Are PA28's A Bad Purchase?

[Lawson_Stone]

I am planning this year to begin my PPL training and also plan, assuming I'm successful, on buying a plane. I love the Cherokees, but increasingly I'm hearing of more and more invasive and frequent required inspections of the spars, fixed end-of-service times, etc.

Is the Cherokee not going to be a wise purchase for somebody embarking on general aviation as a retirement "treat?"

 

[Pugs]

They're no better or worse than any other GA aircraft built 40 years ago. Find a decent one that wasn't a trainer and that has been taken care of and you'll do fine.

 

[frfly172]

The cherokees are holding their own in the used market. Quite a few have updated avionics. You could probably find a good used one with the 160 motor.

 

[Lawson_Stone]

The cherokees are holding their own in the used market. Quite a few have updated avionics. You could probably find a good used one with the 160 motor.

But my concern is the regimen of inspection related to the wing-spar. It sounds like the eddy-current inspection will need to be repeated periodically, and from all I hear it is not cheap.

 

[Pugs]

But my concern is the regimen of inspection related to the wing-spar. It sounds like the eddy-current inspection will need to be repeated periodically, and from all I hear it is not cheap.

The inspection isn’t cheap but how often it is done depends on several factors. PA-28s that were not used as trainers generally have a long period between inspections but there’s a formula you have to use to calculate that cycle. I don’t have it handy but easy to find. The proposed AD of last year has not been approved yet that I’m aware of and there was significant pushback by many folks including EAA, AOPA and Piper themselves that the FAA had it wrong.

 

[AvNavCom]

But my concern is the regimen of inspection related to the wing-spar. It sounds like the eddy-current inspection will need to be repeated periodically, and from all I hear it is not cheap.

Certain Cherokees are not subject to the wing spar AD you're referencing. I have a 1966 Cherokee 180C and it has a total of four recurring ADs, only one of which involves the wing spar. That just involves checking for corrosion every 7 years and doesn't require any eddy-current inspection. There is a follow-on action in a NPRM which does involve PA-28-180s, but only if they have more than 12,000 hours or incomplete maintenance records. My bird has complete maintenance records, has never been used for instruction/commercial ops, and will likely never reach 12,000 hours, so I can ignore that one.

Bottom-line? Buy an experimental. Failing that, get a PA-28-180 that hasn't been a trainer and has complete records.

 

[Racerx]

Not enough information. By and large, no. But as with any airplane, its airframe dependent

 

[schmookeeg]

"Is marrying women a bad idea?"

Yes, unless no.

 

[Dixiebluesky]

They sure can be. The only way to consistently fly and not become mired in the usual aviation pits of frustration is to go experimental. Especially if a guy is even slightly mechanically inclined or has a willingness to learn.

 

[TCABM]

I am planning this year to begin my PPL training and also plan, assuming I'm successful, on buying a plane. I love the Cherokees, but increasingly I'm hearing of more and more invasive and frequent required inspections of the spars, fixed end-of-service times, etc.

Is the Cherokee not going to be a wise purchase for somebody embarking on general aviation as a retirement "treat?"

What do you love about Cherokees? As for a retirement treat, I will always recommend a partnership or equity club over sole ownership for the simple fact that sole ownership is it’s own learning curve and the first year can be steep and expensive.

Where sole ownership makes sense if when you’re reliably flying 100+ hours/year after you’ve completed whatever certificates you plan to collect.

 

[hindsight2020]

I am planning this year to begin my PPL training and also plan, assuming I'm successful, on buying a plane. I love the Cherokees, but increasingly I'm hearing of more and more invasive and frequent required inspections of the spars, fixed end-of-service times, etc.

Is the Cherokee not going to be a wise purchase for somebody embarking on general aviation as a retirement "treat?"

Your intuition is correct. They're not a good long term purchase at this stage of the hobby's life cycle. The regulatory environment simply isn't conducive to happy sunsets. You'll get gaslit on here with a whole host of defensive false equivalences, appeal to authority, and whataboutisms. It's an internet board of pilots after all, which is to say inherently opinionated and ego-primed to dismiss others' experience as invalid.

