Uh oh, I sit in a Grumman Tiger today.

L

LandSickness

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 28, 2012
Messages
1,023
Display Name
Display name:
fri tale
Hanging out at HWY today and took a long look at a Grumman Tiger. Didn't get to fly in it but I took a seat. It fit me like a glove. I haven't been up in one yet, but I'm seriously interested in it being my first plane(unless I find someone out of their mind giving away an RV7) I resume lessons in a Cessna 172 in a couple of weeks. Would it serve me to train in a Piper Warrior instead or will it matter?

That Tiger sure was purty....
 
You fly that Tiger I Guarrente you'll never go back to a Skyhawk. Light controls, good cruise speed, great vis, canopy opens in flight, strong airframe, and great looks. Can't go wrong with a Grumman!:wink2:
 
I've never been in the AA-5 line, but have flown an AA-1. Nice airplane, just not big enough to fit in comfortably for a big guy.
 
Depends on what he wants to take with him and whether he likes a green-house canopy. But Grummans are nice for many owners.
Velocity173 said:
You fly that Tiger I Guarrente you'll never go back to a Skyhawk. Light controls, good cruise speed, great vis, canopy opens in flight, strong airframe, and great looks. Can't go wrong with a Grumman!:wink2:
Click to expand...
 
I can carry the wife(but not a day before I get my ticket) and maybe an overnight bag. We're Midwesterners living in Virginia. I can't imagine flying any plane to Missouri. Maybe I'll get there one day. I really dig that sliding canopy and the cockpit was surprisingly roomy, even for me.

wabower said:
Depends on what he wants to take with him and whether he likes a green-house canopy. But Grummans are nice for many owners.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
LandSickness said:
I can carry the wife(but not a day before I get my ticket) and maybe an overnight bag. We're Midwesterners living in Virginia. I can't imagine flying any plane to Missouri. Maybe I'll get there one day. I really dig that sliding canopy and the cockpit was surprisingly roomy, even for me.
Click to expand...

Ron Levy is in your general area, and a well known Tiger pilot. He would be a good resource for you to get to know as you check out more of the Grummans.

The type clubs are also really good resources.
 
VA to MO is a long day in the plane, but not that bad, and the Tiger will carry you and the wife and a whole load of baggage very comfortably. For more on Grummans, see:
http://www.aya.org
http://www.grumman.net

As for your training, it won't matter much whether you continue in the 172 or change to a Warrior. I've checked out folks trained in both, and it doesn't make much difference in their Tiger adaptation.
 
I've flown with Anthony a few times in his and it is a sweet ride.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
I've never been in the AA-5 line, but have flown an AA-1. Nice airplane, just not big enough to fit in comfortably for a big guy.
Click to expand...

I've flown in Anthony's, too, and didn't feel cramped at all. What do you consider "big"? I'm 6' and 220.
 
A wonderful flying airplane. Good speed using simple(r) systems.

Canopy is wonderful for cooling on the ground; unless it is raining. Fold the
rear seats, and you have a cavernous baggage area. Not especially
capable/realistic if you need to haul four (USA-std adults).
 
Last edited:
gkainz said:
What do you consider "big"? I'm 6' and 220.
Click to expand...

You're a little guy.:wink2:

I'm 6'2" and let's not discuss my weight that is much higher than yours. I got a 182 for a reason!

Never been in a Grumman before, but a pal just got a Cheetah. Might have to go for a spin...
 
Rigged4Flight said:
I've been drooling over this one for a while. Out of my league, but very beautiful in the pictures/details provided.

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_687052_Grumman+Tiger.html
Click to expand...

That is a nice looking plane that would be in my price range. I would either have to sell the skyhawk, or take on a couple of partners.

I sat in a tiger a few years ago and really like it, even if it was just a little snug. But I have lost 40 pounds since then and I plan to lose more.

What kind of speeds and distance would I expect from a plan like the one in the ad.
 
JOhnH said:
That is a nice looking plane that would be in my price range. I would either have to sell the skyhawk, or take on a couple of partners.

I sat in a tiger a few years ago and really like it, even if it was just a little snug. But I have lost 40 pounds since then and I plan to lose more.

What kind of speeds and distance would I expect from a plan like the one in the ad.
Click to expand...

2100 eng time? A bit high. I guess the price reflects this.

Speed was advertised 139 KTAS for the older Tigers and 143 for the newer ones. My friend owned one and reported 128 KTAS? Had another friend who was a demo pilot for American General in the early 90s. He said the plane wasn't even close to the book cruise speed. Forgot what he said it cruised at though. Range is close to 700 nm which is respectable. I owned a Traveler with only 36 gals and my range was only around 500 nm. Loved that plane.
 
rainsux said:
Canopy is wonderful for cooling on the ground;
Click to expand...
In flight, too -- you can fly with the canopy open up to 116 KIAS. That is a great comfort feature in the pattern in summertime.

