Having spent around 30 hrs in a C172 and 80 in a PA28 (+25 in a C150 and 25 in other assorted varieties), I don't disagree with much of the previous.
My personal votes for / against PA28 and C172 are:
PA28
For- Good visibility in circuit
- Low seating / High coaming
- Oleo legs (to minimise bounces)
- Ease of checking fuel visually
- Generally a nicely engineered aircraft
- Good upward visibility
Against- Poor 'ground spotting + camera ship' for passengers
- A bit rough on bumpy strips
- Reliance on fuel pump
- Single Entry Door
- Uncomfortable seat (I broke my back 13 yrs ago, so this is maybe harsh)
- Lack of rear passenger legroom
- (personal) I find them easy to get on the back of the drag curve
C172
For- Good for passengers who want view
- Pilot sits so he can see over coaming
- Good strong undercarriage for grass strips
- Two door access
- No reliance on fuel pump
- Good room for rear passengers / baggage
Against- Older ones can be draughty!
- Bit prone to post-landing relaunches!
- Cessna seat rail locking stinks (personal opinion)
- Can feel a bit 'tinny' and less solid than PA28.
- Poor visibility in circuit / above
- Bit tricky to do visual fuel checks
Having said all that, if I were buying one for myself, I'd probably opt for a C172 - it was what I flew my first 25 hrs in and I just like the feel. Passengers tend to prefer the access / view / camera ship features.
[edited shortly after posting 'coz the formatting of the bullet list looked cr@p once the
vB code was translated and edited again to remove errors!]