piper 180 for training

M

muleywannabe

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
331
Location
Independence, Kansas
Display Name
Display name:
Cherokee235
I have two friends that are interested in buying a plane. As I have discussed in previous threads, we dont have any rentals around us and it makes it hard to fly. One guy is an A&P, the other should have his A&P by mid summer and is a CFI. They are both looking into a Piper 180 to purchase for both useful load and price of course. I would like to join in with them but have a couple of questions for you all here.

1. I am a 10.1 hour student in a Cessna 172N, will this be a drastic change for me to learn in a piper 180? Any quirky changes that will hinder my training?

2. What is the proper way of setting something like this up? do you involve an attorney and have paperwork drawn up? do you form an LLC to buy the plane etc?

3. Lastly, I feel this is a good way to build a ton of hours and learn when I can and when I want, assuming the other partners are in agreement of time usage, etc. Am I thinking wrong in this? By splitting the costs between 3-4 partners, having built in A&P's and a CFI does this make sense to partner up? as opposed to renting and paying another cfi?
 
Excellent idea!

You'll have no problem transferring to the cherokee. At most a couple hours. You'll find some things easier (glareshield is lower than on a 172 and the wings are on the bottom so you'll be able to see base to final). Easier to fill the gas tanks (no need for a ladder), but be careful not to bang your head on the fuel drains when you crawl under the wing to sump fuel.

Biggest downside (for me) is only one door on the pax side. There are times I really get tired of crawling over the right seat, thanks to 2 knee surgeries.

Other than that, anything else is a religious discussion. Slight difference using carb heat but talk to your CFI about it.

If the 172 you've been flying is a later model with the O-360 engine, that's the same one in the cherokee. If flying an earlier 172, it probably had the O-320 engine which means with the cherokee, about 20-30 HP more. Other than that, not much difference.

Enjoy - the cherokee is fairly benign, a trainer just like the 172, everyone knows how to fix it, parts everywhere, and as long as you don't do anything really stupid, you'll have fun. Not the fastest airplane around but quite comfortable and reasonable economics.

Recommendation - if it doesn't have shoulder harness in the front seats, spend the money (about $800-1200 depending on type and install costs).

As for the partnership, start with the paperwork on AOPA website and understand what's involved. Then consider an attorney who specializes in aviation partnerships. But have the personality & operational details worked out before you talk to the lawyer. Think of it as a pre-nup so you won't have and ugly divorce down the road. For example, if the CFI is going to use it for teaching anyone outside the partnership, there's a HUGE insurance issue! You're still a student, so the insurance will be higher but not nearly as much if it's being by the CFI to teach anyone but you.

Another advantage is that you always know who's the last person to use the airplane.
 
murphey said:
Excellent idea!

You'll have no problem transferring to the cherokee. At most a couple hours. You'll find some things easier (glareshield is lower than on a 172 and the wings are on the bottom so you'll be able to see base to final). Easier to fill the gas tanks (no need for a ladder), but be careful not to bang your head on the fuel drains when you crawl under the wing to sump fuel.

Biggest downside (for me) is only one door on the pax side. There are times I really get tired of crawling over the right seat, thanks to 2 knee surgeries.

Other than that, anything else is a religious discussion. Slight difference using carb heat but talk to your CFI about it.

If the 172 you've been flying is a later model with the O-360 engine, that's the same one in the cherokee. If flying an earlier 172, it probably had the O-320 engine which means with the cherokee, about 20-30 HP more. Other than that, not much difference.

Enjoy - the cherokee is fairly benign, a trainer just like the 172, everyone knows how to fix it, parts everywhere, and as long as you don't do anything really stupid, you'll have fun. Not the fastest airplane around but quite comfortable and reasonable economics.

Recommendation - if it doesn't have shoulder harness in the front seats, spend the money (about $800-1200 depending on type and install costs).