Not especially capable/realistic if you need to haul four (USA-std adults).
Click to expand...
That's true of most any 180HP simple single -- you really need at least 230 HP for that.
 
Last edited:
JOhnH said:
What kind of speeds and distance would I expect from a plan like the one in the ad.
Click to expand...
I get 130 KTAS on 9.3 gph in mine, but if you push it to 10.5 gph you can go 135 KTAS. As for range, it depends on IFR/VFR, weather, and winds, but the tanks hold 51 gallons usable and you've got the speeds and fuel flows above to do the math.
 
My Tiger performs like Ron's, and with today's gas prices, I've been throttling back to about 8.5 GPH and a bit lower KTAS.

Someone mentioned "greenhouse canopy". It is no greenhouse as there is actually only plexi on the sides, not the top, so you sit in shade. The nice thing is during the summer is the ability to keep the canopy open during taxi. Much cooler than planes with doors.
 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
Speed was advertised 139 KTAS for the older Tigers and 143 for the newer ones.
Click to expand...
Those may be top speeds, but what I posted above is realistic.

My friend owned one and reported 128 KTAS?
Click to expand...
You can certainly fly it at that speed if you want, and get fuel flow down to 8.5 gph or so.

Had another friend who was a demo pilot for American General in the early 90s. He said the plane wasn't even close to the book cruise speed.
Click to expand...
I think you'll find the POH fairly accurate on that, but as I said, the speeds/fuel flows I posted are based on about 2000 hours in the AA-5-series, including a lot of time in other people's planes.

Range is close to 700 nm which is respectable.
Click to expand...
Still air, zero wind, fly to empty tanks, yes, that's probably about right. But I hope you're not planning to make 700nm legs in one without a really big tailwind. FWIW, I made Chicago to Salisbury MD non-stop one time, but I had an 80-knot tailwind that day.

I owned a Traveler with only 36 gals and my range was only around 500 nm. Loved that plane.
Click to expand...
The Travelers had only 36 gallons usable fuel, but the Tiger expanded that to 51. A few Cheetahs had the "standard" small Traveler tanks, but 90-95% came with the larger "long range" Tiger tanks.

That said, 500nm in a Traveler is pushing the limits of good sense without a good tailwind. The AA-5 is basically a 115-120 KTAS airplane on 8-8.5 gph, and if you do the math, that doesn't leave much reserve on a no-wind 500nm leg.
 
LandSickness, I have some time in a Tiger and I will say it is one of my favorites, second only to a Bonanza. It's an absolute blast to fly.
 
gkainz said:
I've flown in Anthony's, too, and didn't feel cramped at all. What do you consider "big"? I'm 6' and 220.
Click to expand...

I'm 6'1", 235, and just couldn't get comfortable in the AA-1. I've got longer legs, which I felt was the biggest issue, I just didn't have anywhere to put them. On the flip side, I'm very comfortable in a Mooney, which people say isn't for big guys.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
I'm 6'1", 235, and just couldn't get comfortable in the AA-1. I've got longer legs, which I felt was the biggest issue, I just didn't have anywhere to put them. On the flip side, I'm very comfortable in a Mooney, which people say isn't for big guys.
Click to expand...


The AA-1 series is very different from the AA-5's. The Tiger is an AA-5B, and that is what the OP posted about.

I've had people 6' 4" in my Tiger without issues.
 
I don't know much about them, one used to be in the hangar with me and seemed he was always in front of me. I cursed that thing every time I had to push it back in the hangar with that castering nose wheel
 
Thanks to everyone for the ringing endorsements and the links to those sites are great. Where exactly would I go to learn to properly evaluate an aircraft? How do you determine, for instance, what instruments are valued at? The link in the thread is to a beautiful plane, but the engine, I think is past TBO. Budgeting maybe $20k for a rebuild, am I looking at about $70k for a Tiger that's average or exceptional? I'm fresh into my training so I'm only in research mode right now, so I'm only shopping if the deal is great. Not even good. It's got to be great.


Ron Levy said:
http://www.aya.org
http://www.grumman.net
Click to expand...
 
bartmc said:
I cursed that thing every time I had to push it back in the hangar with that castering nose wheel
Click to expand...
:D

It's a skill that has to be learned. One of the usual events at Grumman fly-ins is the contest to see who can push his airplane backwards most accurately, without a towbar, over a predetermined course.

That might be an Olympic event four years from now.:goofy:
 
Last edited:
Another reason Ron likes the sliding canopy on his Tiger... gassy Labradors.

