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.

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"

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"

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

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

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

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"

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"

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

"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