At the end of the day it'll be you dealing with the hassles, so caveat emptor. I'm not relitigating it for the 69th time; feel free to PM if you want my expanded answer on PA28 ownership. Good luck to ya.

 

[Clip4]

Certain Cherokees are not subject to the wing spar AD you're referencing. I have a 1966 Cherokee 180C and it has a total of four recurring ADs, only one of which involves the wing spar. That just involves checking for corrosion every 7 years and doesn't require any eddy-current inspection. There is a follow-on action in a NPRM which does involve PA-28-180s, but only if they have more than 12,000 hours or incomplete maintenance records. My bird has complete maintenance records, has never been used for instruction/commercial ops, and will likely never reach 12,000 hours, so I can ignore that one.

Bottom-line? Buy an experimental. Failing that, get a PA-28-180 that hasn't been a trainer and has complete records.

Yea, that way when there is a wing spar problem no one will make you fix it.

 

[Half Fast]

there’s a formula you have to use to calculate that cycle. I don’t have it handy but easy to find.

Factored Service Hours = 100N + (T-100N)/17 where N=# of 100hr inspections and T=total time.

The requirement varies by model, but I believe the initial inspection is required when FSH exceeds around 4500 hours. Airplanes used for training get 100hr inspections (N) regardless of annual requirements, so the formula imposes a penalty on training hours. 1 hour as a trainer is equivalent to 17 hours outside the training environment.

Consider two hypothetical planes, N1234 and N9876. Both airframes have 4500 hours total time. N1234 was a trainer and therefore had forty-five 100hr inspections, but N9876 was never used for training.

N1234: FSH = 100*45 + (4500-100*45)/17 = 4500 hours INSPECTION REQUIRED
N9876: FSH = 100*0 + (4500-100*0)/17 = 265 hours INSPECTION NOT REQUIRED

HOWEVER, there is also a limit on total hours beyond which an eddy current inspection is required regardless of FSH. I think it's 5000 hours.

 

[cowman]

Nobody can in good conscience ever say an airplane purchase is a wise investment. Even with all the right pre-buy inspections and maintenance done you can still have a sudden five figure or worse repair bill and possible months of downtime. Just know going into it that's always a possibility.

I owned a PA-28-181 for about 6 years and I've owned a PA-32R-300 which is hit by some of the same ADs for the last 7. In my case none of them have been a big deal- when I do the factored service hours calculation I'm nowhere close to needing the inspection and could likely fly it for the rest of my life and never hit it. Most of the others have been minor line items during annual inspections and not particularly noteworthy. I've been very fortunate as an airplane owner over the years, most of my unplanned maintenance issues have been in the hundreds or low thousand dollar range. Some guys get unlucky and end up needing a $50k+ engine within a short time of purchasing... it's a dice roll. You can stack the odds in your favor by following the standard pre-buy advice but guarantees do not exist.

Anyway... what I think OP is really asking here is if PA28s are generally worse than other certified single engine piston aircraft in the same general price/capability range. My answer to that is no, not really. Most of these old airplanes have collected several ADs over the years, there's always going to be something to deal with on an aircraft. That said, given the current market pricing, regulatory environment, and all the upcoming questions on fuel I'd take a good hard look at the experimental world right now if I was looking for an airplane with PA28 capabilities.

HOWEVER, there is also a limit on total hours beyond which an eddy current inspection is required regardless of FSH. I think it's 5000 hours.

Unless I'm mistaken I think that's part of a Piper service bulletin not the AD so recommended but non-regulatory and therefore not required.

 

[Dana]

I am planning this year to begin my PPL training and also plan, assuming I'm successful, on buying a plane. I love the Cherokees...

First ask yourself, what is it about Cherokees that you "love"? Not that there's anything wrong with them, but they're just one of many options, each with strengths and weaknesses. Personally, I find the Cherokees kind of boring, like a Toyota Camry... it'll get you there in reasonable comfort but you won't be saying, "Wow!" If that's what you want that's fine, but once you actually start flying your preference may change several times.

 

[schmookeeg]

I would have favored Hyundai Elantra for my car metaphor

 

[rockyfatcat]

To inspect the Cherokee spar, both fuel tanks have to be removed. If there is corrosion you’ll be looking for a new (replacement) wing.

