If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)
Newps wrote: 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. Actually wouldnt touching the door with a ten foot pole put me right under the wind of a Cardinal? On a serious note... I've had more problems with the landing gear in Arrows than in the Cardinal... but the Cardinal is super-well taken care of, what in particular makes that a poorly designed system? It seems rendundant to me and has a simple emegency extension procedure. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)
Newps wrote: 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. But if I do touch an C177RG with a ten foot pole... doesn't that put me right under the wing? On a serious note... why is it a poor system, the RG II I've been flying has never given the hint of a bad system, no leaks, no hesitation no nothing, and a engenious emergency extention system to boot. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)
Highly unlikely you will keep the plane for 40 years. Practically
unheard of. I would recommend buying a single, non-retract airplane that will carry the load you need to carry. Cessna 172 or 182 or a Piper Warrior or Pathfinder. Retractable gear is a maintenance headache. With your short hops, speed doesn't really matter. I would also recommend buying it with the avionics you want, although with 10K in shipping costs you may have a hard time finding exactly whay you want in Hawaii. As for leaseback, a simple plane like a 172 or Warrior will rent MUCH more often and the required insurance premium and required 100 hour inspections will dictate that you rent it as much as possible if you want to have any hope at all of breaking even or better. If I were in your shoes I would either get a 172 or a 182, one of the later models (1999 or so), but not a new one. New airplanes depreciate a LOT the first year, so I'd let someone else take that hit. However an older model that has the avionics I want, if I can find it, would do even better financially, but would not have the newer planes reliability. If you prefer the Piper line, then choose one of those. Good luck. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)
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. Here's my two cents... Both are reasonable planes. The Cardinal *had* a bad reputation for years (and you could pick one up cheap as a result), but they are beginning to recover from that. I fly a turbo Arrow III, and have a natural preference for that - but question: What is the primary use of the plane on leaseback? Is it for training, or for sightseeing? Obviously the cardinal has the edge for photo and general sightseeing in the islands. But the Arrow is clearly preferred for pilots going for their commercial ticket. Relatively bullet proof, cheap to operate, and all the systems can be "tested." [Emergency gear extension, for example.] Frankly, if I was going to look at significant bucks (as you are), *and* going to put the plane back on leaseback - I would not even consider *new* for either. Buy a good quality used one (either plane, but NOT a turbo Arrow for leaseback) with a run out engine. Have a good shop do the overhaul, add your avionics suite - and while they are at it, have the interior re-done and get a good paint job. You should still be well under $200K, probably more like $120K or less total. The plane will look like new, fly like new, feel like new - and your payments at the bank will be a small fraction of what they would be otherwise. This will allow you to charge a lot less per hour, keeping it rented a lot more. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper ArrowIII (brand new)
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)
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! |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)
The Arrow is better looking. If your going to spend that kind of money I
would a buy Bonanza. I have flown them all. The Bonanza is so much nicer. Kind of spoils you. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)
I'd rather have a 30 year old 36 than a brand new Cessna or
Piper. Fresh paint and a panel mod and new windshield makes the Beech the best. It is fast, you sit up and it is done depreciating. "Aluckyguess" wrote in message ... | The Arrow is better looking. If your going to spend that kind of money I | would a buy Bonanza. I have flown them all. The Bonanza is so much nicer. | Kind of spoils you. | | |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)
Check out the Cardinal flyers online site
http://www.cardinalflyers.com/ They have alot of info on the RG, since the site is owned and operated by 2 guys (Paul Milner and Keith Peterson) that each own an RG (Paul's is turbo'd!). They are adamant that the gear is solid if rigged and maintained correctly, and they have the data to prove that. All the info you could possibly need for the landing gear and the rest of the plane is available to members ($34/yr). Also, most RG owners report 140-145 kts cruise @ 75%. Bud wrote: Newps wrote: 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. But if I do touch an C177RG with a ten foot pole... doesn't that put me right under the wing? On a serious note... why is it a poor system, the RG II I've been flying has never given the hint of a bad system, no leaks, no hesitation no nothing, and a engenious emergency extention system to boot. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Anti collision light mod for Piper Arrow 1968 model? | Frode Berg | Owning | 4 | May 20th 04 05:16 AM |
$15,000 Cash for a Cessna 152 Or Piper Tomahawk | MRQB | Aviation Marketplace | 17 | February 15th 04 12:05 PM |
$15,000 Cash for a Cessna 152 Or Piper Tomahawk | MRQB | Owning | 18 | February 15th 04 12:05 PM |
$15,000 Cash for a Cessna 152 Or Piper Tomahawk | MRQB | Piloting | 17 | February 15th 04 12:05 PM |
Piper Archer III or Cessna 172SP | Dale Harwell | Owning | 10 | July 15th 03 04:01 AM |