Running costs - Dakota vs. Archer II

[London Flyer]

For those with experience of owning or having a share in the above aircraft, I'd be interested to know a ballpark figure for the increased running costs of a PA28-201T Turbo Dakota over an Archer II.

I'm assuming the cost uplift will come from i) the Dakota's turbo engine; ii)VP prop, and iii) thirstier engine.

Many thanks in advance for your thoughts.

[S-Works]

About an arm and half your left leg. Expect around double the costs.

[IFollowRailways]

I used to have a Turbo Arrow, so same engine/prop, (slightly) different airframe - So, to give you a rough idea -

The Continental will use around a gallon/hour more than the lower horsepower Lycoming.

Allow around £2k for a prop overhaul every six years (£300ish per annum)

The Continental engine in the Turbo Dakota has a lot lower TBO than the Lycoming in an Archer. (1400hrs or 1800hrs dependant upon version, compared with 2000hrs for the Lycoming)

Overhaul costs for the Continental engine will be more than twice that for a Lycoming. (Think £20k+ against £9/10k for the Lycoming)

The Continental will almost certainly not reach TBO without something nasty (expensive) happening!

Using very simplistic maths -

Engine cost per hour -Assuming run to TBO with no midlife top overhaul (Very unlikely and probably unrealistic, but hey!)
Archer - £10000/2000hrs = £5.00 hr
Dakota - £20000/1400hrs = £14.30 hr

Prop - Assume 100 hrs per annum so 600 hrs between overhauls for the constant speed - 2000 hrs for the fixed pitch.
Archer - £750/2000 hrs = £0.37p hr
Dakota - £2000/600 hrs = £3.30 hr

Fuel -
Archer 35 Litres/hr = £52.50hr
Dakota 40 Litres/hr = £60.00hr

Therefore engine and prop and fuel costs per hour -
Archer -£57.87 hr
Dakota - £77.60 hr

Or about £20/hr more for the Turbo Dakota over an Archer

Plus points - The six cylinder Continental is much smoother than the four cylinder Lycoming, lots of manifold pressure available, no carb icing.
Minus points - See above!

[A and C]

If you are a "london flyer" do you need the turbo for the flatlands that are the UK?

As far as I can see the turbo is usualy used in the western USA because of the high altitude take off performance and you don't need that at Elstree!

Perhaps you should consider a non-turbo, the Lycoming engine usualy reaches TBO (2000 hrs I think) and the overhaul cost is about mid way between the 180 hp and the turbo continental.

I don't think that I have ever seen a PA28 with the turbo Continental in Europe could this be because it is total overkill for Europe.

[Brooklands]

London Flyer,

You also need to factor in the extra cost of having dangly dunlops:), and the possible extra costs if, one day, the decide not to dangle when you want them to. :uhoh::{

Brooklands

[IFollowRailways]

A and C

I don't think that I have ever seen a PA28 with the turbo Continental in Europe

There are three on the UK register.

Brooklands.

You also need to factor in the extra cost of having dangly dunlops

The Dakota is fixed undercarriage the same as an Archer, Warrior etc.

[Brooklands]

:
You also need to factor in the extra cost of having dangly dunlops
The Dakota is fixed undercarriage the same as an Archer, Warrior etc.

Ooops - for some reason I thought London Flyer was talking about an Arrow, I think it was the PA28-201 bit which threw me. I normally associate the Piper Dakota name with the PA28-235.

Brooklands

[Zulu Alpha]

Ifollowrailways has made some good comparisons. One thing is that the Dakota will be faster than the ArcherII so less time per trip, better climb and also you can just point the nose down for a descent rather than throttling back. These all save maybe 10-15% of the hrs on a long trip.

ZA

[smarthawke]

Piper Dakota is a PA28-236 (tapered wing) as opposed to the much older 235 which was a huge-engines Cherokee 140.

Firstly agree with A&C, don't bother with a turbo version, find a normally aspirated Lycoming powered one. Unless you have to go very high, just not worth the cost of owning a turbo Continental in Europe. It may not be twice the cost of the Lycoming but it will cost more (lower TBO and generally not as strong and reliable as a Lycoming).

As for the Archer comparison. As others have said, fuel burn on a Lycoming Dakota is 50-55 lph (unleaned) against 30-35lph for the Archer but you will be moving at a genuine 135KIAS against 115 ish for the Archer - and that is with 4 real adults, baggage and 271 lts of fuel - something that the Archer won't do.

CS prop pays big time when it comes to take off and climb (and drag when landing). Costs around £1500-2000 every 6 years to overhaul but the performance gain is there so it isn't lost money.

Only problem is finding a Dakota.....

One for hire on the BAFC fleet at: http://www.bafc.co.uk if you want to try one out.