beechcraft 24r sierra vs. piper 180

There are no modifications that increase the max gross weight of the 140*.
So upgrading the engine will only address the need for "speed" and not
useful load. Granted changing my 140 from 150hp to 160hp was nice,
I only was able to do it because I was overhauling the engine anyway.


*ok, I vaguely remember something about changing the max gross
from 1950 lbs to 2150 lbs for certain serial numbers, but that's it.
 
Bob, does increasing the hp help much with speed? How much did you gain?
I had an engine rebuilder tell me that he could get my 150 hp up to 180 (dyno) hp.
That, I think, would be a great difference in speed and weight capabitlity.
 
I have a Cherokee 180 G, My 1st plane
I fly off a 3900 ft paved and also a 2600 ft grass with trees.
1 door is a pain. I'm old, 6' ,230 lbs. But doable.
I fly 2 people in the plane but could do three. 2400 max gross,useful 950
8-10 gph, speed it depends which way the wind blows,but normally 113-115 kts until you get up there.The other day 103kts ,another was 127kts.
It's a stable, simple, basic good platform,just a step up from your 140. Well maybe 2 steps,150 -160-180hp

The Sierra 2 door,nice, maybe impress someone because you tell them you have a Beechcraft ( they might think you have a Bone or Baron if you don't elaborate), but your annuals will be higher with the prop and the gear and don't forget your insurance will be higher over a fixed gear.
Also seems like more demand for the Cherokees when you go to resell.
I haven't flown a Sierra ,but I don't think I'd trade my Cherokee for one.
Like Cap'n Ron says What's your mission?
Go fly them both and decide for yourself. You're the PIC.

And Anthony , did you tell him about the lifetime AD on the Grumman wing spar and the glued in motor mounts? ( Ed said I should mention that:D)
 
stapler101 said:
Bob, does increasing the hp help much with speed? How much did you gain?
I had an engine rebuilder tell me that he could get my 150 hp up to 180 (dyno) hp.
That, I think, would be a great difference in speed and weight capabitlity.
Click to expand...

Typically you will see an IAS increase that's equal to the cube root of the horsepower increase. In this case that's (16/15)^(1/3) or 2.2% which would amount to about 3 Kt on a Cherokee and come with about a 7% increase in fuel flow. Of course if you're low enough you could accomplish the same thing by opening the throttle further. The most apparent improvement with the bigger engine would normally be in the climb and takeoff performance where the benefit is likely to be much more than the 6.7% power increase would indicate since the improvement is related to the same additional number of horses added to the original minus the power required to fly the airplane in level flight.

You can easily compute the additional climb rate at sea level (where you can actually count on the full extent of the extra power) with the following formula:

Additional FPM = HP increase * propEffiency * 33000 / GrossWeight

If you use .85 for the propEffiency you'll be close enough.

For example a 10 HP increase with a 2200 lb gross weight yields 10*0.85*33000 / 2200 = 127.5 FPM
 
Last edited:
I repitched the prop at the same time, so my 140 will fly the same speeds as a warrior at the same warrior rpm settings.
 
I once owned a ‘75 Sierra for 3 years and before that rented them from Beech Aero clubs. I’d raced them in the ‘’99’’s air races back in the late 70’s and early 80’s. It is the most under rated airplane out there! I could always out run Tigers and the Cessna Cutlass RG with ease. I’d be on par with the Piper Arrow. I have race results that show me winning with an average speed of over 162 mph. I won the Fullerton, CA air race 5 times, 4 in a Sierra and once in a Sundowner. I also have 2 seconds and a third there.

After buying my ’75 Sierra I did a clean up on it and got 7 more mph. I could also take out the 2 middle seats and carry 2 mountain bikes, easy with the big back door. I have also flown a Sierra from MRY to VNY with 40 gals of fuel, 3 adults (2 of them not very thin), 2 teenage boys and 4 suit cases. Yes it had the 5 & 6 seat. I have landed Sierra’s in crosswinds up to 45 kts and has handled them with ease.

