banner
banner

12 Dec 2018, 01:35 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


FreeFlight Systems (Banner)



Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 10:34 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 09/08/13
Posts: 450
Post Likes: +89
Location: Lander, WY
Aircraft: Duke B60
Username Protected wrote:
............…I'm not really interested in anything but the 6/300. I do see a RayJay STC for the 6/260 though...............

That's a good position. Your profile shows "SW USA" as location. The 6-260's are not good hot/high performers. The 300s are better, and, of course, a turbo Saratoga is better yet.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 11:50 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 11/27/09
Posts: 697
Post Likes: +223
Location: Knoxville TN
Aircraft: none
I have been looking at the Cherokee six for a while and what I want is similar to you. From what I have been told the six 260 will carry a bigger load than the 300 if you are not operating out of high DA airports. The 260 engine is carbureted and is a little less expensive to overhaul and I understand is bulletproof reliable. Some claim the difference between the two is not worth the price premium.

I understand problem areas are the fuel selector, spare corrosion behind the inboard fuel tanks, and wing skin cracking from poor fuel management.

Prices are going up on the six and it now looks like $75K and up is the asking price for a good example. I have no idea what they actually sell for but I hear good examples sell quickly.

Piper forum has some good info.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 12:00 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 10157
Post Likes: +3143
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1959 Travel Air
I have never heard of less horsepower improving a plane’s load-carrying capacity. How does that work?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 12:20 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 05/13/14
Posts: 4182
Post Likes: +2298
Location: Central Texas (KTPL)
Aircraft: '78 Bonanza A36
Username Protected wrote:
I have never heard of less horsepower improving a plane’s load-carrying capacity. How does that work?
I don't know if the engine is lighter or what, but it's true for the Cherokee Sixes. Maybe the 260s are just older/lighter to start with.

If book useful load is the primary objective, the 260 usually will win over the 300.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 12:30 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 02/10/12
Posts: 254
Post Likes: +16
Location: kccr
Aircraft: C23
Be prepared if the looming wing AD comes to fruition. Good write up in Piper magazine about it.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 13:03 
Online


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 12/29/14
Posts: 634
Post Likes: +288
Location: SoCal
Aircraft: A36
You can stuff a bunch of stuff (or people) in a Cherokee 6, that's for sure. The one I used to fly had a useful load over 1600 pounds. I filled it up and flew it on hot days to Las Vegas and Laughlin. This was a 300HP version. It was a 135 knot airplane at full "Renter Power".
Lots of people say they handle like a Chevy Suburban. IMHO, they handle more like an old school bus. There's nothing flashy to me about a Cherokee Six, but they really can haul a load and they are very stable to fly. Hitting the right speed on approach is a good thing. Too slow and they sink like a rock and too fast, they really float with that thick wing.

My first inclination when I read this post was to think that an A36 is a much better choice, but then I looked at what was for sale and you can certainly buy a Six for less than an A36.

I think it really comes down to how you balance out budget and your actual need for high load carrying, speed and handling. Having flown both, if you're OK with the increased cost to buy an A36, and if you can get an early model - then you'd be looking at around 1300 pounds of useful (mine is 1386). People will tell you that you can bump that up by 400 pounds with tip tanks and an IO550, but let's stay within a reasonable cost comparison for now and assume this is a higher time engine that you would fly for 200-400 hours before going back to the bank. Cabin isn't quite as roomy and there is no forward luggage space behind the engine. For the loss in load capacity and increase in cost (guessing 130K to 150K purchase), you'd be rewarded with much better speed and handling and you'd burn 2-3 GPH less fuel.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 15:52 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 01/10/13
Posts: 510
Post Likes: +97
Location: greenville,ms
Aircraft: baron 58
one for sale at my home base, pm me and i'll send you owner's number


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 16:24 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 09/11/08
Posts: 678
Post Likes: +110
Location: Cedartown Ga
Aircraft: Bonanza ,K35
Also one for sale at Cedartown Ga. 4A4.
Pm and I will give you a name and number.

