Lance vs Saratoga... differences (if any)?

pkuhns

pkuhns

Pre-Flight
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
65
Display Name
Display name:
pkuhns
Apologies if Hanger Talk is not the place to ask this question (not sure where on POA to ask these plane questions):

It seems there are Lance fanatics and Saratoga diehards which is great. But for us un-initiated, what if any is the difference? I mean, I know the wing is different but is that all there is? They both seem like serious hauling machines and I know there are fixed-gear Saratogas but aside from that ???

Has anyone on here flown in both/either? Can I read about their big differences somewhere's online? Thanks for the help as I research upgrading to something with more useful load (my Cheetah's useful load is a whopping 732lbs...)...

-- Pete in Indy
 
The major difference is the wing and fuel tank arrangement, but there are some nuances ...

PA-32R-300 Cherokee Lance (1976-77 model years): Retractable, hershey-bar wing, low tail.

PA-32RT-300 Lance II and PA-32RT-300T Turbo Lance II (1978-79): Retractable, hershey-bar wing, T-tail.

PA-32R-301 Saratoga SP and PA-32R-301T Turbo Saratoga SP (1980- ): Retractable, tapered wing, low tail.

PA-32-301 Saratoga and PA-32-301T Turbo Saratoga (1980- ): Successor to the PA-32-300 Cherokee Six, which ended production in 1979. Fixed gear, tapered wing, low tail.

Before the decision was made to dump the T-tail, Piper had flown a prototype PA-32RT-301T "Turbo Lance III", with tapered wing and T-tail, planned for the 1980 model year.
 
Last edited:
I have a straight tail Lance and a good friend has a Toga. I went with the Lance for the the higher useful load. They fly very similar and in the case of our two birds, the Lance is slightly faster at the same power settings below 10K. He is probably faster up high. There really is not a lot of differences between the obvious, wings, tanks, a few other refinements.

I have a 1440 useful load and it can carry my family of 5, dog, cooler, golf clubs, pressure washer, etc...You should also be comparing the Chevy Suburban if you need a lot of useful load.
 
I've flown a few hundred hours in the PA-32RT-300T Lance and currently I rent a 2000 PA-32-301T Turbo Saratoga. As far as big differences in the way they fly/handle, I don't think they are too many/big.

The Lance required you to not over-boost when operating at lower density altitudes. The Saratoga is automatic and you just push the throttle lever to the stop and it takes care of you.

The Lance had the (in my opinion) bad idea of the single housed dual mag's. When I finally was able to list the plane on TaP I flew it to norther Alabama for the pre-purchase. The mechanic brought me over and showed me that 3 of the 4 nuts that hold the mag in place were gone. The fourth had about 3 spins left before it was gone as well. As you can imagine what the glide range is with the hershey wings in a heavy Lance, it ain't good (I know this because I lost the mechanical fuel pump climbing out south of ATL one day and before I got the electric on and engine back to full speed, I was coming down!).

The rest of the differences for me are primarily just the difference between a 70's plane and a 2000 plane. The interior of the saratoga is MUCH better. The avionics are night and day different and the STEC 55 autopilot vs no autopilot on the lance is huge. Hell, the saratoga even has A/C!

Final thought is the T-tail vs straight-tail. Straight is obviously preferred by most hence them going back to them. Once you learn the difference in handling (slower airspeed/lower power setting) there is no drastic difference. X-wind wise, they far exceed the book just keep enough air over the rudder to handle and it's easy breezy (had a 30 kt x-wind at ROA with the crossing rwy clsd with no problem).
 
USAF JD said:
I have a straight tail Lance and a good friend has a Toga. I went with the Lance for the the higher useful load. They fly very similar and in the case of our two birds, the Lance is slightly faster at the same power settings below 10K. He is probably faster up high. There really is not a lot of differences between the obvious, wings, tanks, a few other refinements.

I have a 1440 useful load and it can carry my family of 5, dog, cooler, golf clubs, pressure washer, etc...You should also be comparing the Chevy Suburban if you need a lot of useful load.
Click to expand...
+1 on this.
I owned a PA-32R-300 1977 Lance and now own a PA-32R-301T 1980 Turbo Saratoga. Both fly the same. The Lance will haul more and fasted below 10000 but the Turbo Saratoga does well at high altitudes. The only reason I changed was because I fly fish and fly into airports in the Rockies and other mountain area. I wanted the extra power from the Turbo to help me get in and out of those airports.

Also WELCOME to POA!!!
 
I'm curious about the cabin configurations. Are both Toga and Lance available with both Club and 6 forward?

I'd like Club for my 6 place plane in my retirement hangar.
 
USAF JD said:
I have a straight tail Lance and a good friend has a Toga. I went with the Lance for the the higher useful load. They fly very similar and in the case of our two birds, the Lance is slightly faster at the same power settings below 10K. He is probably faster up high. There really is not a lot of differences between the obvious, wings, tanks, a few other refinements.

