1972 PIPER PA-28-140

korben88

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Messages
587
Location
Salt Lake City
Display Name

Display name:
Troy
I have the opportunity to get in on a plane share for a '72 piper. I don't know a lot about the plane, and am looking for info. How does it compare to the 172 I've been training in? How do they fly (first one to say thrust, lift, wings or any other smart ass thing is getting kicked in the shin)?

The monthly would be in the neighborhood of $135 to cover insurance, hangar fees, maintenance. and the hourly $110 wet. Is this a good deal?
 
No,,, at 100 hrs a yr, you would be paying about the Regular rental charge.
Less than 100 hrs hrs a yr, has you paying even more.
Only advantage is the possession.
 
I have the opportunity to get in on a plane share for a '72 piper. I don't know a lot about the plane, and am looking for info. How does it compare to the 172 I've been training in? How do they fly (first one to say thrust, lift, wings or any other smart ass thing is getting kicked in the shin)?

The monthly would be in the neighborhood of $135 to cover insurance, hangar fees, maintenance. and the hourly $110 wet. Is this a good deal?
Is that Hobbs or Tach time? If Hobbs then no. If Tach then maybe a bit high but more realistic.

Also depends on fuel in your area. Friend has a stake in a similar bird and pays about that on tach time, but is in an area where fuel is quite expensive.
 
Depends if the share is a half, a third or a quarter.

As for comparing, remember the 140 is a 2+2....two people plus bags, or four people and no bags (no baggage area.) A 172 is four people plus bags (assuming small people in both cases!!...two adults, two kids, for instance.)
 
The plane is more or less the same as a 150hp 172, just a low wing.

The price is basically what you would pay retail to rent from most FBOs, and they don't also ask for another $135 a month, money wise it's not a good deal, shy of there being something REALLY special about that piper, like full glass panel, 3 axis Ap
 
I have the opportunity to get in on a plane share for a '72 piper. I don't know a lot about the plane, and am looking for info. How does it compare to the 172 I've been training in? How do they fly (first one to say thrust, lift, wings or any other smart ass thing is getting kicked in the shin)?

The monthly would be in the neighborhood of $135 to cover insurance, hangar fees, maintenance. and the hourly $110 wet. Is this a good deal?

Of course it's hard to say with accuracy whether or not that's a good deal or not without knowing where you are located. What's a good deal in Exurban California, is substantially different than Big City California, which is different still from Rural Utah. So, hard to know. What I do know is, where I'm at in Exurban California $110 wet on a PA28-140 is already too high to begin with, and that does not involve spending $135 a month, and it also doesn't involve bringing cash to purchase a share. Personally, I'd pass, but that's me.
 
I have a Piper Cherokee and I've owned Cessnas...they fly pretty close to the same, although I prefer the Piper as I find it less tiring to fly (to me more stable), and much easier on crosswinds. In fact, it is so easy on crosswinds that when the xwind component is less than 10 knots, I pretty much just ignore the crosswind and fly the Piper to the runway, making minor slip corrections if needed. I could never do that in my Cessnas.
And what was said about baggage may or may not be true, as many pipers have been modified with a "hat rack" that also extends the lower area to give you a (albeit smaller than a Cessna) baggage area. I consider both 2-adults-plus-small-kids aircraft. I only fly mine with just me, or me with one or two adults.
As to the price, you haven't given enough info to determine if it is a good deal. BTW, for myself I always consider owning more expensive than renting in the long run, but expense isn't the reason to own.
 
Like others have said--it depends. Depends what you consider a good deal.
Money wise it doesn't seem like a great deal, but if you are only 1 of 3 partners and the plane is always available for you to use on trips and overnights... that is worth something. It can be hard to do those things while you are renting from an FBO.
I am in a club 182RG and I don't pay much more than your hourly rate for a much bigger and faster airplane. Although I don't always fly it that much, I will pay the monthly fee to have the option to take it on a trip if I want to. My2cents
 
I was a CFI and sales demo pilot in the Cherokee 140 for a Piper Flite Center in the early '70s, and was a partner in one of the last 140s built (a '77 model), so I know them pretty well. The Cherokee 140 is a safe, comfortable (in front, anyway) and inexpensive first airplane to own. Performance is very similar to a 150-hp C-172, but it doesn't do as well on short fields and struggles some above 10,000'. Gross weight and useful load are both about 150 pounds less than a comparable 172. My '77 140 (well-equipped) had a useful load of 730 lb. On the plus side, a 140 will carry 50 gallons of fuel, giving a nice, long range, if there's not too much weight in the cabin. The 140 worked out well for us as a first airplane for a family with two small kids.