@Ron, your story about Chewy makes me grin every time I remember it.
 
Anthony said:
The AA-1 series is very different from the AA-5's. The Tiger is an AA-5B, and that is what the OP posted about.

I've had people 6' 4" in my Tiger without issues.
Click to expand...

I know that. I was responding to a post that was in response to my comment about the AA-1.
 
bartmc said:
I don't know much about them, one used to be in the hangar with me and seemed he was always in front of me. I cursed that thing every time I had to push it back in the hangar with that castering nose wheel
Click to expand...
We try to keep the children away during the "Broken Tow Bar" contest at the AYA Convention every year (during which the contestant has to push an AA-1 backwards through a twisty course by hand along) -- lots of "bad words" used there. But once you learn the proper technique, it isn't that hard.
 
LandSickness said:
Thanks to everyone for the ringing endorsements and the links to those sites are great. Where exactly would I go to learn to properly evaluate an aircraft? How do you determine, for instance, what instruments are valued at?
Click to expand...
The Vref section on AOPA's site will give you a rough idea.

The link in the thread is to a beautiful plane, but the engine, I think is past TBO. Budgeting maybe $20k for a rebuild, am I looking at about $70k for a Tiger that's average or exceptional?
Click to expand...
$20K is in the ballpark for the total overhaul cost (a factory rebuilt engine costs more), and yes, I think at least $70K is what it takes for a nice Tiger, but I've seen average ones go in the mid-50's recently.

I'm fresh into my training so I'm only in research mode right now, so I'm only shopping if the deal is great. Not even good. It's got to be great.
Click to expand...
It's been a buyer's market the last few years. Tigers that would have fetched $80K+ in 2007 are now going for $55K, but that's pretty much true across all makes/models, not just Grummans.
 
Ron Levy said:
Go for a ride, yes, but please don't intentionally spin it.;)
Click to expand...

I know they are "spins prohibited" airplanes, but do the AA5 series have the same mean fully-developed spin behavior as an AA1?
 
bullwinkle said:
I know they are "spins prohibited" airplanes, but do the AA5 series have the same mean fully-developed spin behavior as an AA1?
Click to expand...
No. They don't have the issue of fuel being centrifuged to the wing tips, and they have more powerful elevators and more yaw-resisting surface area at the tail (especially the 5A/5B models). But you still don't want to even think about intentionally spinning one, even if recovery from an incipient (less than 3 seconds/one full turn) spin is no big deal.
 
bullwinkle said:
I know they are "spins prohibited" airplanes, but do the AA5 series have the same mean fully-developed spin behavior as an AA1?
Click to expand...

Can't give you specifics but...back in 1975 when a buddy (my instructor) became a Grumman dealer we spun the trainers, the Cheetah and the Tiger until they sent us the stickers that said we shouldn't...:yikes:
Great planes, every one of them. Got my ticket in the trainer and really enjoyed them all flying out of a "Dimensions: 2156 x 30 ft." strip with trees at each end. The coolest thing was the new airport owners, a few months later, had a Dino Ferrari for an airport car....if you didn't mind the dirt and hair from the big Lab that lived in it......! :yesnod:
 
bartmc said:
I don't know much about them, one used to be in the hangar with me and seemed he was always in front of me. I cursed that thing every time I had to push it back in the hangar with that castering nose wheel
Click to expand...

Tow bar? ;)
 
Anthony said:
Good point. It's a one person job, and easy to do, but yes, you need a tow bar when backing a Tiger into a hangar.
Click to expand...

And if you are watching, it is almost second nature to want to go push on the wing to help...:nono:
 
Ron Levy said:
No. They don't have the issue of fuel being centrifuged to the wing tips, and they have more powerful elevators and more yaw-resisting surface area at the tail (especially the 5A/5B models). But you still don't want to even think about intentionally spinning one, even if recovery from an incipient (less than 3 seconds/one full turn) spin is no big deal.
Click to expand...

Have you ever spun one? During flight reviews the CFI's never want a full power on stall ... they get so nervous they prefer a 2200 power on and are on full alert:yikes:

Goofy said:
Can't give you specifics but...back in 1975 when a buddy (my instructor) became a Grumman dealer we spun the trainers, the Cheetah and the Tiger until they sent us the stickers that said we shouldn't...:yikes:
Click to expand...

I thought the elevator being below the rudder would cause them to be extremely difficult to spin recover.
 
Ron Levy said:
We try to keep the children away during the "Broken Tow Bar" contest at the AYA Convention every year (during which the contestant has to push an AA-1 backwards through a twisty course by hand along) -- lots of "bad words" used there. But once you learn the proper technique, it isn't that hard.
Click to expand...

Why not push the tail down and walk it any where you want, like a real aircraft?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top