banner
banner

07 Jun 2025, 12:42 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Stevens Aerospace (Banner)



Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 11:26 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 09/07/12
Posts: 2004
Post Likes: +1166
Location: KIWS Houston, VA, N03 NY
Aircraft: Baron C55
I've flown a Citabria and a Decathalon but never a 140. I'd like to find a plane that is simple, suited for casual/fun flying, and with good short/dirt field capability. Have always loved the look of the 140, but sure do like flying the Citabrias. Don't want to spend a lot of money. Plane will be hangared (ouch, almost wrote hang(e)red).

What do you think?

Jim

_________________
GAMuseums https://airfactsjournal.com/2023/05/gen ... directory/


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 12:40 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 04/04/12
Posts: 2377
Post Likes: +558
Location: O32 Central Cali.
Aircraft: C150
I like the metal plane, but you will be squished with a passenger in. The 140.
Just an opinion.
Mark


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 12:51 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 09/12/11
Posts: 682
Post Likes: +354
Location: Central California
Aircraft: Navajo /7GCBC/TTX
If you're going to fly a tail wheel, it's got to be stick and rudder!!!!!!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 12:58 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12804
Post Likes: +5254
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
I love the 140, but it's not a short field plane with any sort of weight/temp.

I flew one out of H49. Gross wt in summer it was sporty getting it over the power lines at the south end of the field.

I'd take it into http://www.airnav.com/airport/6MO2 solo, but that has clear approaches each end. Was getting up my nerve to take a friend when I moved away.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 13:03 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/13/07
Posts: 20413
Post Likes: +10431
Location: Seeley Lake, MT (23S)
Aircraft: 1964 Bonanza S35
The 140 is not what one would consider a good short field airplane. And if it's not a good short field airplane it is definitely a worse soft field pane. A friend has a 140 and we were up in the mountains at Schafer Meadows about 5 years ago and he and a friend took off in the 140. Took forever to get off the ground and then once in the air the climb performance is anemic.

_________________
Want to go here?:
https://tinyurl.com/FlyMT1

tinyurl.com/35som8p


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 13:12 
Offline




User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/10/07
Posts: 34887
Post Likes: +13441
Location: Minneapolis, MN (KFCM)
Aircraft: 1970 Baron B55
Username Protected wrote:
I've flown a Citabria and a Decathalon but never a 140. I'd like to find a plane that is simple, suited for casual/fun flying, and with good short/dirt field capability. Have always loved the look of the 140, but sure do like flying the Citabrias. Don't want to spend a lot of money. Plane will be hangared (ouch, almost wrote hang(e)red).

What do you think?

Jim

While I've always admired the 140 as a pretty airplane, a Citabria has a lot more to offer as long as you're OK with fabric (hangar required, etc). They're way more fun to fly, you can do skis in the winter, floats in the summer, acro when you feel the urge, and except for the hassle of getting in and out of the rear seat, they're way more comfy.

_________________
-lance

It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 13:12 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12804
Post Likes: +5254
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
If I recall correctly, the stock 140's had a C85 or C90. There have been various STC's to tinker with the engine, swap for O-200, O-235 and I think somebody has put an O-290 in as well. Not sure if the one I flew had an 85 or 90, but my feeling was always just a touch more HP would have made a huge difference. An upgraded engine might be a different plane depending on what sort of short field you have in mind.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 13:17 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 08/10/13
Posts: 771
Post Likes: +289
Company: Woodrow Corp
Location: Springfield, OH (I54)
Aircraft: 1952 Bonanza C35
Have you considered a Stinson 108? Lots of capability for the money.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 13:59 
Online



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/03/11
Posts: 10306
Post Likes: +3124
Company: Gee Bee Aeroproducts
Aircraft: hang glider
There is a clean/ original Pa28-180 in the hanger at Bermuda Dunes airport

there were several models of the PA28
140-150-160-180-235

Later were
151-161-181-236

235 is just a rare as a Turbo 236 T


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 14:18 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12804
Post Likes: +5254
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
Cessna 140, not piper :)


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 14:44 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 09/08/13
Posts: 940
Post Likes: +263
Location: Lander, WY
Aircraft: Duke B60
How tall are you? Go sit in one first, 140's are not very generous on legroom.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 15:00 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12804
Post Likes: +5254
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
I'm 6'3", fit fine.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 15:17 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/13/07
Posts: 20413
Post Likes: +10431
Location: Seeley Lake, MT (23S)
Aircraft: 1964 Bonanza S35
I'm 6'2" and don't. Would never have one. As bad as a J3 Cub.

_________________
Want to go here?:
https://tinyurl.com/FlyMT1

tinyurl.com/35som8p


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 15:34 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/01/14
Posts: 2280
Post Likes: +2042
Location: 0TX0 Granbury TX
Aircraft: T-210M Aeronca 7AC
The 140 is a nice flying airplane but it is a ground lover that will go faster than a Champ on about the same fuel burn. The Champ/Citabria/Decathlon have elbow room and after it is all said and done; right hand belongs on the stick, left on the throttle. If I had a Van's 6,7,9, or 12, you'd find me flying from the right seat. :peace:


Top

 Post subject: Re: Citabria or 140?
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2014, 16:00 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/16/10
Posts: 9712
Post Likes: +8816
Location: Buffalo MN KCFE
Aircraft: S35 E35 C120
With the short/soft field requirement, you need the Citabria or decathlon. My 120 is not good at either and the 140 flaps will add nothing.
One option would be a 140A with the single strut fowler flap wings and the 108hp motor or bigger. I would think its a pretty good performer. But they only made about 500 of these.

Greg


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next



B-Kool (Top/Bottom Banner)

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025

.ocraviation-85x50.png.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.KingAirMaint85_50.png.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.tempest.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.midwest2.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.Latitude.jpg.
.aerox_85x100.png.
.performanceaero-85x50.jpg.
.holymicro-85x50.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.puremedical-85x200.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.b-kool-85x50.png.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.mcfarlane-85x50.png.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.Elite-85x50.png.
.rnp.85x50.png.