As for the partnership, start with the paperwork on AOPA website and understand what's involved. Then consider an attorney who specializes in aviation partnerships. But have the personality & operational details worked out before you talk to the lawyer. Think of it as a pre-nup so you won't have and ugly divorce down the road. For example, if the CFI is going to use it for teaching anyone outside the partnership, there's a HUGE insurance issue! You're still a student, so the insurance will be higher but not nearly as much if it's being by the CFI to teach anyone but you.

Another advantage is that you always know who's the last person to use the airplane.
Click to expand...


Thank you for the good advice and words of wisdom. I have been training in the C172N, so relatively the same engines, I think the cherokee has 20 hp more. We do not plan on training in the aircraft other than for myself. That is all. The combined hours for all three owners will be 660 hours, the CFI has 500 hours himself.
 
muleywannabe said:
1. I am a 10.1 hour student in a Cessna 172N, will this be a drastic change for me to learn in a piper 180?
Click to expand...
Not at this point.

Any quirky changes that will hinder my training?
Click to expand...
Might delay your solo by a couple of hours, but that's about it.

2. What is the proper way of setting something like this up? do you involve an attorney and have paperwork drawn up? do you form an LLC to buy the plane etc?
Click to expand...
If you are going to buy this plane with two other friends, the answer to both questions is almost certainly "yes". Find an attorney familiar with this field (the AOPA Legal Services Plan attorney list would be a good place to start), but you can do some homework first to make your initial meetings with the attorney more productive. See AOPA's ownership guide, and especially look at the Co-Ownership tab. Their incorporation guide is also on point.

3. Lastly, I feel this is a good way to build a ton of hours and learn when I can and when I want, assuming the other partners are in agreement of time usage, etc. Am I thinking wrong in this?
Click to expand...
No, you are not thinking wrong.

By splitting the costs between 3-4 partners, having built in A&P's and a CFI does this make sense to partner up? as opposed to renting and paying another cfi?
Click to expand...
It does indeed make sense.
 
I'm not knowlegeable on clubs or joint ownership but I can reiterate what Ron said about transitioning. It might add a couple hours to your total training but since it's early on, it will be less of a hassle.
 
The Cherokee airframe and variants are good aircraft. You will enjoy your time in them for training and going places post training.

Too add to your knowledge base about them, keep in mind the old American Indian description of a Cherokee Pilot.... as in "man who taxi with door open". (referring to the low amount of ventilation they have during ground ops).
 
Be sure to get used to switching fuel tanks. There is no "both". Its either left, right, or off. Other than that its pretty much a 172 with low wings
 
jordane93 said:
Be sure to get used to switching fuel tanks. There is no "both". Its either left, right, or off. Other than that its pretty much a 172 with low wings
Click to expand...

There is more to it than that, but it is indeed not a difficult transition even for a low time student pilot.

The only real criticism I've heard about them is that they are too easy. The stall break is so gentle that I've had to tell people it happened. There are oleo struts on all three wheels instead of just the nose gear, making all landings softer. And the big one is that nose gear steering is a whole lot more positive than a Cessna. It steers like a truck instead of a supertanker.

The only real drawback is ventilating them on a hot day. You can open the door, but there is only one.

Gotchas are that you must nail your airspeeds on short final or you'll float into the next county (and flaps are much less effective at braking than a 172 with 40 deg), and you have to manage an electric fuel pump.
 
MAKG1 said:
There is more to it than that, but it is indeed not a difficult transition even for a low time student pilot.

The only real criticism I've heard about them is that they are too easy. The stall break is so gentle that I've had to tell people it happened. There are oleo struts on all three wheels instead of just the nose gear, making all landings softer. And the big one is that nose gear steering is a whole lot more positive than a Cessna. It steers like a truck instead of a supertanker.

The only real drawback is ventilating them on a hot day. You can open the door, but there is only one.

