Cherokee 180 or Cessna 172 with 180hp for training?

Both are good trainers. Some people say high wings are harder in cross winds, but I've never noticed that personally.
 
I've flown both...they fly about the same...unlike Salty I do think the Piper handles crosswinds better, which for training means little (you will learn crosswinds with either, it just might take less time in the Cherokee / learn more in the Cessna). I'd personally pick the one that rents cheaper and leave the decision at that...
 
tawood said:
I've flown both...they fly about the same...unlike Salty I do think the Piper handles crosswinds better, which for training means little (you will learn crosswinds with either, its just might take less in the Cherokee / learn more in the Cessna).
Click to expand...
Maybe if you start in the low wing and move to high wing it's more noticeable?
 
Salty said:
Maybe if you start in the low wing and move to high wing it's more noticeable?
Click to expand...
I learned in the Cessna, then went to the Piper...crosswinds gave my feet a workout in the Cessna, but I hardly notice crosswinds in the Piper. I flew a Piper on Friday (albeit a PA28-140) and the crosswind was 16 knots gusting to 20 at 90 degrees...it was a breeze (pun intended).
 
Piper. More stable, more deliberate, feels more like a "real plane" and less like a trainer.. my list, in my opinion is below. I have many fond memories flying high wings, but I do prefer low wings in general

Piper Pros:
-won't hit your head on the wing
-easier to fill up with gas
-more stable
-easier to land
-better crosswind handling
-less workout on the feet and rudders
-in my experience they're a bit faster than the Skyhawk, even against the 180hp Skyhawks
-more comfortable in cruise on those longer 200nm+ trips
-manual flaps means one less electronic thing to break and worry about losing in an electric failure
-left and right fuel tank means no weird cross feeding and odd fuel burn rates, I like having two isolated tanks to deliberately select from
-feel less "boxed in" inside
-easier to see if you are getting any ice on the wings
-easier to taxi with the nose gear directly linked to the rudder pedals
-like the blade type pitot since both the static and the pitot are heated
-like that there is an internal drain for the pitot static (wait, wrong thread?)
-rudder trim
-rumor is the intake design makes it less susceptible to carb ice (the debate it still out)
-elevator trim is in a very ergonomically convenient and logical place by your right hand
-I happen to like a real throttle quadrant
-I prefer the vent system in the Piper, with the overhead vents, and foot vents, plus the electric fan
-the faster it goes the more solid and true it feels.. the Skyhawk tends to start to feel more "wobbly" or out of sorts as the IAS climbs over 120


Cessna Pros:
-two doors
-easier to sump the tanks
-easier to check flaps and ailerons
-easier to check the tires
-doesn't get as hot in the sun
-initial climb rate feels heartier
-some people like the convenience of just leaving fuel on both
-in some models there is no electric fuel pump since the engine gravity feeds, so one less thing to break or worry about losing
-if it rains you stay dryer
-very nice visibility under you, helps in the pattern, turns around a point, S turns, etc.
-being able to open the pilot window makes taxiing on hot days with your hand out great
-I like Cessna's POH better.. feels more "professional"
-flaps seem more effective on the Cessna
-if you are going to be doing soft field landings the landing gear seems more forgiving
-don't know why this is, but I've always had an easier time starting Cessnas than Pipers...
-you get some more headroom inside with a less rounded, more "square" cabin

**Notice, I didn't include a single con.. they both have them, but I feel like the pros speak better to each plane's strong suites

And ultimately, your training will not be that much different... you may almost want to try a few lessons in both and see which you prefer
 
tawood said:
but I hardly notice crosswinds in the Piper
Click to expand...
I forgot to mention that the Piper seems to also handle turbulence a little better. The Piper's wing (I believe) has a slightly higher wing loading, and the design overall seems to always do a better time in crosswinds, gusts, and turbulence
 
I'll add many of the things cited by San_Diego_pilot above are model dependent. Early Pipers have vernier throttles and mixture rather than a throttle quadrant. (To me it doesn't really matter, but still.) Early C-172's have manual flaps. (Which I do like better that electric.) Different C-172's have different amounts of flaps. The 40 degree flaps in early models that haven't been limited by STC (gets a gross weight increase) will really stop you in your tracks, so to speak.

What do you think you'll fly after you get done training? There is something to be said for ab-inito (Did I spell that right?) training. There than that, take the one you are more likely to fly more. (Closer to your house, cheaper, whatever drives the choice to fly vs not to fly.)

John
 
Why do you need 180 hp for training?
 
You didn't say what type of training, but if each aircraft is similarly equipped I don't think it really makes much of a difference.
 
Tantalum said:
Piper. More stable, more deliberate, feels more like a "real plane" and less like a trainer.. my list, in my opinion is below. I have many fond memories flying high wings, but I do prefer low wings in general

Piper Pros:
-won't hit your head on the wing
-easier to fill up with gas
-more stable
-easier to land
-better crosswind handling
-less workout on the feet and rudders
-in my experience they're a bit faster than the Skyhawk, even against the 180hp Skyhawks
-more comfortable in cruise on those longer 200nm+ trips
-manual flaps means one less electronic thing to break and worry about losing in an electric failure
-left and right fuel tank means no weird cross feeding and odd fuel burn rates, I like having two isolated tanks to deliberately select from
-feel less "boxed in" inside
-easier to see if you are getting any ice on the wings
-easier to taxi with the nose gear directly linked to the rudder pedals
-like the blade type pitot since both the static and the pitot are heated
-like that there is an internal drain for the pitot static (wait, wrong thread?)
-rudder trim
-rumor is the intake design makes it less susceptible to carb ice (the debate it still out)
-elevator trim is in a very ergonomically convenient and logical place by your right hand
-I happen to like a real throttle quadrant
-I prefer the vent system in the Piper, with the overhead vents, and foot vents, plus the electric fan
-the faster it goes the more solid and true it feels.. the Skyhawk tends to start to feel more "wobbly" or out of sorts as the IAS climbs over 120


