Cherokee Six

azpilot

azpilot

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jul 27, 2015
Messages
821
Display Name
Display name:
azpilot
I have five kids. If I am every going to take my wife and all the kids flying at the same time, I am going to need to get a Cherokee Six. It's the only single engine piston airplane I am aware of that is somewhat easy to find for sale that is available with seven seats. My kids range in age from 12 to 4 years old, so for at least the next few years the weight shouldn't be a problem. Currently, all of us combined weigh about 730 lbs.

I probably spend more time than I should looking at Cherokee Six's for sale. Typically, it's the PA32-260's that have the seven seat option. A lot of the -300's have the club seating option, and those don't normally have the seventh seat. Anyway, I don't know the first thing about what to look for when it comes to buying an airplane. Take this one for example:

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=PIPER&model=CHEROKEE+6/260&listing_id=2167497&s-type=aircraft

It looks like a decent plane. It looks like it has some nicer avionics. It also looks like it needs an engine overhaul coming up pretty soon. If I am going to look at buying a PA32-260, what are some things I should look for? Also, how much does the Total Time affect a planes value? I know when it comes to cars 100,000 miles is getting into the 'well used' category, and 200,000 miles is typically 'very well used'. Are there similar numbers for an airplane?

Anyway, this isn't something I'm likely to do any time soon. We're about six weeks out from buying a new house. This is something I might be able to do in a couple of years. But I am patient. I'll keep renting and flying. But someday, I WILL have my own airplane.
 
Most people prefer the 300's as opposed to the 260's. You get a little more speed, and better climb performance, but to lose a little useful load. But it is not unusual for them to get close to 1500 useful or even higher. 6's were originally one of the few planes that could lift more than the gross empty weight. Really impressive. You may also want a later model 6 because the originals had a four tank fuel system, that could be hard to manage. Later versions (including the retractable Lances and Saratogas) went to a two tank system for fuel management.
 
I had a 260 for 6 years. I had six adults in it a few times. It is a wonderful family machine. It has loads of cargo room in both the forward and rearward baggage compartments. I'd not get to wrapped about a seventh seat....it'd be small. Unless you had three small kids for that row....I'd pass. Mine was forward facing middle row vs the club seating. I happen to think you get more room with the forward middle row since the club row has to share the same foot space with the rear two seats.

I've had it loaded to gross several times....1550 lbs of people and gas and it climbed a bit slower....~600-700 fpm.

I've never flown a 300....so, I have no idea how much more ya get with 40 extra ponies. Mine was fine and didn't have any issues on the eastern coast.

Mine would true out at 138 kts and 15 gph (my flaps were adjusted to the up most limit -2 degrees)...also it took a while to figure out the rudder trim and the importance of readjusting for cruise....if not one can lose 3-5 kts.

Items to inspect:
* fuel selector seals leak over time. Some are not rebuildable ($1-2,000). The test is to see if the tip tanks will hold fuel and not leak to the mains.
* main tanks can develop typical Cherokee leaks and can need rebuilding ($3,000)
*corrosion in the main spar and along the bottom of the corners of the fuselage

Don't buy a fixer upper....that will be the most costly. Buy what you want....autopilot, GPS, panel, etc....
 
Last edited:
The -260 we had growing up was faster than either of the two local -300s, and had a higher useful load. Depends on the airplane.

But if 7 seats is the goal, I'd be happy with either one.

In our family, the most desirable seats were the left front (my brother and I traded off) and the rear two (most leg room).
 
High total time presents a discount, but if you don't care about resale, it doesn't affect airworthiness as long as the systems have been repaired and overhauled on condition and appropriately. Same deal for damage history (although it requires a bit more due diligence if it involved prop strike).

Me and the wife (we only have one kid and hope to keep it that way) daydream about the upgrade from the Arrow, and the Lance is on our mind. We have nowhere near the need for the useful load, but we could use much better climb rates and room. We don't care to go just as slow as the arrow on 14gph (65% on the 300) though. So for us the Lance is the only option unless I go piston twin if I can ever afford my overwater caribbean snowbird bucket list dream mission. For you, the fixed gear version will tend to bring the highest useful load potential. When amortized for the amount of meat you're moving, 130 knots on 14gph is actually pretty economic compared to airlines. Talk about carpooling. :D

Mx is pretty affordable on these things. It's a limo stretch PA-28. Identical systems, identical parts support and availability. It's pretty affordable flying, the only obstacle is the purchase price. Non-issue if you are willing and able to finance of course. Good luck.
 
One thing to also consider is time on the airframe and time on the engine and prop. The plane you listed has 1800 SMOH. TBO is 2000, so you're looking at an overhaul in the very near future. Look for good avionics as well. If it were me, I'd be looking at the 300 over the 260. Better resale and you'll be happier with the performance.
Best advice is to get a pre-buy inspection from a reputable mechanic that is recommended by friends that have planes. Never use the mechanic that the seller uses or that has worked on the plane. Someone that hasn't seen the plane is your best bet.

Good luck!
 
drotto said:
You may also want a later model 6 because the originals had a four tank fuel system, that could be hard to manage. Later versions (including the retractable Lances and Saratogas) went to a two tank system for fuel management.
Click to expand...
Only the 1979 "Six" (they dropped the "Cherokee" name after 1978) had the Lance-style two-tank system (actually, IIRC, there were still four tanks, but the two on each side were interconnected). For 1980 they changed to the tapered wings and became "Saratogas".
 
Last edited:
I have a friend with a 300 he just put on the market. I'll look to see where he has it advertised.
 
Pilawt said:
Only the 1979 "Six" (they dropped the "Cherokee" name after 1978) had the Lance-style two-tank system (actually, IIRC, there were still four tanks, but the two on each side were interconnected). For 1980 they changed to the tapered wings and became "Saratogas".
Click to expand...
I fly a Saratoga, and yes it is technically a 4 tank system. With two inboard steel tanks and two bladders about mid wing. They are connected however. I did not know when the Cherokee changed its name however. Early Saratogas still had good useful load. The one I use has 1298 useful and that is including the added retract weight as well as factory AC. A second Saratoga owner I know says his plane is at 1335 useful load.
 
drotto said:
I did not know when the Cherokee changed its name however.
Click to expand...
The "Cherokee" name was dropped at the end of the 1977 model year on all PA-28s and PA-32s, except for the "Cherokee Six" which continued for one more year, 1978. For 1979 the 260 hp version was dropped, and the PA-32-300 was marketed as just "Piper Six 300".
 
Last edited:
LDJones said:
I have a friend with a 300 he just put on the market. I'll look to see where he has it advertised.
Click to expand...
Thanks LD! Just to be clear, I am sad to report it will be some time before I am ready to get into the market. Right now I just spend my spare time looking at pictures and dreaming...
 
You might also look into the feasibility of acquiring a 7th seat to add to a Six that doesn't have one...I don't know that there's any problem adding it (as long as the center row is forward-facing), and it might expand the range of suitable options when the time comes.
 
azpilot said:
Thanks LD! Just to be clear, I am sad to report it will be some time before I am ready to get into the market. Right now I just spend my spare time looking at pictures and dreaming...
Click to expand...

Airplane Porn... :eek:
 
Seanaldinho said:
Pc-12, buy your last plane first.
Click to expand...

The first time I took my son flying, we did our engine run up and watched as a PC-12 was holding at the hold-short line waiting to depart. He took off, and then we took off right behind him. It was a thing of beauty. My son is now fascinated with the Pilatus and talks about it all the time.

To bad this one costs five times as much as the house I am stretching to buy...

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/search...odel=PC-12&listing_id=1375495&s-type=aircraft
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top