.

For short hops?

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

In article .com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

Call me fickle, self-oriented, greedy, snobby, what have you, but I do
not fly and will not own a fixed-gear plane.

That's the goofiest thing I've read here in a long time.

Atlas, our fixed-gear Piper Cherokee 235 Pathfinder, will absolutely
walk away from an Arrow in a head-to-head speed race

Um. If Atlas is faster than an Arrow, it has to be because of speed mods.
Put the equivalent speed mods on the Arrow and Atlas will lose. For
example, vref says the 1973 Arrow cruise is 140 knots and the 1973 235
cruise is 133 knots.

Of course, Atlas will haul way more than any Arrow.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

Jay Honeck wrote:

(I've never raced
a Cardinal RG, but I've over-taken older Mooneys and Bonanzas, too)

The older Mooney I can understand, they weren't that fast. The Bonanza
driver let you win. The slowest Bonanza is a 185 mph airplane.

Jay Honeck wrote:
Call me fickle, self-oriented, greedy, snobby, what have you, but I do
not fly and will not own a fixed-gear plane.

That's the goofiest thing I've read here in a long time.

It's not about speed it's about the landing gear lever.

Atlas, our fixed-gear Piper Cherokee 235 Pathfinder, will absolutely
walk away from an Arrow in a head-to-head speed race, (I've never raced
a Cardinal RG, but I've over-taken older Mooneys and Bonanzas, too) has
a 1460 pound useful load, and burns that sweet car gas. In every
measurable way, the Pathfinder is superior to the Arrow, except one --
fuel burn. With the money you're talking about, that hardly matters.

A pro I'm seeing with the Arrow is the Johnson Arm flap lever, which I
greatly prefer to motorized systems every day. What all of us, and
myself, are forgetting about aircraft with more ponies than 200 hp and
more expensive (as was the case with the new arrow) is the cost of
insurance.

Do what you want, but IMHO if you've got the kind of money you're
talking about spending, you'd be crazy not to get a Lancair or a
Cirrus.

Cirrus and Lancair are great planes... but what I've said a few times
now is try to get parts for them where I am, theres a practicality
portion to my purchase as well, a "happy medium" has to be reached with
an aircraft in Hawai'i, the planes you see around here are VERY limited
because of that reason, primarily to provide parts on hand for many
aircraft, while a Lancair or Cirrus might be waiting on a part for
months. Think of how horrible it is to get a new engine dropped in a
plane in Hawai'i, not only do we pay what you guys pay, but I have to
get the thing shipped here for about $3,000. One of the guys at our
hangar is overhauling the engines on his Chieftain, comes to about
$60,000 each. Just because I can spend doesn't mean I want to create a
black hole for my money.

In a leaseback situation you NEED volume to cover your ADDITIONAL costs
of insurance and 100 hours. Find out how much RENTAL insurance is vs
regular insurance (the insurance you would get if just you flew it).
Find this out before proceeding as if you are going to rent it out. And
rental insurance is sold by the month, not by the rental hour. Around
here insurance on a 172 is $1000 per year. Rental insurance is about
$8000. 100 hour inspections cost about $400 or so so that adds $4 per
hour. The only way to make money or break even is to rent it out a LOT.

I can either buy my flight clubs 177 for 50K (without avionics and a
high time engine (for 20K more the clubs mechanic will put a brand new
engine and prop on).

I can buy a Piper Arrow on the mainland and have it shipped to Hawai'i
for about 10K (from Cali), and refit that with the AVIDYNE system.

Here's my two cents... Both are reasonable planes. The Cardinal *had*
a bad reputation for years (and you could pick one up cheap as a
result), but they are beginning to recover from that. I fly a turbo
Arrow III, and have a natural preference for that - but question: What
is the primary use of the plane on leaseback? Is it for training, or
for sightseeing?

Obviously the cardinal has the edge for photo and general sightseeing
in the islands. But the Arrow is clearly preferred for pilots going
for their commercial ticket. Relatively bullet proof, cheap to
operate, and all the systems can be "tested." [Emergency gear
extension, for example.]