Gotchas are that you must nail your airspeeds on short final or you'll float into the next county (and flaps are much less effective at braking than a 172 with 40 deg), and you have to manage an electric fuel pump.
Click to expand...

I hear the float factor is a real Bit$% if you dont get it right! Good thing my CFI buddy got his PPL and soloed in a piper 140
 
I got to make one pattern lap in an Archer early on in my training and although I don't remember a lot of it, MAG sure ain't lying about the nose wheel steering. I just about put it in the grass immediately:)
 
muleywannabe said:
I hear the float factor is a real Bit$% if you dont get it right! Good thing my CFI buddy got his PPL and soloed in a piper 140
Click to expand...

If you fly a correct airspeed, it is not a problem. Not even a little.

If you try to flare at 80 KIAS, you're going to watch the whole runway go by.
 
muleywannabe said:
I hear the float factor is a real Bit$% if you dont get it right! Good thing my CFI buddy got his PPL and soloed in a piper 140
Click to expand...

Ron Levy said:
No more or less than any other light single if landed faster than it should be.
Click to expand...

Cross the numbers at a higher than correct airspeed, and any aircraft will float (especially the DA20/40).

But as Ron is saying, cross the numbers at the correct airspeed, and float is minimal.

With low wings, you will be in ground effect a bit sooner than a high wing. But this is one of the pluses of the low wing craft.

A nice benefit of the PA28's is that they are good aircraft for shorter runways, as long as you're not loaded to gross AND it's a hot day.


And that bar between the seats is useful for when you need more forward momentum... just start pumping it up and down like a madman to get the extra "flapping" going.... :rofl: :rofl:
 
I would welcome the chance to fly more than one type of airplane. During my training I flew the Cherokee 150 and a Grumman a1a.,had a blast.
 
Float factor? With a hershey bar wing? Not a factor. Best thing about it is you can plant it on the runway, and it stays planted. You'll love it in an x-wind.
 
If you're looking at the Cherokee/172 class of aircraft, I would strongly recommend looking at Grumman Tigers as well. I just recently purchased one with a partnership, and our search started with 172s, moved to Archers, and then we eventually decided that the AA5B was the right plane for us (then we had to find the right one).

140kts, 9gph, great flight characteristics, canopy gives great ventilation and much easier in/out than the single door. Overall they're great, fast airplanes that seem to be relatively lower-cost to maintain. They can also be acquired for less than the Archers and or similarly-equipped 172s 180hp upgrades (at least when we were looking).
 
Last edited:
dwalt said:
If you're looking at the Cherokee/172 class of aircraft, I would strongly recommend looking at Grumman Tigers as well. I just recently purchased one with a partnership, and our search started with 172s, moved to Archers, and then we eventually decided that the AA5B was the right plane for us (then we had to find the right one).

140kts, 9gph, great flight characteristics, canopy gives great ventilation and much easier in/out than the single door. Overall they're great, fast airplanes that seem to be relatively lower-cost to maintain. They can also be acquired for less than the Archers and or similarly-equipped 172s 180hp upgrades (at least when we were looking).
Click to expand...
While agree with these points generally, you don't get 140 KTAS on 9 gph in a Tiger -- more like 10-10.5 gph to get that speed. 9 gph will only get you about 130 KTAS low or 135 KTAS high.
 
The Cherokee is great. Stalls as gentle as any plane.

Really easy to land. You will have no issues.
 
Last edited:
dwalt said:
If you're looking at the Cherokee/172 class of aircraft, I would strongly recommend looking at Grumman Tigers as well. .
Click to expand...

A friend of mine owned a Tiger for several years, I own a PA28-180. In general he got a bit more speed per $ but the 180 is slightly roomier and has substantially higher payload. His tiger was a three person plane; my 180 is a four person+baggage plane. The co-owners and I felt the Cherokee offered more flexibility overall for a minor loss in speed/economy, but this depends on you mission. If you plan on flying by yourself or with one or two other people, seriously consider the Tiger. If you want to load up three or four people and go on a trip, the Cherokee may be a better fit. Varies by plane as well.

