Hehe.. sure..

At the risk of starting something... but looks like I did any way.

OK.. the misssion of both aircraft is about the same, same engine,
(both 150 hp) We had the 172 for 2 yrs, into our 2nd year with the
Warrior.....

Cessna 172,(1974)

Pros - better at short field, better glide ratio (lighter wing
loading), easier to assist pax getting in . High wing is an umbrella
in rain.

Fun to fly, less stable, probably a better trainer, spinable (miss
that!!)


172 Cons, - lightly/loosely built, squeaked and groaned. Ventilation-
awful , the "pop can controls" were umm... awful. Opening the window
(s) worked well though..

Drafty, although ours was warmer than others we have flown...

Heater.. what heater? Could never convince the rear seat pax that it
had one....

Cockpit lighting seemed to be an afterthought.. The overhead red
light "lens" was a poor arrangement that had to be adjusted if you
changed the bulb, was sensitive to a change in filiment position..



Warrior.(1976)

Pros - Tougher, stiffer, no squeaks/groans while taxing, stabilator
has better authority in the flare.

Seems that everywhere we looked, (we had the interiors out /replaced
etc. in both planes) the piper is built stronger, stiffer, closer
spacing between structural members etc.

Wider landing gear stance, ....would not hesitate tackling a cross
wind with the Warrior that I would be aprehensive to try in the 172.

The oleos on the Warrior allow me to "plant" the Warrior down firmly
in difficult winds without getting kicked back into the air. (the
Cessna spring steel gear would reward me with a bounce)

More comfortable cross country aircraft. More stable in the roll axis,
(more dihedral) and HAS RUDDER TRIM! Cruise climb, - 3/4 turn of the
knob and keep your feet on the floor. Had to keep pressure with your
right foot with the 172 during climbs/decents.

Good cockpit lighting. Overhead red light has a proper (glass) lens,
light hits the right places. Separate controls for radio and
instrument lighting.

Better seat tracks/rollers.. no more needs to be said here...

Smoother ride in rough air, requires less attenton to keep
upright..(probably due to higher wing loading and less flat side area)

Controls feel more direct, responsive - yoke tube is an inch
diameter, or more, - Cessna yoke tube is 3/4 in dia... flexible by
comparison.

Interior is quieter, we can speak to each other with headsets off..
There is more fabric/vinyl in the Warrior interior, it absorbs some
sound..(.new Airtex headliner is wool) The 172's headliner was hard
plastic, in fact , most of the interior finish was hard plastic, not
very sound absorbing...

Faster than the 172 at same power settings (but not by much)

Ventilation is great! Overhead duct with individual, controllable
vents for each person, high volume floor (side) vents. And they can
all be truly "shut off" (no more 200 mph tape over the vents in the
winter)

A real heater! Will roast you if you crank it up. Has REAL heat ducts!
and rear seat pax have ducts too...(I live in Canada, we get winter
here)

Connection to nosewheel steering is more direct (no springs)


Warrior Cons...

Longer takeoff/landing distances, most difference noticed at heaver
weights, less if lighter

Other owners tell us that the Mattson VG's and gap seals (to be
installed soon) will close this gap significantly.

Ya HAFTA manage yer fuel! (no "both" setting)

Stalls are not much fun, can't spin it.. (rats!)

Single door... I can't help a (elderly?) pax much, I have to get in
first...

Oleo struts require care & maintenance.




Now, having said all this, remember, the is my OPINION, based on ONE
Cessna 172, and ONE Warrior. - ONLY

They are both good aircraft, but for the reasons/preferences above the
Warrior is my runaway choice..of the two designs.

Note I have tried to stay away from the high vs low wing thingy....


I am not an aircraft design engineer, but I have looked into every
cavity of both aircraft, and (God forbid) if I had to put down in the
trees some night, I would sooner be in the Piper.

YMMV!

(Dave struggles into flame suit)

Dave





On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:55:17 -0700, "Jay Beckman"
wrote:

I realize much of what people value in their planes if often very personal
but I don't think I've read anything comparitive between the two that was
spawned from first hand experience.
Could you possibly do a quick and dirty 172 Vs Warrior and why the Piper
fits better?

TIA,

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