Frankly, if I was going to look at significant bucks (as you are),
*and* going to put the plane back on leaseback - I would not even
consider *new* for either. Buy a good quality used one (either plane,
but NOT a turbo Arrow for leaseback) with a run out engine. Have a
good shop do the overhaul, add your avionics suite - and while they are
at it, have the interior re-done and get a good paint job. You should
still be well under $200K, probably more like $120K or less total. The
plane will look like new, fly like new, feel like new - and your
payments at the bank will be a small fraction of what they would be
otherwise. This will allow you to charge a lot less per hour, keeping
it rented a lot more.

The Arrow is better looking. If your going to spend that kind of money I
would a buy Bonanza. I have flown them all. The Bonanza is so much nicer.
Kind of spoils you.

I'd rather have a 30 year old 36 than a brand new Cessna or
Piper. Fresh paint and a panel mod and new windshield makes
the Beech the best. It is fast, you sit up and it is done
depreciating.



"Aluckyguess" wrote in message
...
| The Arrow is better looking. If your going to spend that
kind of money I
| would a buy Bonanza. I have flown them all. The Bonanza is
so much nicer.
| Kind of spoils you.
|
|

When I saw this topic I figured I liked both types and would read on.
Until I saw "Hawaii" and "club/leaseback". Horrible combination.
I spend a fair amount of time out there, and I've seen what that salt
air does to decent airplanes. You want to drop half a mil on something
that will be eaten alive, and you think it'll last 30 years? It may, but
it'll probably be worth half or less what it'd be worth anywhere else.
Those guys you know that have had those airplanes that long, they
probably have no choice! Double whammy - hard to unload
corroded airplanes, and in the middle of the Pacific, those airplanes
are stuck there for life.
Then the abuse of a club or school, not to mention the ridiculously
high insurance costs. If you're going after the renter, most newer
ones will avoid these types if they aren't commercial rated. The
ones that are, let's say on vacation, may not care for the high
checkout requirement hourswise when they can get into a C172
fairly cheap and quick.
If this is a inter-island quick flight commuter, multiple daily flights
possibly, you're just begging for a gear-up somewhere. Either
by pilot error (depending on the experience/familiarity) or the
poor gear design (this is bottom of the barrel for retractables
except for maybe the Cutlass), or that dreaded salt air taking
it's toll - or all of the above. Really going on faith there, and
I'll say again, I like both of these types, but not for this mission.
Jay could be on to something, a (mostly) composite airframe
that is fixed gear. Cirrus SR20 or Diamond Star would fit
this, or possibly a Liberty XL2. Depending on which, and
what year, you could build a small fleet with half a mil. Avgas over
there aint cheap and these are more economical than what
you have in mind.
Call me fickle, self-oriented, greedy, snobby, what have you, but I do
not fly and will not own a fixed-gear plane.
I wouldnt use any of those words, but I'll be nice
That's a whole lot of very capable airplanes you're ruling out. Guess I
have to ask, what's your #1 point in doing this? To have an airplane
for your personal use that you occasionally rent out, for tax purposes?
Or is it the possible profit in the leaseback? Or you being coaxed by
some guys trying to unload an airplane and get a new sucker to take
over the leaseback situation - often a real stinker of a situation.
(no avionics, high time engine, probably high time airframe, likely some
damage history being rented/clubbed, guaranteed of at least some corrosion
for $50k? - no favors being done there)
Either way, with either of these types, forget about a profit. You might
have the occasional good luck of nabbing a commercial student, but
overall they'd probably sit - except when you're flying it = no profit.
Meanwhile, those lowly 172's would be renting 10x as much as
yours, making those owners a...................profit. You have looked
into what insurance is, right? For that $70k Cardinal (after engine
rebuild, and tack on whatever you spend on it) I bet it's at least
$6k a year on a leaseback.
Good luck in whatever you decide, proceed with caution. Remember,
you said any advice is appreciated!
Chris