172 vs. Warrior for private pilot training

[jdlilfan]

In fact you may find that the Arrow won't float near as much on landings.

They dont really float, they sink like a rock. Pulling the power on a 180 Accuracy landing results in sink rates to the like of a learjet. Thats just my experience with it.

 

[2Inverted]

If you can get in the Cherokee, and price is not a factor, I'd take the Warrior. It won't do you any good at all if your interval between lessons is increased waiting for it.

If you can have the Warrior without scheduling issues, transition and get moving. I'd wait until after you solo, but that's just my opinion.

Eagle-ista hit it on the nose, and you'll like the Warrior. Once you get your ticket, get checked out in everything you can and make up your own mind as to which you like better.

 

[DieselDragRacer]

Thanks for all the responses! I'll stick with the 172 and hopefully solo in it Saturday.....weather accomodating that is.

 

[Black Hawk]

IIRC, the 172R has a higher aspect ratio than the PA28-161. Regardless, I could care less what the POH says - a Cessna 172 *will* glide better than any Cherokee, even one with the tapered Warrior wing. I've seen it with my own two eyes. I've even caught a thermal in a 150 and climbed 1500ft with it, and you won't ever do that in any PA28...

Good points. Although the manuals do claim similar glide ratios for similar airplanes (I looked up a C172RG and Arrow IV because I had them handy) I wouldn't count on that in practice. In a real life engine out situation I'll take a Cessna product over a comparable Piper product any day regardless of any claims their manual might make.

 

[CX880]

DieselDragRacers, good luck on you first solo and make sure to bring friends or family to share the experience. 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, just tips from my experience at solo. As far as your question, take the C172. Both are good planes but the 172 is very easy plane to fly, although I hear the arrows are easier to land. 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!

 

[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.