In the early 1970s the Cherokee 140 was marketed as a fleet flight-school trainer, with optional snap-in rear seats for occasional use; while the C-172 was sold as an entry-level family/business traveling machine.

Though the Cherokee 140 exterior dimensions and appearance are identical to the full-four-seat Cherokee 150, 160 and 180, the 140's rear seats and baggage area are smaller than those models. Piper needed a trainer to compete with the smaller, cheaper Cessna 150, so in 1964 they took the Cherokee 150, removed the rear seats, moved the rear cabin bulkhead forward by one station, and sealed up the baggage door -- and called it the Cherokee 140. In 1965 they offered the snap-in rear seats as an option, and called it the "Cherokee 140 2+2 Cruiser". The rudimentary back seats leaned against the flat rear bulkhead with no cargo room behind them at all. The net result was somewhat less rear seat legroom than in the Cherokee 150, which was discontinued in 1967.

The 1969 model, dubbed "Cherokee 140B", added a lot of improvements, including the six-pack instrument panel and throttle quadrant introduced on the Arrow in 1967. A new molded plastic rear cabin bulkhead was offered as an option, which provided a tiny baggage area and hat shelf behind the snap-in rear seats. But there was still no baggage door. A restryled nose cap was introduced late in the 1971 model year, and the 1972 model added a dorsal fin and small extension to the top of the rudder, along with optional shoulder harnesses. The '72 140 still had the quirky ceiling-mounted trim crank, a holdover from the Tri-Pacer days. Other Cherokee models had switched to a more conventional floor-mounted trim wheel by then, and the 140 joined them in 1973.

From 1971 to 1974, Piper offered a stripped-down, two-seat, fleet-spec version of the 140, called "Flite Liner", to its Flite Center network. It came with just basic gyro instruments, one navcom, the old flat rear bulkhead, no back seats, no wheel fairings, no outside cabin entry step, no toe brakes. The only options were a 360-channel com radio instead of the standard 100-channel unit, and blue exterior trim paint instead of red. Over the years many Flite Liners have been re-equipped with features otherwise seen on standard 140s, so it may be hard to tell if the airplane you're looking at started out as a Flite Liner. A registration number ending in "FL" is a clue.

pa-28-140_1972.jpg

pa-28-140_fliteliner.jpg
 
Last edited:
Interesting and cool history lesson on the 140. Thanks.
 
call me crazy, but I am starting to love that quirky ceiling mounted trim. Unscrew nose down, Screw in nose up!

Assuming tach time, I think its a bit expensive. Hobbs would be a terrible deal. How many people in the club? If the airplane is seldom used then, it might be worth it.
 
Thanks for all the replies.

So far it seems like not such a good deal. A bit more in fo to answer some of the questions.

The club is being started by UVU (Utah Valley University) students, there is no buy in for the club, but I'm not sure how many people will be involved or how often it will be available. I also don't know if it is billed hobbs or tach time. I will find out all that information when I go to the meeting in a couple weeks.

In contrast to pricing I currently pay $85 an hour wet to rent from my instructor for a '77 172 with 180 hp. That is for the trainer plane and it is usually available because most people prefer the cheaper 152.

I'm also looking at a '75 172 with 180hp and constant speed prop in a 1/10 share for $137 a month and $39 dry with a $2000 buy in. Most of the 10 are 2 times a year flyers though so it's often available as well.

My current rental is at U42 which is 10 minutes from my house. And the other 172 is at BTF which is a 20 minute drive.

The Piper however is down in Spanish Fork Utah about an hour away.

Fuel is about $5 a gallon here, so the piper would be comparable in price to the 172s and I was kinda hoping that it was a significant upgrade over the cessnas but that doesn't seem to be the case, and maybe even be a bit of a downgrade.

