Cardinal owners...

[dell30rb]

The useful load in my 1977 Cardinal RG is 1000.2 lbs. The CoG can be a bit tricky if you put two heavyweights in the front seats. You'll need some weight in the baggage compartment to balance that out. My plane has both a lighter weight starter and alternator, and after last year's annual the inop ADF and ADF antenna hardware is gone (anyone want it? It's still in my basement!).

I usually cruise at 2400 RPM, 23-24" or WOT. This is around 10 GPH. The stock fuel flow gauge is not super accurate (it's actually a pressure gauge calibrated in GPH). A future upgrade will be a proper fuel flow and totalizer so maybe some day I'll have a better idea of the fuel flow for various power settings. Block fuel consumption vs. hobbs is around 8.5-9 GPH since I bought the plane.

My favorite cruise settings is 2400 RPM, WOT, at or above 7 or 8 thousand feet, ROP or even peak if manifold pressure is sufficiently low to make for 65% power. For some reason my plane doesn't seem to run smoothly very far LOP. I routinely get 140 knot true air speeds at that altitude and power setting.

I would definitely hesitate to take a Cardinal RG off of a short strip fully loaded in the summer but being even 100-200 pounds under gross makes a pretty big difference. Like all long-legged airplanes you have considerable flexibility in the fuel planning.

Those numbers are about what I figured for a cardinal. Pretty good!

Given the purchase price delta and the high wing configuration with two big doors, I would probably choose a cardinal RG over a mooney M20J. The time difference on my usual trip is maybe 20 minutes.

However I do consider 140kts to be about the minimum speed I could tolerate if I was spending that much on an airplane.

 

[dell30rb]

Does no one try to run LOP on the Lyc 4 banger? For a short time, I had a Grumman with an O-320 and I ran it a bit LOP. Similar engine to the Cardinal. I found the first time it would run rough, then I took off all the intake runners and put new gaskets on, then replaced the intake hoses and clamps and made sure they were tight. After that, I could get just over the peak on my single EGT and run LOP at 65% power and it would be fairly smooth. Saved quite a bit of gas, and kept the plugs pretty nice.

Yes. Our club has three mooneys (200hp lyc 4cyl) and 2/3 will run nicely at about 65% power 40degrees LOP and 8.5-9gph

One just does not like it. From the factory, lycomings usually have injectors well matched enough to run smoothly LOP. Not always though. The solution is about $800 for GAMI's

 

[bnt83]

One more thing: There are apparently a lot of misrigged AIRPLANES out there. This does affect the cruise speed. A common problem is that the flaps don't quite retract as much as they are supposed to. I've never had problems maintaining book speeds at altitude.

My CFII has flown the plane and commented that he liked it a lot. I only have experience with 172, 172RG, and the 177RG, and the 177RG is the obvious winner there.

FTFY. It's all makes & models

 

[flyingcheesehead]

You ALSO said the Mooney had more room than any other airplane you've flown.

So, you haven't flown a Cardinal.

No. I said:

more leg room

Emphasis added. I have not flown a Cardinal, and I would love to. It certainly has a larger overall cabin. I'd be surprised if it truly had more leg room than the Ovation - I'm sure it's sufficient and then some, and maybe it does... But I would be surprised!

 

[JohnAJohnson]

Does no one try to run LOP on the Lyc 4 banger?

Yep, I can run LOP smoothly on my O-360. The GAMI spread is less than a half gallon. But I find that running LOP actually causes my CHTs to be ~20 degrees hotter than rich of peak. It's the difference between 390 degrees and 370, and I'm not comfortable with 390 at cruise. I know, I know. Many will tell me I'm full of it because running LOP produces cooler CHTs, but it is what it is on my plane. This is measured with a JPI 700 with FF.

 

[MAKG1]

My CFII has flown the plane and commented that he liked it a lot. I only have experience with 172, 172RG, and the 177RG, and the 177RG is the obvious winner there.