Before you fixate on a particular airframe, it would be wise to really sit down and evaluate what your flight mission really is.

I know that I fly solo 90+% of the time. I occasionally take someone up in my right seat. I have flown down to Sun N Fun and was planning on flying to Oshkosh last year but that got derailed.

Each of those trips requires refueling stops and careful weight management.

Are you VFR? Or IFR? Carefully selecting your mission choices will dictate what is your best option. Choosing a particular airframe without choosing a mission is kinda like buying a 2 sear sports car when you really need a station wagon. Or vice-versa.

 

[asicer]

I would have favored Hyundai Elantra for my car metaphor

With all but one door welded shut.

 

[NealRomeoGolf]

My first airplane was a PA28. It was a very good one to learn the ropes of ownership. As said above, avoid one that has been a trainer for too long. Mine was in its early days but not for thousands of hours.

 

[WDD]

If you're just starting your PPL journey / pilot training, don't determine what plane you'll eventually own at this point. Get your PPL, then rent several different planes, get some hours under your belt, and then you'll know a lot better on what plane will actually suit you the best.

 

[Hang 4]

To inspect the Cherokee spar, both fuel tanks have to be removed. If there is corrosion you’ll be looking for a new (replacement) wing.

That's one of the inspections, there are others. I have a 1973 180 which I've had for almost 10 years and it's so far been exempt from any of the AD's. Primarily due the the Factored Service Hour calculation. I have done the tank removal service bulletin. That makes sense to do anyways as it gives a chance to replace the gaskets for the fuel senders and the flexible fuel lines that don't have an infinite life. Tank removal is not that big of a deal, just painstaking.
The fascination with Piper spars kind of makes all the AD's associated with other 50+ year old airframes fade away.
If the Cherokee strikes your fancy, buy one. Just make sure to get a good pre-buy from someone that knows the airframe and what to look for.

 

[Dana]

I would have favored Hyundai Elantra for my car metaphor

Nah, that's the C-172. The Cherokee is a bit plushier, like the Camry.

 

[Lawson_Stone]

Thanks all for your observations and experiences. All goes into the mental hopper to circulate and ponder. I have a lot of time to think about this, and plan to take matters slow when it comes to acquiring a plane.

 

[Pugs]

Thanks all for your observations and experiences. All goes into the mental hopper to circulate and ponder. I have a lot of time to think about this, and plan to take matters slow when it comes to acquiring a plane.

One of the best things you can do prior to buying a plane is join a club. It will open your eyes to the details of plane ownership both cost and LOE and it's hard to get hurt financially that way.

 

[WDD]

One of the best things you can do prior to buying a plane is join a club. It will open your eyes to the details of plane ownership both cost and LOE and it's hard to get hurt financially that way.

Great idea. AND.... volunteer to help the maintenance guy. You will learn a lot, such as database updates, how to change the oil, how to work with the club's A&P, the misc things you have to have in the plane (window shades, hand tug for the nose wheel, fuel level stick, fuel sump sample cup, what oil to use, etc. etc. etc.). AND how to research and track the routine maintenance items such as hours/time to oil change, how to keep track of time to check ELT, transponder, etc. etc. etc. AND.... how to organize and keep track of all of this. AND... how to research and make a list of all of the AD's and when they were complied with. AND...........

I learned so much from my club flying; helped quite a bit when wife I and got our own plane.

 

[Maurice]

If you're just starting your PPL journey / pilot training, don't determine what plane you'll eventually own at this point. Get your PPL, then rent several different planes, get some hours under your belt, and then you'll know a lot better on what plane will actually suit you the best.

One of the best things you can do prior to buying a plane is join a club. It will open your eyes to the details of plane ownership both cost and LOE and it's hard to get hurt financially that way.

Lawson, WOD and Pugs are right on with advice. To that I would add, make the trip to Airventure in Oshkosh. Total immersion in everything aviation! What a retirement treat that will be!

