If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Ray Andraka wrote:
Dave Butler wrote: Ray Andraka wrote: I believe it. The dakota has the tapered wing where the 235 does not. In the case of a PA32, the tapered wing adds about 200lbs to the empty weight. Hmmm. If I did my numbers right, that's about 1.2 cubic feet of aluminum. Seems like a lot of aluminum. Well, the tapered wings are a few feet longer, the fiberglass tip tanks are replaced with a second set of aluminum tanks, and who knows what else was changed on the airframe to accommodate the tapered wings. The point is the tapered winged models run about 200 lbs more than the hershey bar winged models. Thanks Ray. |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
I'm also surprised the useful load is so close. I thought Jay said the
Pathfinder positively trounced the 182 in this regard? 1230 versus 1460 pounds? Sounds like "trounced" to me! Where is the 1460? I see 1222 for the Dakota and 1230 for the Skylane? Looks like a small win for the Skylane if anything. Can you point out the 1460 in his post? Whose post? You were talking about "Jay" here (that's me), and my 235 has a 1460 pound useful load. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#133
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
I think Jay is saying he has 1460 lbs useful load on his airplane.
I question that. I cannot believe he has an additional 230 lbs of useful load unless there is a drop in the max gross weight between the 235 and the 236/Dakota. His BEW simply cannot be that much lower. http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/cont...athfinder.html 1974 Piper Pathfinder specs (scroll down) According to that chart, I was off by 10 pounds. ("Only" 1450 pounds...) Luckily, I just removed an old DME from the panel that weighed about that much... ;-) -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Jay Honeck wrote:
I think Jay is saying he has 1460 lbs useful load on his airplane. I question that. I cannot believe he has an additional 230 lbs of useful load unless there is a drop in the max gross weight between the 235 and the 236/Dakota. His BEW simply cannot be that much lower. http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/cont...athfinder.html 1974 Piper Pathfinder specs (scroll down) According to that chart, I was off by 10 pounds. ("Only" 1450 pounds...) So, according to this comparison, the 235 has 145 lbs more useful load, but is 6 knots slower in cruise, climbs 90 fpm more slowly, has a higher stall speed, much lower service ceiling (more than 4,000 feet lower!), a substantially longer takeoff run and a dramatically longer landing run (more than 2X longer!) as compared to the Skylane. In addition, it has a smaller cockpit and only one door vs. two. And its value appreciation is dramatically less than the Skylanes. So, Jay, tell us again how this is the best 4-place single ever? :-) It looks better to me in only two categories, useful load and cheaper purchase due to the lower appreciation over the years. Matt |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Jay Honeck wrote:
I'm also surprised the useful load is so close. I thought Jay said the Pathfinder positively trounced the 182 in this regard? 1230 versus 1460 pounds? Sounds like "trounced" to me! Where is the 1460? I see 1222 for the Dakota and 1230 for the Skylane? Looks like a small win for the Skylane if anything. Can you point out the 1460 in his post? Whose post? You were talking about "Jay" here (that's me), and my 235 has a 1460 pound useful load. John Smith's post of 1/16/2007 at 11:56 AM ... the one I replied to. Don't you have a threaded newsreader that shows this? I quoted his entire post in my reply, so it was pretty hard to miss. :-) Matt |
#136
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Jay Honeck wrote:
I'm also surprised the useful load is so close. I thought Jay said the Pathfinder positively trounced the 182 in this regard? 1230 versus 1460 pounds? Sounds like "trounced" to me! Where is the 1460? I see 1222 for the Dakota and 1230 for the Skylane? Looks like a small win for the Skylane if anything. Can you point out the 1460 in his post? Whose post? You were talking about "Jay" here (that's me), and my 235 has a 1460 pound useful load. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" John Smith's post of 1/16/2007 at 11:56 AM ... the one I replied to. Don't you have a threaded newsreader that shows this? I quoted his entire post in my reply, so it was pretty hard to miss. :-) Matt |
#137
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Have you ever weighed you airplane?
Karl "Jay Honeck" wrote in message ups.com... I'm also surprised the useful load is so close. I thought Jay said the Pathfinder positively trounced the 182 in this regard? 1230 versus 1460 pounds? Sounds like "trounced" to me! Where is the 1460? I see 1222 for the Dakota and 1230 for the Skylane? Looks like a small win for the Skylane if anything. Can you point out the 1460 in his post? Whose post? You were talking about "Jay" here (that's me), and my 235 has a 1460 pound useful load. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
I doubt you have that much. They useful ALWAYS go down when actually
weighed, and the TRUTH comes out. Karl I should talk, my 185 lost 50# of useful when I weighed her. The factories always lied about aircraft weight, and didn't have to weigh each one. "Jay Honeck" wrote in message ps.com... I think Jay is saying he has 1460 lbs useful load on his airplane. I question that. I cannot believe he has an additional 230 lbs of useful load unless there is a drop in the max gross weight between the 235 and the 236/Dakota. His BEW simply cannot be that much lower. http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/cont...athfinder.html 1974 Piper Pathfinder specs (scroll down) According to that chart, I was off by 10 pounds. ("Only" 1450 pounds...) Luckily, I just removed an old DME from the panel that weighed about that much... ;-) -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote: So, Jay, tell us again how this is the best 4-place single ever? :-) It looks better to me in only two categories, useful load and cheaper purchase due to the lower appreciation over the years. don't sneeze at cheaper purchase, especially with the higher useful load. -- Bob Noel Looking for a sig the lawyers will hate |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message news snip So, Jay, tell us again how this is the best 4-place single ever? :-) It looks better to me in only two categories, useful load and cheaper purchase due to the lower appreciation over the years. Matt It all goes back to your mission. For most of us East of the Rockies, a 200 lb increase in useful load has more utility than a few knot increase in cruise speed, a higher ceiling (how many of us have access to O2 systems, anyway?), and/or better short field performance. A 1400 lb useful load vs 1200 lbs is a big deal, whereas 135 knots vs. 140 isn't... KB |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Narrowing it down... Comanche? | Douglas Paterson | Owning | 18 | February 26th 06 12:51 AM |
Cherokee Pilots Association Fly-In Just Gets Better and Better | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 7 | August 8th 05 07:18 PM |
Comanche accident averted last evening | [email protected] | Piloting | 23 | April 13th 05 10:02 AM |
Cherokee National Fly-In & Convention | Don | Piloting | 0 | May 5th 04 08:14 PM |
Cherokee National Fly-In & Convention | Don | General Aviation | 0 | March 20th 04 02:15 AM |