I also sent Aviation Consumer, years ago, a letter telling them how wrong they are about the Sierra. You fly it like a Sierra not a Cessna. It’s got a very thin wing not like the Piper or Cessna fat wing. Slow down to maneuvering speed? Not in a Sierra! It handles great I could always out dog flight the others including the Mooney 201. It may not be as fast as a 201 but it will out turn it. I did fly a 201 in an air race. It was fast, but it got hot and didn’t turn as fast as the Sierra. Oh, I got 3rd in that race.

I sold my Sierra and got a Beech Baron 56TC, I will always stand up for the Sierra, Sundowner, Sport and Skipper. I have flown them all and they are all Beechcrafts.
 
Hahahahaha. A 146kt Sierra. Does that come with a Yuma view of the Pacific?
 
EdFred said:
Hahahahaha. A 146kt Sierra. Does that come with a Yuma view of the Pacific?
Click to expand...
162 mph is 140 knots.

The Cessna 172RG I fly will true about 138 knots if everything is right (I file 135 knots and get it no issue). Considering how the Sierra has 20 more hp - it's not that much more amazing.

I've flown both the Sierra and the Cutlass. I personally prefer the Cutlass.
 
Ron Levy said:
About the only raison d'etre for the Sierra, Cutlass, and Arrow is to provide a minimum cost complex aircraft for CP and CFI training/certification, and retractable time-building.
Click to expand...


Yes, except it was the 200 HP Sierra, Arrow, and Cardinal. All for the GI bill. Every 141 flight school had them.

It was the only reason those three were built. All three manufacturers had better airplanes for transportation rather than training.

The Cutless came later, and missed the GI bill.
 
jesse said:
162 mph is 140 knots.

The Cessna 172RG I fly will true about 138 knots if everything is right (I file 135 knots and get it no issue). Considering how the Sierra has 20 more hp - it's not that much more amazing.

I've flown both the Sierra and the Cutlass. I personally prefer the Cutlass.
Click to expand...

The way I read it, he added 7mph (6kts) to the already 140kt Sierra.
 
EdFred said:
The way I read it, he added 7mph (6kts) to the already 140kt Sierra.
Click to expand...

The way I read it, she achieved a 162mph (140.5kts) average speed in a 99s, air-race.
 
Trapper John said:
LOL, that story should have started out, "Dear Penthouse"...


Trapper John
Click to expand...

I suppose it would be plausible if the race was from Blue Canyon to Lincoln Regional. 37 miles, 5163ft elevation change.
 
Ron Levy said:
Well, I think the Sierra may have a bit better load, and certainly has a larger cabin, but I agree that none of the 200HP retractables outside the Mooney give you any more bang for the buck than you can get with other fixed gear aircraft for less total cost. About the only raison d'etre for the Sierra, Cutlass, and Arrow is to provide a minimum cost complex aircraft for CP and CFI training/certification, and retractable time-building.
Click to expand...

200 hp Arrow vs. 182 (club has both)

Arrow allows me to log complex time
Arrow has greater payload with full fuel.

182 is faster (by a few knots)
182 is more comfortable
People can ride in the back seat of the 182. Haven't flown with anyone I like little enough to put them in the back seat of the Arrow, especially behind me.
 
Like I said the Sierra has more speed in it, it just needs cleaned up in a few areas, like the nose gear, as it’s not flat in its retracted position, I’ve been working on making a fairing for it and hope to get it finished soon.

Other pilots at some of the air races believed I was cheating. How can you cheat with a rented airplane? Now when I got my own Sierra I had the chance to really clean it up. Yeah, the 99's did not believe Sierras were that fast and told me that too.

I’ve also be working on wheel fairings for the Sport and Sundowner. I believe I can get
8 more kts out of them.

The 99's did put on races for men only and men and women as a team.
 