 

[eman1200]

Yes, but 172’s are worse

 

[Timbeck2]

Personally, I find the Cherokees kind of boring

*crosses Dana off my “people to fly with” list

 

[kareyweston]

The PA28 family is a great line of airframes…so are Cessna 172s. It isn’t the family that matters, it is what you like, your mission, your budget and overall what you feel comfortable with. DO NOT LISTEN TO ALL THE INTERNET POSTERS! Everyone has an opinion but ultimately it is your money and your comfort/mission that dictates the plane. I own a PA28-181 Archer II. Yes there are AD’s related to the spar and other items but every airplane has some AD related to something. AD’s come out because something happened and someone died or a continuous report from mechanics found something that the FAA wanted to get in front of. AD’s are not bad things, they may save your life. As to own, lease, flying club, etc, once again that is 100% your call. There are many that have great advice or things to consider but even that is not for everyone…just advice. Nothing is cookie cutter and some say “it only makes sense to own if you fly 100+ hours per year”. Ya well on paper that may very well be the case but like everything, paper numbers are just numbers and if you are getting into aviation (or boats for that matter, both of which I have) thinking it is cheap then time for a new hobby…because it ain’t cheap BUT for me it is fun, relaxing and has convenience factors. We commute from our house in WV (KMRB) to our house in Florida (KFPR). That is a 15 hour or so drive but about a 7.5 hour flight in the Archer (they ain’t fast). Ya WAY cheaper to drive but 15 hours. Cheaper to fly commercial absolutely but dealing with people sucks for me. We do any of the three depending on time, weather, etc. but having the option of flying ourselves is that…an option.

As far as buying a PA28. Deciding on whether to buy one or if they are good airframes is only part of it. As an airframe, excellent. As a buy, well ANY airframe can suck depending on how it was cared for or what it did in it’s life up to where you want to purchase it. You will hear things about airframe hours and buy one with low hours…well not necessarily true! I have seen many different airframes that were in excellent condition and “baby’d” that had 10,000+ airframe hours and compared them that had just a couple thousand hours and abused (and not flight school ones to boot). Before you buy any airplane, YOU have to inspect it. If you are not mechanically inclined, then I hate to say it but owning a 30, 50 year old or older airplane, is not for you. When I buy I take MY trusted mechanic with me, take it to a known hanger with tools and we BOTH sit and go over the logs and take very single panel off, crawl through it and make a list of what should be fixed whether I deal with that cost or the seller does. Best $1700-$2200 spend you can ever do is that inspection. Owning an airplane is expensive but expensive is relative to your personal “wealth”. Flying itself is cheap(ish), owning adds a bit because it comes with responsibility but honestly the biggest expense above that is the pesky hanger fees, landing fees, insurance and your own personal thing if you like updated avionics, etc.

To answer about you looking at a PA28…just like any plane it is personal preference and how it fits your mission and pocket book. My wife adores her Archer, wipes it with a cloth whenever she is in the hanger and the time we spend together flying here and there is worth every penny to us…but it is an inanimate object at the end of the day that is also a tool that gets us from point A to point B, wherever and whenever that might be.

IF you like flying a low wing 120kt or so airplane that has 4 seats then by all means a Warrior or Archer is a good choice…as would be a Mooney, Beech or Commander if you prefer a different name. Year of manufacture is not what you look at for any of them. You want the beer can money to be spent on a solid, rust free, accident free airframe and the cost goes up for engine life left and avionics. The one thing I will say about shopping for an airplane is to not compromise on what you like/want. If what you like/want turns out to be above your spend threshold, then wait. All too many times I have seen folks buy an airplane and settle on outdated avionics or high-time engines because they think they will just “make it their own” or cross that bridge as needed just so they get a plane…and they end up regretting it or not flying it and it just rots on the ramp or collecting dust in a hanger and eventually being sold at a loss and/or with lots of hassle. If you want low-time engines, glass panel(s), leather this or shiny paint that, then look for and buy that. If it is out of your price range to do so and you do not mind a good six pack, decent radios and maybe a little peeling paint and still love to fly it, then do that one instead! Planes are like your life mate…there is one for everyone out there. But if you look like me and are not a billionaire, then sometimes you find the one that you love even when it may not be the dream one at first. However, they still provide you with fun and enjoyment (the plane that is).

 

[Clip4]

Nobody can in good conscience ever say an airplane purchase is a wise investment. Even with all the right pre-buy inspections and maintenance done you can still have a sudden five figure or worse repair bill and possible months of downtime. Just know going into it that's always a possibility.