I have a 1440 useful load and it can carry my family of 5, dog, cooler, golf clubs, pressure washer, etc...You should also be comparing the Chevy Suburban if you need a lot of useful load.
Click to expand...


So your Lance can literally carry a Cheetah if we could squeeze it in there. Impressive...
 
Ravioli said:
I'm curious about the cabin configurations. Are both Toga and Lance available with both Club and 6 forward?

I'd like Club for my 6 place plane in my retirement hangar.
Click to expand...
With teens and small kicking kids we liked the standard all forward facing seating. :)
 
Ravioli said:
I'm curious about the cabin configurations. Are both Toga and Lance available with both Club and 6 forward?

I'd like Club for my 6 place plane in my retirement hangar.
Click to expand...
I think the early year Lance had Facing Forward seats. Not sure if that was an option on the Toga. With Club Seats and two people in the back they can prop their feet up and recline the seat back if they want to sleep. Very nice for long trips. My 85 year old mom took a nip on one of our trips to see her sister.
 
The Lance will be much cheaper to acquire and higher UL.

The T tail stabilator is 28% smaller than the low tail. Chop the throttle and it sinks quickly. It's not a short strip plane unless you are bold. If you gave any desire to grass strip it with the RVs, your in the wrong neighborhood.

Dollars to doughnuts, a 1980 Saratoga next to a 79 Lance with the same equipment, the Lance will be 30-40% cheaper. I have noticed a smaller difference in straight tail Lance pricing, but nothing to justify the Toga premium.

Really, it boils down to your budget. If you can afford a newer Toga, go for it. If you are $120k or below, there is some very good value in the Lances with marginal trade offs over a Toga. If the panel is a huge driving factor, there are some sharp lances out there that would be $200k + Togas under $130k.

FWIW..... I love my Lance. It does everything I want it to do. Looked at Bos, meh. Over priced in my opinion. Both acquisition and on the MX side....but, but, but.....they are great to fly, right? I don't need Cadilac handling. I need suburban utility.
 
Unit I bought my 1980 fixed gear Toga for less than 90% of the Lances on the market at that time. Yes I stole the plane, but yeah generally a Toga with all original panel is still well over 6 figures.
 
Get the T tail!

My first job was in a T tail arrow, great memories, sweet plane, got next to nothing of value to add aside from that lol
 
arkvet said:
Unit I bought my 1980 fixed gear Toga for less than 90% of the Lances on the market at that time. Yes I stole the plane, but yeah generally a Toga with all original panel is still well over 6 figures.
Click to expand...

That was my experience too. I did look at a clapped out stiff leg Toga. guy wanted $130k and that was that. All steam, all original, nothing special. I said we need to be around the $100k mark on this plane and he rolled his eyes. I pulled up TAP and controller right there and showed him the competition.

He didn't care. He "knew what is plane was worth". I ended up buying from Bartelt.

I flew down to his airport about a year later and that plane still had for sale banners on the prop. ducking idiot.
 
Unit74 said:
That was my experience too. I did look at a clapped out stiff leg Toga. guy wanted $130k and that was that. All steam, all original, nothing special. I said we need to be around the $100k mark on this plane and he rolled his eyes. I pulled up TAP and controller right there and showed him the competition.

He didn't care. He "knew what is plane was worth". I ended up buying from Bartelt.

I flew down to his airport about a year later and that plane still had for sale banners on the prop. ducking idiot.
Click to expand...

I suspect most sellers who start with pie-in-the-sky prices won't ever be convinced of the plane's true market value, even when presented with compelling evidence. Had they cared what "market value" is, they'd have looked before listing. Instead, they just use their "gut" to set the price and won't be told differently...
 
bradg33 said:
I suspect most sellers who start with pie-in-the-sky prices won't ever be convinced of the plane's true market value, even when presented with compelling evidence. Had they cared what "market value" is, they'd have looked before listing. Instead, they just use their "gut" to set the price and won't be told differently...
Click to expand...

Or maybe he just didn't want to sell it. Divorce, wife, something like that, said he had to sell it, who knows.
 
Reference the Saratoga I fly now, it has a 2551 empty weight as configured which gives 1049 for useful load. That is quite a bit less than some of Lances as mentioned above. The A/C adds 56 lbs and the O2 system adds 28 lbs plus other optional items.

As far as performance numbers, normal cruise burns around 16.5 gph at 080 that gives you around 162 kts true if you go up to 160 you're looking at 175 kts at 180 book says 182 kts. I'm not a fan of O2 and living in the mid-west usually keep it below 100 but can verify the below 100 book speeds are pretty close. With full fuel (102 usable) that gives you ~5 1/2 - 6hrs to zero fuel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top