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

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).