Really? I find the 172RG and 177RG performance to be pretty similar. There is more room in the Cardinal, but you can open the windows at any airspeed in the Cutlass (and they are substantially larger). The Cutlass seems a whole lot easier to start, especially hot. W&B is also a whole lot easier in the Cutlass, but the Cardinal holds more useful load and more fuel.

It's also not easy to have someone help you push a Cardinal around the ramp. There are no wing struts to push on; the only spot is the prop roots. And that SOB is HEAVY. On the plus side, Cardinal wings sit higher so you don't get Cessna Forehead, ever. And the visibility in the pattern is substantially better.

 

[Pilawt]

Back seat of the C/E, yes. I haven't flown a short-body, only a J (mid) and R (long), but I don't think the dimensions in the front seat area of Mooneys have ever changed, so I can't imagine why/how you had such issues in the right seat unless there was some odd modification of the plane you looked at.

As I mentioned above, the area in front of the pilot's face has changed. The old pre-M20J near-vertical windshields contributed to the cramped, closed-in feeling in front.

 

[spinfire]

Maybe the 172RG I rented was in poor shape. But it was even worse of a pig in the climb and cruised about 10 knots slower. It handles, well, like a 172. And the 172RG was carbureted. I know people have said that fuel injected airplanes are tough to start but I find the IO-360 quite easy to start. I've never had difficulties starting it hot or cold.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Maybe the 172RG I rented was in poor shape. But it was even worse of a pig in the climb and cruised about 10 knots slower. It handles, well, like a 172. And the 172RG was carbureted. I know people have said that fuel injected airplanes are tough to start but I find the IO-360 quite easy to start. I've never had difficulties starting it hot or cold.

My experience has been similar. Never had a problem with hot starts in the 177RG I used to fly.

 

[Yellowbird]

I've got a 74 FG Cardinal, but I don't remember what the performance numbers are. I don't think I even remember what the airplane looks like - it's been in the shop since January, waiting on a firewall that Cessna apparently has no interest in delivering.



(Update: Cessna now says that they expect to see the firewall delivered from their subcontractor today!)

 

[AdamZ]

Here's my view based upon experience:

1) Sitting in a cardinal is comfortable as anything, roomy and easy to get in and out of.

2) Sitting in the mooney Kent flies, an Ovation I belive is exceptionally comfortable and was surprisingly roomy. Let me add that that I flew in that plane with Kent in the left front, Alon in the right front and I sat in the right back. I was amazed at the room in the back. Viz was not as good as the cardinal but the plane was roomy and comfortable for 3 larger guys.

3) Sitting in the front right of a Mooney M20B was pretty darn tight.

 

[bnt83]

Are the RG cowls any easier to R&R than the FG?

 

[JohnAJohnson]

I've got a 74 FG Cardinal, but I don't remember what the performance numbers are. I don't think I even remember what the airplane looks like - it's been in the shop since January, waiting on a firewall that Cessna apparently has no interest in delivering.



(Update: Cessna now says that they expect to see the firewall delivered from their subcontractor today!)

What happened? Have you painted the airplane yet, or are you waiting for the new firewall? You have one of the cleanest planes I've ever seen, with zinc chromate and soundproofing everywhere. Please tell me you didn't land hard on the nose gear.

 

[Yellowbird]

What happened? Have you painted the airplane yet, or are you waiting for the new firewall? You have one of the cleanest planes I've ever seen, with zinc chromate and soundproofing everywhere. Please tell me you didn't land hard on the nose gear.

I did land hard, last year. Before then, I did get the plane repainted, and followed up with an avionics upgrade (GPS, audio panel) last summer. I was coming home from the avioinics shop after a follow-up visit to have the side tone adjusted when botched the landing in a crosswind. I bounced once, went around and finished with a more respectable landing. I didn't notice any damage from the outside, but when I dropped the plane off for her annual in January, my mechanic noticed some wrinkles in the lower firewall.