Thanks


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 16:34 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 07/24/14
Posts: 177
Post Likes: +105
I’ve got 900 hours in a 79-300HP Cherokee 6. Great airplane. 79 was the first year with the more aerodynamic wheel pants and it consistently cruised at 150 Ktas. If you buy one before 79, there are lots of mods you can add to speed her up. Definitely get the 300 hp versions n.

_________________
Jay


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 16:36 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 01/25/15
Posts: 189
Post Likes: +127
Username Protected wrote:
If book useful load is the primary objective, the 260 usually will win over the 300.


That's a classic example of book vs. real life. 260 hauls more useful load, but 300 carries it much much better.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 16:41 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 05/29/09
Posts: 3768
Post Likes: +2266
Company: Craft Air Services, LLC
Location: Hertford, NC
Aircraft: 58, D50A
Username Protected wrote:
I have never heard of less horsepower improving a plane’s load-carrying capacity. How does that work?


I'm not sure about the specifics of the "6", but the 260HP Lycoming is a parallel valve engine and is much lighter and cheaper than the angle valve 300hp engine. The argument has been made about several airframes that had the choice between the parallel valve 180HP O-360 and the 200HP angle valve IO-360.

_________________
Who is John Galt?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 16:44 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 07/15/11
Posts: 3595
Post Likes: +363
Location: Owensboro, KY (KOWB)
Aircraft: 1957 Bonanza H35
Why not a Lance for not much more $?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 16:45 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 07/15/11
Posts: 3595
Post Likes: +363
Location: Owensboro, KY (KOWB)
Aircraft: 1957 Bonanza H35
A lot of the Cherokee 6 300's are approaching A36 prices. The Lance's are less than some six 300's.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 16:59 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 05/13/14
Posts: 4182
Post Likes: +2298
Location: Central Texas (KTPL)
Aircraft: '78 Bonanza A36
Username Protected wrote:
A lot of the Cherokee 6 300's are approaching A36 prices. The Lance's are less than some six 300's.

Especially if you'll accept a T-tail.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cherokee Six Cost Numbers
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 17:01 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 01/25/15
Posts: 189
Post Likes: +127
Username Protected wrote:
A lot of the Cherokee 6 300's are approaching A36 prices. The Lance's are less than some six 300's.

Especially if you'll accept a T-tail.


T-tail is a non-issue. You spend approx. 2-3 seconds per flight in a place where the tail configuration makes any noticeable difference. I think the bigger difference is the retractable landing gear in Lance that does add a bit of cost (but not much).

Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next




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 2007-2018

.L3_85x100.jpg.
.PistonPower_85x50.jpg.
.Trace.jpg.
.ForeFlight.jpeg.
.jaair-85x100.jpg.
.sureflight-85x50.jpg.
.avionicssource-85x50.jpg.
.concorde-2017-11-01.jpg.
.aps-85x150.jpg.
.EagleFuelCellsTriple.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.avidyne-85x50-2017-11-22.jpg.
.Blackhawk_85x100.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.jetacquisitions-85x50.png.
.airpower-85x50.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.wholesalepowertools.jpg.
.ps_engineering.gif.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.Expert_Aircraft_Solution_85x50.jpg.
.instar.jpg.
.teebee.png.
.jlosborne-85x50.jpg.
.metarmap_85x50.jpg.
.selectairparts-85x100.jpg.
.americanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.westsky.jpg.
.methodseven-85x50.jpg.
.lopresti_85x50.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.Outright_85_50.png.
.AviationCreation_85x50.jpg.
.truecourse.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.Davis_Aviation_85x50.jpg.
.wilco.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.FreeFlight_85x50.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.CAV_85x50_2017_12_4.jpg.
.nexair_85x100.jpg.
.phillipangert-85x50.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.bkool-85x50-2014-08-04.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.jetfuelx-85x50.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.Showalter.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.textron-85x200-2018-07-19.jpg.
.tulsair-85x50.jpg.
.hpair-85x50.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.cubcrafters.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2018-11-27.jpg.
.weatherspork_85x50.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.dshannon.jpg.
.x-naut_85x200.jpg.
.fliteelectronics.jpg.
.kingairdom.jpg.
.heartlandsm.jpg.