Budget Retracts - Anyone own a Sierra or Comanche 180?

Henry A. Spellman wrote:
: The Comanche line started with the 180, so the whole aircraft was
: designed with the 180 hp engine in mind. A year or so later, the 250
: came into existence. But the Lycoming O-540 is quite a bit heavier than
: the O-320, so the 250 seems a little heavier in pitch, especially in the
: landing flare. The 250 is really quite good, it is just that the 180 is
: almost perfect.

: I have only flown a 180 twice, but I could discern the difference from
: my 250 that I have owned for over 20 years. The difference is slight,
: but it is there.

Hrm... having flown a 250 a couple of times with a friend that owns one, I can
say it sure is sweet. Granted the retract and CS prop would help, but 180hp on a PA24
seems like it would be awfully marginal... my PA28-180 hardly has power to spare. The
airframe on the PA24 is about 400lbs heavier than my PA28 IIRC, with only 150lbs more
gross. Sounds like a 3-place retract.

The 250 on the other hand climbs great no matter what the load it seems.
There is such a thing as a "resonant design" for aircraft. On the PA28, I'd argue
it's 180hp. For the PA24, it's 250. For a 172, probably 180hp as well.

As far as fuel flow goes, just because you have a bigger engine doesn't mean
you need to cruise with it. With only 60 gallons on a stock PA24 though, it'd be a
little bit short on range.

-Cory


--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************