I owned a PA-28-181 for about 6 years and I've owned a PA-32R-300 which is hit by some of the same ADs for the last 7. In my case none of them have been a big deal- when I do the factored service hours calculation I'm nowhere close to needing the inspection and could likely fly it for the rest of my life and never hit it. Most of the others have been minor line items during annual inspections and not particularly noteworthy. I've been very fortunate as an airplane owner over the years, most of my unplanned maintenance issues have been in the hundreds or low thousand dollar range. Some guys get unlucky and end up needing a $50k+ engine within a short time of purchasing... it's a dice roll. You can stack the odds in your favor by following the standard pre-buy advice but guarantees do not exist.

Anyway... what I think OP is really asking here is if PA28s are generally worse than other certified single engine piston aircraft in the same general price/capability range. My answer to that is no, not really. Most of these old airplanes have collected several ADs over the years, there's always going to be something to deal with on an aircraft. That said, given the current market pricing, regulatory environment, and all the upcoming questions on fuel I'd take a good hard look at the experimental world right now if I was looking for an airplane with PA28 capabilities.


Unless I'm mistaken I think that's part of a Piper service bulletin not the AD so recommended but non-regulatory and therefore not required.

Actually there have been 3 periods in my life that buying an airplane would have been a very good investment. Now telling in advance when that is in the future is a challenge.

 

[cowman]

Actually there have been 3 periods in my life that buying an airplane would have been a very good investment. Now telling in advance when that is in the future is a challenge.

Well, yes... if I'd kept my Archer for a couple years instead of selling it when I bought the Lance I probably could have sold it for $30k more but nobody could have predicted that. That's actually one of the reasons I'm a little less of an advocate of the PA-28 than I used to be. When I bought mine I had little trouble finding a good mid-time example with a decent IFR panel in the $50k price range. Last time I looked a similar plane would be $80k if not considerably more which in my mind changes the value proposition a bit.

 

[hindsight2020]

When I bought mine I had little trouble finding a good mid-time example with a decent IFR panel in the $50k price range. Last time I looked a similar plane would be $80k if not considerably more which in my mind changes the value proposition a bit.

Yup. And that's why I advise neophytes to ask their so-called mentors what year they bought their airplane. Lots of present incumbents born on 3rd base gum-flapping about hitting triples...

 

[Albany Tom]

Not to derail the whole thread, or at least not any more than normal, also keep in mind that some PA-28's beyond the -160 may have engines that may not be approved to run the unlead gas that may be the only one that can be used at some time in the future. And yep, too many uses of the word 'may' in there, even during the month.

Other thing is that you're talking value/economics in the same post as "treat". To me, one of the best uses of financial resources is to find some moments of fun, but the fun math and the money math can be different kinds of math. It also may be different equations if you're in a position to want to leave some of the retirement savings to someone else. And..it might be different math depending on how long you want to fly after retiring. Just stuff to consider.

 

[cowman]

Not to derail the whole thread, or at least not any more than normal, also keep in mind that some PA-28's beyond the -160 may have engines that may not be approved to run the unlead gas that may be the only one that can be used at some time in the future. And yep, too many uses of the word 'may' in there, even during the month.

Other thing is that you're talking value/economics in the same post as "treat". To me, one of the best uses of financial resources is to find some moments of fun, but the fun math and the money math can be different kinds of math. It also may be different equations if you're in a position to want to leave some of the retirement savings to someone else. And..it might be different math depending on how long you want to fly after retiring. Just stuff to consider.

I know the PA-28-181 had an STC available to run mogas but it involved modification of the fuel system.

There's some uncertainty on fuel right now but if I were to place a bet... which in a way I am as an owner of an aircraft with no such STC... I think there's still going to be a fuel option whether it's going to be something that requires modifications or they'll extend leaded fuel production I don't know but I have faith something will come together.

 

[davela]

I've flown the Archer a fair amount and I own a Cherokee 140. I love them both. PA-28's are reasonably priced compared to comparable Cessna's right now and some are actually bargains. The main competition to the non-complex non-high performance PA-28 models is the Cessna's 172, and as fine as they are (and they are), their demand as trainers has raised their prices to extreme levels in recent years.