Last edited:
nvsssnake said:
I once owned a ‘75 Sierra for 3 years and before that rented them from Beech Aero clubs. I’d raced them in the ‘’99’’s air races back in the late 70’s and early 80’s. It is the most under rated airplane out there! I could always out run Tigers and the Cessna Cutlass RG with ease. I’d be on par with the Piper Arrow. I have race results that show me winning with an average speed of over 162 mph. I won the Fullerton, CA air race 5 times, 4 in a Sierra and once in a Sundowner. I also have 2 seconds and a third there.

After buying my ’75 Sierra I did a clean up on it and got 7 more mph. I could also take out the 2 middle seats and carry 2 mountain bikes, easy with the big back door. I have also flown a Sierra from MRY to VNY with 40 gals of fuel, 3 adults (2 of them not very thin), 2 teenage boys and 4 suit cases. Yes it had the 5 & 6 seat. I have landed Sierra’s in crosswinds up to 45 kts and has handled them with ease.

I also sent Aviation Consumer, years ago, a letter telling them how wrong they are about the Sierra. You fly it like a Sierra not a Cessna. It’s got a very thin wing not like the Piper or Cessna fat wing. Slow down to maneuvering speed? Not in a Sierra! It handles great I could always out dog flight the others including the Mooney 201. It may not be as fast as a 201 but it will out turn it. I did fly a 201 in an air race. It was fast, but it got hot and didn’t turn as fast as the Sierra. Oh, I got 3rd in that race.

I sold my Sierra and got a Beech Baron 56TC, I will always stand up for the Sierra, Sundowner, Sport and Skipper. I have flown them all and they are all Beechcrafts.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the overview of the Sierra, it sounds like you have experience in all the birds and quite a bit in the Sierra so it's appreciated. As far as everyone sayi g the Sierra is only a few knots faster, there are many videos on YouTube of people doing 140knts in a Sierra and a guy at my strip says he does 132knts at 65% and only 9gph of burn. That sounds better than the 180 on speed and about the same on fuel. The interior is huge, 4 spacious seats with lots of room behind. That sounds like a pretty practical bird to me.

I'm also considering the 1973 Piper 180 (Challenger) that has the extra window and 5 inches like the Archer, or the Sierra so I appreciate all of the feedback. Wondering why a few people have said it Flys like a dog??
 
Armcorp said:
My first post..........I own a 74 Cherokee 180. I am a low-time Pilot. It has been very stable and reliable and I would highly recommend it. I get about 9.5 gph. It has been a great ride.
Click to expand...
Yes but the Challenger is 5 inches longer in the fuselage and gives more room vs the 1972 Cherokkee 180. This is a big difference with a full boat IMO.
 
RotorAndWing said:
The myth of the "Beech Quality" is just that, a myth. It's a marketing ploy pretty much in line with "Cadillac Quality". I've owned 2 Beech's (H18 and A90) and have flown and worked on pretty much everything else they have produced with the exception of the B17 Staggerwing. Beech does some things a bit better but they also have their downsides.

As far as the small Beech's go (Musketeer, Sundowner, Seirra) they are heavy built and slow with lots of room inside. Parts are pricey (once again, the Beech "quality") but acquisition cost are also low versus other makes.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure it's a myth, with the dual wing spar I believe the G rating is much better. I'm trying to find the data on the Sierra, I did find it for the sundowner which I think is pretty much the same fuselage (20 hp less and no retractable gear) Aerobatic load capibility of +6, -3 g load with two spars. The Cherokee180 specifically prohibits aerobatics and I think the negative was 1.52. Many pilots say they feel more solidly built too....so maybe exaggerated but not a myth.
 
Anthony said:
Someone has to say it. You can get better cruise and similar load carrying capability with a Grumman Tiger. Fixed gear, fixed prop, 180 HP. It will cruise at 135 KTAS and carry around 950 lbs usefull load.

If you are stuck on either the Cherokee 180 or the Beech Sierra, I'd go Cherokee due to the simplicity.
Click to expand...

Good luck getting the Tiger for the price of a Sierra. This is the market I've been watching for a few years. I really want the Cheetah/Tiger, but the market says everyone else does, too.

Geez, didn't realize the thread necro when I posted :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top