Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Private Flying
Reload this Page >

C182 v Cherokee 6

Private Flying LAA/BMAA/BGA/BPA The sheer pleasure of flight.

C182 v Cherokee 6

Old 5th May 2014, 14:59
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 76
C182 v Cherokee 6

Sorry for dusting down a discussion that's probably already been done to death, but given fuel prices and that i now have my licences and ratings back, I'd welcome views on the following. I live in south east London and am looking to move up from renting the usual pa28/172 to either a cherokee 6 or 182 as my primary a/c (probably not quite ready to take the jump into equity share). My criteria

1) cost - /hour wet
2) distance from me by car (se3)
3) cost - /mile at usual cruise setting.

I know Stapleford has a 182 for rent and there used to be a c6 at white Waltham but I can't find any rental prices for the latter or anywhere else for that matter?
marioair is offline  
Old 5th May 2014, 18:11
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 556
Well, if its a 300hp Six, the fuel burn will be more than the 182. Both nice airplanes, though. The 300 horse is actually more comparable to a 206.
Desert185 is offline  
Old 5th May 2014, 18:23
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 76
I'm guessing id have to compare the 260hp model for it to be a fair comparison.
marioair is offline  
Old 6th May 2014, 05:15
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,016
PFT at Kidlington has a Cherokee 6:

Pilot Flight Training Current Price List

209/hour
tmmorris is offline  
Old 6th May 2014, 07:15
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 76
Thanks. A bit too far from south east London.
marioair is offline  
Old 6th May 2014, 11:09
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: South-East, United Kingdom
Posts: 248
Have you considered a group share in either? In the end, these would increase your options of finding a machine in this category to fly/hire, and ultimately reduce the per hour costs.
piperarcher is offline  
Old 6th May 2014, 17:59
  #7 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 76
I have but (a) can't find one! And (b) am in that grey zone where renting vs share is financially not an obvious decision based on hours I do.
marioair is offline  
Old 7th May 2014, 14:19
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 677
Is this what you were looking for??

Aircraft Rates - West London Aero ClubWest London Aero Club
wsmempson is offline  
Old 7th May 2014, 18:13
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 556
Good Lord Almighty! Those rates would ground me. One can only imagine the burden of extra costs were I to own an aircraft there vs here.

Seriously?
Desert185 is offline  
Old 7th May 2014, 19:28
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 9
@Desert185

Where do you fly and how much do you pay?
I am looking to learn and those price are what I see around west London
Falcons11 is offline  
Old 7th May 2014, 21:28
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,085
Seriously?
Yes. I'm afraid so. See how lucky you are?

You live in a land where you pay the same for a gallon of Avgas as we pay for a litre! (A litre is just about the same as a US quart)


MJ
Mach Jump is offline  
Old 7th May 2014, 22:44
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 822
I have quite a bit of time in cherokee six types.

And a few hours in the C182


I much prefer the Cherokee six and its offspring (saratoga etc).

More comfortable, more passengers etc.

AS to comparing the C182 to a Cherokee Six with the 260 hp engine, it really isn't fair as there are very few of the 260's out there and they will be very, very old.

So, it all depends on the flying you do. Money must be put aside for a moment anyway.

Will you be flying from unimproved fields? (gravel etc) The 182 might be better, but then the 180 would be even better!

But just regular flying the roominess and flexibility as to payload, the Cherokee Six should win out.

Good luck.

Take a lesson in both and see which one you like better. Club seating in back is nice for the passengers.
glendalegoon is offline  
Old 8th May 2014, 17:35
  #13 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 76
Does anyone have some figures for

Hour rental rate (wet)
Fuel consumption
Cruise speed

For the 182 versus C6-300? I'm guessing the c177rg might fit between the two somewhere?

My usual profile would be 3 or 4px plus bag, a few hours of fuel. No need for excessively short field performance but perhaps 800m grass upwards.
marioair is offline  
Old 8th May 2014, 19:08
  #14 (permalink)  
Aztruckdriver
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London
Posts: 11
Both aircraft benefit from being flown at FL60 plus which in the UK typically means airways.

For low level VFR would suggest the 182 uses 50 litres per hour, cruises at 120 -125 KTAS, and rents for around 230-250 per hour wet. Full throttle at FL80 and leaned it improves to 40-45 lph, and 130-135 KTAS.

Ensure you get a good checkout in particular technique for landing the 182 when at a forward CofG.

There are syndicate 6-300 in the London area and may be worth checking G-Info for London syndicate owned Sixes and approaching the owners.
RobertL is offline  
Old 8th May 2014, 21:37
  #15 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 76
For low level VFR would suggest the 182 uses 50 litres per hour, cruises at 120 -125 KTAS, and rents for around 230-250 per hour wet. Full throttle at FL80 and leaned it improves to 40-45 lph, and 130-135 KTAS.
Do you have comparative figures for a typical 6-300?
marioair is offline  
Old 9th May 2014, 04:09
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Escapee from Ultima Thule
Posts: 4,220
Why would the fuel consumption be greater at lower altitudes? Are you not leaning? Piston engine fuel consumption is most significantly effected by HP. Set the same HP, get the same fuel flow. Presuming you're trying to compare equal power, of course.
Tinstaafl is offline  
Old 9th May 2014, 05:54
  #17 (permalink)  
Aztruckdriver
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London
Posts: 11
Tinstaafl fair point - but practically if you want 125 knots you may have a higher setting low level, and renters don't seem to lean down low. The engine is also a bit more efficient at full throttle, at full throttle altitudes with a power setting of around 65%.

Ideally the 182 should be leaned whenever below 75 %, including taxying.

No experience of a 6-300, but expect similar performance for another six-ten litres per hour. It is fuel injected so fuel consumption per hp may be a bit better.
RobertL is offline  
Old 10th May 2014, 07:10
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here
Posts: 1,727
Wink

You can use ours for 'one-off' trips if you like.

C182 with six seats, SMA engine:

40L/hour of JET (about 80p/litre), giving 135-140kts and a range of over 900nm.

or 27L/hr, giving 120kts and a range of almost 1100nm.

Both ranges with a 45 minute reserve.

Longest flight I have personally made was 920nm, done in 7.5hrs (5-10kt headwind throughout) and landed with just under an hours fuel remaining. From South Africa to Angola without stopping in Namibia!

Cheers, Sam.
Sam Rutherford is offline  
Old 11th May 2014, 13:34
  #19 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 76
Sam - where is it based!

A xix seat 182----are you sure?
marioair is offline  
Old 11th May 2014, 17:34
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: CYYC (Calgary)
Posts: 4,580
Club seating in back is nice for the passengers.
Not always. I've found that rearward-facing seats make me much more prone to airsickness.
India Four Two is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.