Cessna 172 vs. Mooney vs. ?

I, too, am training in Cessna 172s - and newer ones at that - but I
recently
had a demo ride in an older Piper Warrior and let me tell you that the
Piper
was oh so tasty smooth, responsive and panoramic (damn the single
starboard
door). For me, piloting a Cessna seems like I'm driving a Chevy Vega --
if
you're old enough to appreciate the comparison.

I agree with your assessment (my best friend had a Vega!), but I'll throw
this out for you to chew on:

In the price range mentioned ($40 - $50K) you can get a mid-70s Warrior or
Skyhawk.

Also in that price range, you can get a late '60s Cherokee 180. You might
be able to stretch into a Challenger (the 180 hp predecessor to the Archer),
but it'll be rough and high time.

I bought a '75 Warrior as my first plane, and loved it. However, it was no
speed demon, and it was huffing and puffing at high density altitudes. 150
hp will only take you so far, so fast.

Were I to do it over again, I'd have started with a 180 hp Cherokee,
preferably a post-'72 model. They stretched 'em 5 inches in '72, giving the
Cherokee an actual, usable back seat. I know the original poster said he'd
be solo most of the time, but every now and then it's nice to be able to
actually carry four real people in your 4-seat plane.

Had I done this, I probably would not have needed to sell our plane when my
kids got too big for the Warrior to lift.

Although we truly love our '74 Pathfinder (Cherokee 235 -- there's no
substitute for horsepower!), it cost more than twice as much as our Warrior
did. 33% more performance (in both speed and lifting capacity) cost us 100%
more money.

IMHO, if you can stretch your budget to the 180, you'll be way ahead in the
long run. It's a great half-step up from the 150 horse birds, without
breaking the bank, and you may never want to sell it.

Good luck!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

The automotive equivalent of this question is a little like, "Should I get a
BMW Z4, a Chevy Caprice, or a Ford Expedition?"

For your purpose I would go with simple and cheap, which means the Cessna
172. Complex airplanes will eat you alive in maintenance. With just yourself
on board the Cessna 172 should be able to handle Flagstaff easily.

H.P. wrote:

I, too, am training in Cessna 172s - and newer ones at that - but I recently
had a demo ride in an older Piper Warrior and let me tell you that the Piper
was oh so tasty smooth, responsive and panoramic (damn the single starboard
door).


There's always the Beech Sundowner if you want a 2 door low wing.

I'm in the process of taking lessons for my Private Pilot Certificate. I'll
be eventually using my certificate to commute from Tucson to Flagstaff and
will purchase a plane. My training is in a Cessna 172.
My budget is $40K - $50K. Looking at www.aso.com I see that puts me in the
late 70s to early 80s Cessna 172. Alternatively I could go with a 1960 era
Mooney M20.


I'm partial to the Mooney, then again I have one. I'm based out of AVQ -
Marana Northwest. Let me know if you want me to take you up in the
Mooney so you can see what they're about.
---
Ken Reed
http://www.dentalzzz.com

Although I'm a way off, I'm beginning to consider planes for my commute.

Something like an M20E (if you like the ergonomics of the M20 series)
would be great for a single-person commute. Fast and economical to
operate.

The 'E' model is probably beyond his budget of $40-50K. He's looking at
a 'C' for that kind of money.
---
Ken Reed
http://www.dentalzzz.com

My Mark 20C (180 HP) had an after market normalizing turbo (Ray-Jay)
which I basically just used for high altitude take offs.

Worked fine getting sea level power at the high altitudes.

Would let you have the Mooney speed and also ability to carry a load
out of high altitude airports.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` `````````````````````````````````````````````
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 05:23:22 GMT, (Ben Jackson) wrote:

In article CATWc.132424$sh.9312@fed1read06,
pjbphd wrote:
Although I'm a way off, I'm beginning to consider planes for my commute.

Something like an M20E (if you like the ergonomics of the M20 series)
would be great for a single-person commute. Fast and economical to
operate.

If you have a side goal of building time then you might want to get
something slower. I've found that it's hard to resist going as fast
as possible even when you're not in a hurry.

Commuting isn't a very demanding task -- you should figure out what
else you want to do with the plane. There are planes in your price
range that could also land in the back country, or do acrobatics.