172 vs. Warrior for private pilot training

[KeroseneSnorter]

Just remember that the plane will want to fly faster so things will happen more quickly and you need more rudder without the person next to you......................Plus the 172 has 2 doors while the arrow only has one, could get real ugly if your forced to make a emergency landing and your trapped in the plane because the only door you have can't be opened or is obstructed by dead CFI or Pax. Have fun!

Um........where to begin here..........oh the heck with it.:erm:

 

[Fearless Tower]

Um........where to begin here..........oh the heck with it.:erm:

My thoughts exactly

 

[cezzna]

Coke, Pepsi, or, RC. They are all colas and while different, basically the same thing. Do yourself a favor and find a taildragger. Learning how to use the rudder is key, lots of pilots still don't get it. When training say no to glass and head for the grass.

 

[kf4amu]

Coke, Pepsi, or, RC. They are all colas and while different, basically the same thing.

BLASPHEMOUS!!! ITS ALL CALLED COKE!!!

 

[Fearless Tower]

BLASPHEMOUS!!! ITS ALL CALLED COKE!!!

That's awesome....reminds me of when I was in Texas and they used to ask "what kind of Coke ya'll want"

 

[Amish RakeFight]

The Warrior is a more forgiving and easier plane to fly than the 172 IMO. Stall characteristics are different as well. During power-on stalls in a warrior the nose really doesnt pitch down fully, it sort of hangs up there. The 172 will break down and you'll get a little more wing drop.

The 172 can get a lot closer to a spin inadvertantly than the warrior if you mishandle the stall.

 

[kf4amu]

The Warrior is a more forgiving and easier plane to fly than the 172 IMO. Stall characteristics are different as well. During power-on stalls in a warrior the nose really doesnt pitch down fully, it sort of hangs up there. The 172 will break down and you'll get a little more wing drop.

I agree...and is it me, or does anybody else think that when you put flaps in a Piper, the nose pitches down, or doesnt pitch at all...whereas with a cessna, there is a relatively violent pitch up with the first/second notch of flaps....

 

[Amish RakeFight]

deleted.

 

[gkrangers]

I agree...and is it me, or does anybody else think that when you put flaps in a Piper, the nose pitches down, or doesnt pitch at all...whereas with a cessna, there is a relatively violent pitch up with the first/second notch of flaps....

I think I agree, been a while since I've flown a warrior, but I recall this as a difference. The nose will pitch down a bit before ballooning...I think....maybe....

 

[papanovember]

I'd take the 172 any day over a warrior. I have 400 hours dual given in brand new Warrior III's. The 172 is wider up front and the new ones have high back seats that let you sit up. The warriors are like being in a hole.

Performance wise the 172 is far above the warrior. The warriors (and most other new Pipers) tapered wing is great for docile stalls but it is terrible for performance. Yesterday I climbed at 150 FPM from 4000 to 7000 feet at ISA +15. I've flown a carbed 160 HP 172 at 500 FPM up to 7500 no problem. The extra 20 HP of the fuel injected SPs are even better. If you want to fly a low wing grab a Beech Mouse (19,23) or Cherokee 140 or 180 with the old Hershey bar wing, not as good at low speeds but great for climb and cruise performance.

Another example of the poor wing design of the pipers is the Seminole. Comparing it to the Duchess (basically same plane, 180HP side four place light twin) The Duchess can carry an extra 100 lbs (3900 vs 3800 MGTOW) and the single engine service ceiling (8300 DA for the BE76 3800 DA for the PA44) The only sacrifice the Duchess gives up is a higher Red line 65 vs 56.

 

[kf4amu]

I like flying Cherokee 140's with the 160HP engine. By myself though...its small

 

[papanovember]

Yeah the 140 I flew had an 160 hp O320 climbed like a bat out of hell.

 

[flyer172r]

I've even caught a thermal in a 150 and climbed 1500ft with it, and you won't ever do that in any PA28...

So that's how you got it to climb on the way back from nationals.

I think it really comes down to what did you learn in first. That seems to determine which one you'll like better. I started out in 172s, did all my advanced stuff in various Pipers, but I still prefer the 172. I like having my own door, I like not having to worry about switching tanks. And I can never get the seat in a Warrior to go as high as I like, especially the right seat. Performance wise, I don't think there's a big enough difference to really make or break the deal. I've had the exact opposite experience as papanovember in terms of good/bad climb performance. My old flight school had one 172 that would struggle to get above 3000 ft. in summer time. The SPs are great though.

For your situation, I'd say take the 172 for solo since you're familiar with it. After that, go with whichever one is easier for you to schedule when you need it. Being able to fly regularly is (in my opinion) much more important than what airplane you fly. If you stick with the 172, make sure you fly the Warrior after you get your private, having experience in both will only make you better. Then you can chime in on the big debate.