A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Rear passenger legroom in arrow



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 21st 04, 01:00 PM
Dahlin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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.



  #2  
Old October 21st 04, 01:25 PM
Paul Tomblin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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
  #3  
Old October 21st 04, 02:00 PM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

  #4  
Old October 21st 04, 02:19 PM
Nathan Young
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

  #5  
Old October 21st 04, 02:33 PM
James M. Knox
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.
  #6  
Old October 21st 04, 02:42 PM
Bob Chilcoat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.





  #7  
Old October 21st 04, 03:46 PM
Dude
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.


  #8  
Old October 21st 04, 05:53 PM
Aaron Coolidge
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

  #9  
Old October 21st 04, 09:23 PM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dude wrote:

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


My 67 Skylane had lots of room in the back seat once the front seats
were adjusted to flying positiong (they go WAY back for getting into the
front). I'm 6' and once I'd moved the seat forward to a comfortable
flying position, my kids could kneel on the floor behind my seat and use
their seat for a table for their coloring books! In the Arrow, there is
about 6" between the seats vs. probably 16" in the Skylane.


Matt

  #10  
Old October 21st 04, 11:08 PM
John Galban
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Meting with a Lancaster rear gunner Dave Eadsforth Military Aviation 12 November 22nd 03 09:08 AM
More long-range Spitfires and daylight Bomber Command raids, with added nationalistic abuse (was: #1 Jet of World War II) The Revolution Will Not Be Televised Military Aviation 161 September 25th 03 07:35 AM
#1 Jet of World War II Christopher Military Aviation 203 September 1st 03 03:04 AM
Long-range Spitfires and daylight Bomber Command raids (was: #1 Jet of World War II) The Revolution Will Not Be Televised Military Aviation 20 August 27th 03 09:14 AM
Why not a Quad Tiltrotor Pusher-Puller? Blair Maynard Naval Aviation 4 July 2nd 03 07:52 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.