Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)

Having flown the Cardinal RG and the Pa-28R-200, (and liked both).. I
would lean towards the cardinal. You have much greater visibility out
the Cardinal (and can EASILY lean forward to put your head ahead of the
leading edge and visually clear above the wing)..

High wing gives you some rain protection on the ground loading and
unloading.. I used to live in Hawaii and remember afternoon showers
there regularly on the windward sides of the islands..

Large doors that open VERY wide make for easy boarding and loading, and
there are two of them.

Cardinal RG strikes me as just a tad faster/sleeker

Again.. we are having to choose between two very good and capable
airframes, but I favor the cardinal, even though I have much more time
in the Arrow.

Dave

wrote:
So I've decided to buy a plane (in July of 2007), and I've come to a
dilemma. I learned to fly on a Piper Arrow and very much like that
plane, though I haven't flown one in over a year, what I have been
flying is a Cessna Cardinal 177 RGII, very nice plane, great handling
and a pleasure to fly as well, I live in Hawai'i and shipping plays a
big part in inflating the value of planes here... Any plane I buy I
will be putting an AVIDYNE avionics twin LCD system into so I don't
care about the stock avionics packaged, hence my dilemma is as
follows...

I can either buy my flight clubs 177 for 50K (without avionics and a
high time engine (for 20K more the clubs mechanic will put a brand new
engine and prop on).

I can buy a Piper Arrow on the mainland and have it shipped to Hawai'i
for about 10K (from Cali), and refit that with the AVIDYNE system.

or...

I can buy a brand new Piper Arrow for a whopping 427,000 (with the
AVIDYINE and other options I can't get on the older planes stock). And
have peace of mind in a brand new plane that will last a long time
without incurring added maintenance expenses.

Whichever one I buy I will be doing a "lease-back" to the club to allow
other guys to fly it, with a small profit for me (mainly to pay for gas
and maintenance on the plane when I fly it)

Any advice is appreciated.

Dave S wrote:
Having flown the Cardinal RG and the Pa-28R-200, (and liked both).. I
would lean towards the cardinal. You have much greater visibility out
the Cardinal (and can EASILY lean forward to put your head ahead of the
leading edge and visually clear above the wing)..

Never tried leaning forward, the positive thing though about the high
wing is I can visually confirm gear are locked and down.

High wing gives you some rain protection on the ground loading and
unloading.. I used to live in Hawaii and remember afternoon showers
there regularly on the windward sides of the islands..

Agreed, on Oahu you get a lot of showers that get driven over the
mountains and into two VFR arrivals for HNL, one came over so fast one
time (and the temperature dropped on me) and a thunderstorm started
forming around me, I had to dive the plane between two volcanic craters
to 400 feet AGL (one of which tops out at 1208 MSL, the other at about
350 MSL).

Large doors that open VERY wide make for easy boarding and loading, and
there are two of them.

Agreed

Cardinal RG strikes me as just a tad faster/sleeker

It's slower by 10 knots... but speed wasn't my concern on a primarily
sub-cross country flight.

The reason the "new Arrow" is in the mix is because I plan on keeping
the plane for 40 years at a minimum (thats the plan, might not happen
but all signs point to yes) which would mean that a plane with 0 TT
will be a lot friendlier to my schedules than a plane thats got 5800 TT
(Cardinal RG I'm looking at).

wrote:

Cardinal RG strikes me as just a tad faster/sleeker

It's slower by 10 knots...

Says who?

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Dan Luke wrote:
wrote:

Cardinal RG strikes me as just a tad faster/sleeker

It's slower by 10 knots...

Says who?

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

The POH

Also most of our club planes are brand new (8 years)... minus the
Cardinal and the Chieftains.

wrote:
Dan Luke wrote:

wrote:


Cardinal RG strikes me as just a tad faster/sleeker

It's slower by 10 knots...

Says who?

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM


The POH

Also most of our club planes are brand new (8 years)... minus the
Cardinal and the Chieftains.


I seem to remember gettin 140-145 Knots true last time I flew the 177RG
last spring. Of course, with a 50 kt tailwind, I REALLY liked my ground
speed..

Dont base everything on the POH.. they can be overly optimistic at best
with regards to "cruise speed" and "top speed"

Dave

wrote:

Cardinal RG strikes me as just a tad faster/sleeker

It's slower by 10 knots...

Says who?

The POH

Also most of our club planes are brand new (8 years)... minus the
Cardinal and the Chieftains.

What are the book speeds for the Arrow?

The Cardinal RG will do 140+ KTAS. One that won't do that is out of rig or
has engine problems.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Dan Luke wrote:
wrote:


What are the book speeds for the Arrow?

The Cardinal RG will do 140+ KTAS. One that won't do that is out of rig or
has engine problems.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Book for the Arrow II ('72 - '76) is 143. If the engine/prop & (most
importantly) rigging are in good shape you should get very close to
that number.


Mike
PA28-180

Dan Luke wrote:
wrote:

Cardinal RG strikes me as just a tad faster/sleeker

It's slower by 10 knots...

Says who?

The POH

Also most of our club planes are brand new (8 years)... minus the
Cardinal and the Chieftains.

What are the book speeds for the Arrow?

The Cardinal RG will do 140+ KTAS. One that won't do that is out of rig or
has engine problems.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Arrow is 147 kias Vno, the Cardinal is 142 kias.

Vne for the Arrow is 183 kias and 174 kias for the cardinal.

Also the Arrow is, in my experience, friendlier in turbulence, don't
get me wrong, the Cardinal is a great plane but I would "prefer" an
Arrow after looking at all the details right now.

wrote:


Also the Arrow is, in my experience, friendlier in turbulence, don't
get me wrong, the Cardinal is a great plane but I would "prefer" an
Arrow after looking at all the details right now.


I wouldn't touch a Cessna RG with a 10 foot pole. For that reason alone
go with the Arrow. The Cessna retractable gear is poorly designed and
will cause you problems.

wrote:

Arrow is 147 kias Vno, the Cardinal is 142 kias.

But, get to 10,500 MSL... and the Cardinal climbs and
goes faster than an equally weighted Arrow.

At least, that has been my experience in Colorado.
Yes, we have 14,000 peaks, but you don't fly OVER the
peaks, you fly AROUND them. :-)

Having had both, I prefer the Cardinal.

Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocations!"
--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jeratfrii.com http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot BM218 HAM N0FZD 240 Young Eagles!