Pa28 140 v 161, buying a share

[YODI]

Hi all,

I am potentially buying a 10% share of a Pa28 140 if I can agree a deal with the owner, my question is the flight differences between the 140 and the Warrior III

I have about 125 hours on my PPL and only pleasure fly. 100 of my hours are in a PA28 Warrior III both Avgas and Jeta1, the rest mainly DA40. In the last month I have done 2 hours in a 151 with 1 pax, and it was very similar.

So, my question is what difference will I notice in flight between the 140 and the 161 that I am more use too, the wings are different so general flight characteristics is what I am after knowing. I have worked as a Mech on the PA28's since 06 so know them quite well from that point.

Any advice greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Yodi

[mad_jock]

expect many brain farts using the trimmer.

Try and not think which way it goes for the effect.

[Prazum]

They fly the same. The latter is a bit quicker is all

[YODI]

The MTOW of the 140 is 975kg and the 151/161 is 1055kg so 80kg less.



Thanks

[mad_jock]

Nothing that you would notice.

The attitudes are all the same.

Just the trimmer in the roof to get used to.

I prefer the 140

[YODI]

Thanks.....

[18greens]

I also recall you can spin a 140, so semi aerobatic. :)

I thought the 140 was a much lovelier aircraft to fly than the Warrior. The lack of foot brakes was also entertaining.

[mad_jock]

The lack of foot brakes leads to a better taxing technique I found. Stops people riding the brakes all the time.

[foxmoth]

I also recall you can spin a 140, so semi aerobatic.

There is a big difference between being able to spin an aircraft and it being Semi aerobatic:hmm: Really there is no such thing, it is either Aero or not, but generally aircraft that have no inverted system and low "G" limits (+6, -3) are considered semi aerobatic.
140 normally only has 2 seats, if it has 4 then it is really is hard to use all 4 with any sort of bags and fuel load. Many only had a handbrake - not that hard once you get used to it.

[fujii]

10% share sounds a bit awkward. Are you one of 10 in which case when would you get a chance to use it? Are you 10% and the other is 90%? In which case it is still his aeroplane, you subsidise his costs and you can fly if it suits him.

The ideal syndicate has one member.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I disagree with Fuji - 10% is great, as you only pay 10% of the fixed costs, and the rest will rarely seem to want to go flying.

The -140 needs more runway, has a bit of a bite at the stall and poor stall warning, flies around 10-15 knots slower than the -161, and is almost inevitably older, tattier, with less payload. If you're a PA28 experienced mech however, you can work out the condition of it for yourself.

Apart from that, yes, they're substantially the same aeroplane. A good one, based an airport with a reasonable runway and approaches, could be a good first share.

It is basically however a 2-3 seat tourer, don't expect great things!

G

[foxmoth]

The ideal syndicate has one member.

Yes and it would be round a Spitfire for me - unfortunately, like many others my finances do not stretch that far, and like many others I need to compromise with what I fly. 10% with the other owning the other 90 can work very well, at least you will not be competing with 9 others in this case, most aircraft are under-utilised and generally you will get good utilisation, but good if you can get some sort of guarantee on when and how much access you will have.

[A and C]

There are an number of fits an variants of the PA28-140 that make some of the comments above invalid for one aircraft or another so talk of brakes and trim can only be confirmed by inspecting the aircraft.

If the aircraft is left outside take a very good look at any place that steel and alloy fittings meet.

I would add there are a shed load of dogs about that will eat money faster than an Essex girl in west end night club.......... And one or two gems but sorting them requires the employment of an engineer who has worked the type for the last twenty years if not more.

[fujii]

A bit of a drift. Just curious. What are the hourly costs of running an 0-320 powered aircraft in the UK? I know there will be some variation across the country but I just want a rough average. Include fuel, hangarage, insurance, maintenance.

I have a 160 hp Fuji and it costs about $A200. (£112)

[YODI]

Thanks for all the replies guys,

Yes I know 100% would be the best, but as said above it's not really an option and I do no where near the hours to even justify it, even a 10% share would work out a bit more expensive than just self hiring however I've always wanted to be part of a group, so if I can put a deal together on the buy in etc I will probably give it a go, assuming I like the plane.

So yes, it is 10 x 10% shares, 3 of the members use it just for revalidation and last year it flew 70 hours.

My main concern is just the flying side of it, to make sure it's a good first step into owning a share, being able to carry at least 2 pax even though I never have so far, it's usually just one.

PS. It's out of Elstree

[Tarq57]

I did most of my flying training on the Cherokee 140 (150, really) in its various guises (overhead vs floor trim, push/pull carb heat vs up/down, toe brakes and not) and they all flew pretty much the same.

Later over the following 400hours or so I flew all the pa28 variants, various Cessnas, a Beagle, pa32's, a Mooney,etc but the main point is that I was current and regularly flying the '140 while also regularly flying the 181, 161 and 236.

Main difference is the performance - esp get off the ground/initial climb is sluggish. Close to the drag curve the wing gets draggy real fast. When you reduce power for approach, esp with flap on, it will feel like it's falling out of the sky compared to the Warrior. Won't tend to float so much at the flare, either. So the glide ratio is rubbish.

There isn't much pitch change when lowering flap. The taper-wing Cherokees pitch up, like a Cessna. The 140 won't. I seem to recall it pitches down a little.

You'll be quite load-limited compared to the Warrior. 3 medium/heavy people, and full fuel, you'll probably be over gross.

It's a pleasant, honest little beastie to fly. I don't think it's got a mean bone in its body - like most of the Cherokees. Does everything reasonably well, doesn't really shine at anything in particular. Like a Corolla.

[YODI]

Thanks tarq, great reply. I think I will have a 20 minute flight with it over the weekend and see how it goes.

Thanks

[Tarq57]

:ok:

Since it's aging, my advice would also to be to compare it to another couple, if you can find them...rentals, and check the total hours, AD's etc.

That's more to do with purchase checks than handling, I guess.

[WAC]

Love my 28-140. Good honest workhorse, easy to fly, no nasty vices.
Toe brakes only on the left, trim on the roof, push/pull throttle and mix rather than the later quadrants.
Often fly 3 up with full tanks, but with 4, tanks filled only to the tabs (36 rather than 50 gal) burns around 32l/hr.

[glendalegoon]

newer cherokee 140's (even though the 150 hp engine was installed) have the trim on the floor and the newer throttle system.


so it is entirely possible the inside of the cockpit of a warrior and a cherokee 140 will be virtually identical.

for most people the warrior is a little nicer and has another pair of windows aft.

The 140's I flew were built in the 70's and were really pretty nice...back in the 70's.

England seems to have its share of remarkably old airplanes. So, look around!