Handling is of course subjective. We also went with the Cherokee because it is benign, and I've given about 200 hours of instruction in it (plus another 250 or so in other PA28s). I've got about 600 hours of instruction given in 172s of various models, and each has pluses and minuses. On the whole, I tend to like teaching in the Cherokee but I may be partial because it is mine!
 
TUPilot said:
A friend of mine owned a Tiger for several years, I own a PA28-180. In general he got a bit more speed per $ but the 180 is slightly roomier and has substantially higher payload. His tiger was a three person plane; my 180 is a four person+baggage plane.
Click to expand...
If you compare a 1960's 180 Cherokee to a 1990's AG-5B Tiger, you will see significant differences -- planes in the 60's had significantly fewer amenities such as soundproofing, avionics, upholstery, etc, and were much lighter than similar planes of much later vintage. If you compare a 1970's Archer to a 1970's Tiger, you won't see such a difference.

BTW, our college flying club's 1964 180 Cherokee had a 1000 lb useful load (exactly). With a full 50 gallons of fuel, that allowed 700 lb in the cabin, which isn't even four FAA-average adults, no less baggage. In fact, on our trip to the 1971 NIFA AirMeet in San Jose, with Dick Hoesli, Rodger Miller (no, not Roger Miller), me, and our bags aboard, we were right at max gross (admittedly, Rodger wasn't small, but Dick and I were sub-FAA-average). By comparison, my 1979 AA-5B Tiger has a 937 lb useful load. With full fuel of 51 gallons, that's 631 in the cabin. If that extra 69 lb of payload is critical to you, by all means, get the 180 Cherokee. However, I doubt many people will find that amount that critical.

And if you really do need payload for four adults and baggage, get a 182 or 235 Cherokee/Dakota, whose 230-235 HP engine really can lift that load.
 
muleywannabe said:
Thank you all! Great info for sure. Everyone here is great.
Click to expand...

Assuming you go forward on the PA-28, check back on maintenance questions since folks here have seen all the issues there also. The 5,000+ master cylinders on the brake system are real fun. Okay, I exaggerated just a little bit but the brake system started as a simple concept and grew to a monstrosity.
 
Cherokee 180s float...lol.

Cooling is easily taken care of my keeping the door slightly open, and putting in an air scoop on the pilot side vent window. I flew mine with an outside temperature of 122º and never considered a need to have A/C in it.
 
I did my training in Cherokees, C150s, C172s, Warriors, etc., and have time in 180s. I always preferred the Piper products. I prefer the low wings for visibility, the handling vs Cessna, the bar for flaps instead of a little electric switch.

The only big differences you have to get use to are using fuel pumps (no biggie at all), just one more thing before you roll, and the fuel selector. While the selector has a negative in that you have to remember to switch it, it also makes you pay more attention to the fuel system (fuel quant, fuel delivery press, etc).

Any plane will float. If you float too much, go around, and come in a few knots slower until it does what you want.
 
The 180 Cherokee is a fine airplane for what you describe your needs. No idea why people are trying to tell you advantages of other makes and models. The key to YOUR plane is more the circumstances/partners.

From what you have described, having a CFI and an A&P for partners, that want a Cherokee 180, you are lucky to be able to ride their coat tails. Enjoy the journey and you will learn tons from them as you move thru this process.

Consider yourself lucky.
 
JoseCuervo said:
The 180 Cherokee is a fine airplane for what you describe your needs. No idea why people are trying to tell you advantages of other makes and models. The key to YOUR plane is more the circumstances/partners.

From what you have described, having a CFI and an A&P for partners, that want a Cherokee 180, you are lucky to be able to ride their coat tails. Enjoy the journey and you will learn tons from them as you move thru this process.

Consider yourself lucky.
Click to expand...

I am excited about it. Great guys too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top