I'm the Vice President of the NRI flying club. Our 172 logs at least twice the hours of our Cherokee. Hard to beat a 172 for this mission.

Mission of this plane is private training only at absolute minimum cost. Seems like with a little looking you can get a high time decent 140 for $15-17k. Even ratty 4cylinder 172s seem to start $10k higher.

I have nothing against Cherokees but about a year ago, I was asked to do a BFR in one. It was a decent looking airplane, not excessive time and had a reasonably recent coat of paint. I had given a BFR in the same airplane to the previous owner about six years earlier. On walk around the left aileron piano hinge was broken to within a half inch of aluminum holding it to the wing. Considering the flight regimes I would have required, I'm convinced that it would have broken during the one hour BFR.

Just saying that after really looking at the design and the thickness of the hinge, it is a weak point IMO. It was easily repaired with an new fabricated hinge being riveted on, but gosh, I got real busy and let another CFI do the BFR.

I'm beginning to get paranoid about flying in somebody else's 50 year old airplane.

Jgreen

I've flown all the PA 28s (except the 235 and Dakotas), the C-172s with Continental and Lycomings, the C-152 and the Tomahawk. They're all great but the Cherokee will give you the most mission flexibility for your buck. The Lycoming powered Skyhawks are going to be the most expensive, the Continentals aren't in the same class for dispatch rate and the Tomahawk is the best and least expensive trainer of the lot IMHO although it, like the C-152, lacks the useful load and range for a decent XC plane.

A tomahawk - that seems to generally have a 550lb or so useful load - would meet my specs perfectly. Decent XC performance not required. I do wonder about the "traumahawk" reputation. This will be a club airplane that will be flown intermittently by a variety of instructors. Even if the PA38 is not deficient, just different, I wonder if it's a good plane outside of a high volume flight school with instructors who know what to expect.

As a pure trainer to sit outside, you probably can't beat a Cherokee 140 (or 150/160) for bang to buck ratio. I dont think it pays to scrape the bottom of the barrel, even though you have some people interested, nobody is interested in flying in a ratty looking plane.

Charles, you might go to piperforum.com and pose your question there but I'll tell you that I loved the way it landed, the stalls were non-events in my opinion, it has the best all around visibility from that cockpit, it has two doors which is a plus for me and the only thing odd about it was it is a little unstable, meaning you have to keep your attention focused to maintain altitude, airspeed, course, etc. But those are good things for a trainer.

And I think you can pick up a well instrumented one for under $20K.

Oh, yes, and you can do spins!

Oh, and one other thing, I think a Tomahawk will outclimb any of those other options on a hot day.

Check out this Craigslist posting

http://spacecoast.craigslist.org/for/5319180642.html

With dual GPS, 2 axis autopilot, stormscope - That plane would be a great deal for someone and is exactly not what I'd be looking for. My owning/clubbing experience thus far has been that the second biggest driver of cost (behind cylinders) is switches. Less stuff = less cost, and the ongoing maintenance squawks is a huge cost driver in a club. I'm even questioning the need to have a transponder.

With dual GPS, 2 axis autopilot, stormscope - That plane would be a great deal for someone and is exactly not what I'd be looking for. My owning/clubbing experience thus far has been that the second biggest driver of cost (behind cylinders) is switches. Less stuff = less cost, and the ongoing maintenance squawks is a huge cost driver in a club. I'm even questioning the need to have a transponder.

Autopilot??

My ideal panel would consist of a venturi driven six-pack, sl40 com and a 496. That's it.

I've owned a Cherokee 180 and a 140. Flew both all over the country with 2 kids and baggage. Best trainer for an upgrade to a Bonanza there is since it flies like a heavy airplane. A 172 would be about the worst thing you could train with if your goal is to fly a Bonanza. Even people who transition from a 172 to a 182 often have to do some remedial training since the only thing that flies like a 172 is a 150. The Cherokee has more fuel so longer range, if you want it and loading will allow, which often makes it faster that a 172 if the mission length is over about 2 1/2 hours or around 300 miles. The appeal of the the 172 has always been curious to me. The high wing makes it more stable to a degree but ground handling, landing and takeoffs in high winds more difficult. Buy an airplane because of shade!? Really? Two doors are appealing I grant you but dollar for dollar and pound for pound the Lycoming powered 140/180 Cherokees are more useable and flexible than a 172, particularly the old Continental powered ones.

Hi All,

New to Beechtalk, in the process of getting a baby B to call my own.
In the meantime just lurking around, but thought I'd throw my 2 cents in here, since I've done instructing in pretty much all the airplanes under discussion, except the Skipper.

From an instructor's perspective, I think the best buy would be a *good* Tomahawk.

The stall nastiness that caused the "Traumahawk" label was fixed when they put the stall strips on the leading edge years and years ago. Stalls fine unless it's a bent frame. It does break, somewhat hard, which as I CFI I *want* a trainer to do. I can hold a Cherokee in a falling leaf going down with the yoke against my chest at 1000-1500fpm just bobbing up and down. Very good for helping out tired pilots at the end of a long xc - you want a friendly wing for that - but not actually good when you want to teach students. T-Hawk has nice responsible flight qualities otherwise, just like a good trainer should be.

T-hawk has the fuel selector RIGHT THERE in front of you both. When your student runs a tank dry because you've lost track of it (Bad CFI, bad!) while doing touch and goes, it's REALLY nice to not have to suddenly lunge for his crotch to reach the selector nestled against the far end of the cockpit. Seriously, it might seem like a funny ha-ha thing, but... let's just say one single time of becoming a glider on climbout, if only for two seconds, will make you a big, big believer in fuel selectors being placed where both front seats can reach them easily.

I don't mind Cherokees, but the one door really is a pain when you're doing quick turnarounds, moving headset leads, getting flight bag out, etc. Might seem like a minor point, but if you're looking at people flying the thing often and intensely, the five-ten extra minutes getting stuff cleared away for the next set of guys adds up. Dunno. Maybe with your planned ops tempo it won't be an issue. For me, I try to go with two doors if I can.

Cheap acquisition costs now because of the "Traumahawk" BS that just won't go away.

I'd stretch for a nice T-hawk over a semi-nice Cherokee any day of the week. Better visibility, roomy cockpit, modern layout, cheaper overhaul and lower fuel burn... importantly, I also thought it was just more fun to fly. For the training mission it really is just a far, far superior aircraft, imho. The one single advantage the Cherokee has is if you want to have a second student in back riding herd and learning through osmosis. Otherwise in my experience there's nothing a Cherokee with less than 160 (or even 180...) horses does better than a T-Hawk. Just don't look back too often at the tail when doing spins or you'll freak out.

Cessnas I like, but they are pricier.

+1 on the Citabria, but anything in your price range will have wood wings which would be a problem if you're storing outside. Kinda awkward ingress/egress as well.

All best and good luck,

Lawrence
ATPCFIMEI

Let's see-
Reasonable entry price
Easy to fly
Easy to maintain
Easy to get parts
Very common , reliable engine
Carries enough weight for 2 "normal size" people and fuel
Mechanics are usually familiar with the plane and engine
Insurance prices are low
Manufacturer is still making the PA28 series
Manufacturer is still in business.

Maybe with these negatives you should stay away.