As always I appreciate the feedback from ya'll.
 
Thanks for all the replies.

So far it seems like not such a good deal. A bit more in fo to answer some of the questions.

The club is being started by UVU (Utah Valley University) students, there is no buy in for the club, but I'm not sure how many people will be involved or how often it will be available. I also don't know if it is billed hobbs or tach time. I will find out all that information when I go to the meeting in a couple weeks.

In contrast to pricing I currently pay $85 an hour wet to rent from my instructor for a '77 172 with 180 hp. That is for the trainer plane and it is usually available because most people prefer the cheaper 152.

I'm also looking at a '75 172 with 180hp and constant speed prop in a 1/10 share for $137 a month and $39 dry with a $2000 buy in. Most of the 10 are 2 times a year flyers though so it's often available as well.

My current rental is at U42 which is 10 minutes from my house. And the other 172 is at BTF which is a 20 minute drive.

The Piper however is down in Spanish Fork Utah about an hour away.

Fuel is about $5 a gallon here, so the piper would be comparable in price to the 172s and I was kinda hoping that it was a significant upgrade over the cessnas but that doesn't seem to be the case, and maybe even be a bit of a downgrade.

As always I appreciate the feedback from ya'll.

It sounds like the flying school is trying to get members so they can foot the cost for the school.
 
Thanks for all the replies.

In contrast to pricing I currently pay $85 an hour wet to rent from my instructor for a '77 172 with 180 hp. That is for the trainer plane and it is usually available because most people prefer the cheaper 152.
How are you paying $85 an hour wet? I'm renting a 180 and it costs $59 an hour not including fuel plus I have to pay a monthly fee to be in their club to get the "discount" rate.
 
In contrast to pricing I currently pay $85 an hour wet to rent from my instructor for a '77 172 with 180 hp. That is for the trainer plane and it is usually available because most people prefer the cheaper 152...

A 172 with 180 hp that is seldom used, for $85 an hour WITH fuel? I'd stop right there...if that was available local here, I would NOT own my Piper!
 
A 172 with 180 hp that is seldom used, for $85 an hour WITH fuel? I'd stop right there...if that was available local here, I would NOT own my Piper!
Exactly!! My local FBO charges $150 an hour for a C172 if you include fuel.
 
A 172 with 180 hp that is seldom used, for $85 an hour WITH fuel? I'd stop right there...if that was available local here, I would NOT own my Piper!
The school may not allow him to take it for overnight trips.
 
The school may not allow him to take it for overnight trips.
I don't know about that. Part of flight school is flying at night including cross country night solos. Fuel on the low, low end would be $30 an hour. So that only leaves $55 for the cost of the plane, insurance, and maintenance. That's the lowest cost I've ever heard in today's time.
 
Sorry, I miss typed. The $85 for the current rental is dry. I average $130 wet.

I did quite a bit of research before I started my training and it was one of the cheaper deals.

IIRC there was another option that was $120 wet, but the hourly for the instructor was more, and it was a longer drive.
 
Sorry, I miss typed. The $85 for the current rental is dry. I average $130 wet.

I did quite a bit of research before I started my training and it was one of the cheaper deals.

IIRC there was another option that was $120 wet, but the hourly for the instructor was more, and it was a longer drive.
OK. Good. B/c I was about to be extremely jealous and amazed at the same time if you paid $85 and fuel was included.
 
The school may not allow him to take it for overnight trips.

The school may not allow him to take it for overnight trips.

Overnight and weekend trips are possible, but only if they don't interfere with training as that is the primary purpose of the plane. There are usually only 4 or 5 of us that use the 172 one of which is a former student working on his commercial amd even he prefers the 152. He does however take the 172 on weekends every once in a while so he can take the kids.
 
Here is this month's schedule the green is me, and the blue represents 3 other pilots.

Screenshot_2016-09-29-19-11-08.png
 
No,,, at 100 hrs a yr, you would be paying about the Regular rental charge.
Less than 100 hrs hrs a yr, has you paying even more.
Only advantage is the possession.
With the OPs new figures you were in the right direction Robert Lomax...it would actually be 81 hours a year to break even.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top