Cessna Pros:
-two doors
-easier to sump the tanks
-easier to check flaps and ailerons
-easier to check the tires
-doesn't get as hot in the sun
-initial climb rate feels heartier
-some people like the convenience of just leaving fuel on both
-in some models there is no electric fuel pump since the engine gravity feeds, so one less thing to break or worry about losing
-if it rains you stay dryer
-very nice visibility under you, helps in the pattern, turns around a point, S turns, etc.
-being able to open the pilot window makes taxiing on hot days with your hand out great
-I like Cessna's POH better.. feels more "professional"
-flaps seem more effective on the Cessna
-if you are going to be doing soft field landings the landing gear seems more forgiving
-don't know why this is, but I've always had an easier time starting Cessnas than Pipers...
-you get some more headroom inside with a less rounded, more "square" cabin

**Notice, I didn't include a single con.. they both have them, but I feel like the pros speak better to each plane's strong suites

And ultimately, your training will not be that much different... you may almost want to try a few lessons in both and see which you prefer
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you've listed (and also agree with @jsstevens that some is model dependent) but I would add that the Cessna may be a little better on rough fields and much better at handling low obstructions like snow banks or weed clumps.
 
Yup, either is fine. Maybe try both for a few hours each and then decide. But really, in my experience even other planes won't matter either, you learn in what you're flying anyway. High wing better for looking down for scenic stuff if that matters to you.
 
tawood said:
I'd personally pick the one that rents cheaper and leave the decision at that...
Click to expand...

Both are $120 hr. The Cessna is in Ft. Morgan, the Cherokee is in Akron. Equal distance from my house. The Cherokee is owned by an A/P-AI, the Cessna is owned by an Ag pilot who flies the hell out of it during the summer months as a contract Ag photographer. The Cherokee would be more available during spring/summer months. The Cherokee instructor lives 5 miles down the road from me and is willing to barter if I help him with his cattle and hay operations. It doesn't matter which plane I take my instruction in. They both fly.

There's another 180 hp Cessna 172 in Sterling ($140 hr.) that the Cherokee instructor has access to also, so I"ll probably give both a try once I start my training. :cool:
 
jsstevens said:
What do you think you'll fly after you get done training?
Click to expand...
Something that will fly low and slow. Ideally a CubCrafter FX3 depending on the finances. If things look good, I'll go ahead and put my deposit down and get in line for one.
 
azblackbird said:
Something that will fly low and slow. Ideally a CubCrafter FX3 depending on the finances. If things look good, I'll go ahead and put my deposit down and get in line for one.
Click to expand...

Not much overlap with your training choices then. It's high wing, but not much like a C-172 otherwise.
 
azblackbird said:
Something that will fly low and slow. Ideally a CubCrafter FX3 depending on the finances. If things look good, I'll go ahead and put my deposit down and get in line for one.
Click to expand...

Any taildraggers available around you to train in? If the Cubcrafters is the end goal why not start in a cub/champ/decathlon....
 
Longmont KLMO had some Citabrias. Ad, if appropriate, Welcome to Colorado!
 
Pick the one with the most availability. You don't want it to be unavailable when you want to fly.
 
azblackbird said:
Something that will fly low and slow. Ideally a CubCrafter FX3
Click to expand...
Iffen you want to fly a taildragger you should at least do your pre-solo work in a taildragger because, based on my observations (and limited experience), it's stupid easy to learn to fly in a taldragger and transition to a nosewheel, but hard to transition to a taildragger after learning to fly with a nosewheel.

Buy your post ticket airplane now and learn to fly in it.

Otherwise, near as I can tell, ain't no difference between the two choices. Disclaimer: I am the one pilot in the entire world who has never flown a 172 - 150/152's and a Cherokee, yes. But never a 172.
 
I’ve flown both ,owned a 172,both are good trainers. I would choose the one that is lowest in rental cost. Or the one with the most availability.
 
Salty said:
You should take pledges for a dollar a mile for the length of your solo cross country.
Click to expand...
Geez... it's even easier to plan a route now that I'm in CO. I'll go NE, KS, OK, TX, NM, and back up to CO. The winds will tear me up, but I'll figure it out. ;)
 
Meh, all the same, just go with the cheaper one all in, so if the PA28 has better availability and a instructor idmgo thst route, especially if the CFI happens to be the AG pilot.
 
James331 said:
Meh, all the same, just go with the cheaper one all in, so if the PA28 has better availability and a instructor idmgo thst route, especially if the CFI happens to be the AG pilot.
Click to expand...
The CFI that lives down the road from me is a former airline pilot turned cattle rancher, or cattle rancher turned airline pilot. :dunno:

He's thinking about going back to the airlines. He promised that if he trains me that he'll stick with me through the duration of my training.
 
I learned in a 180hp 172. Then 2 hours in a Super Cub and got my tailwheel in an Aviat Husky.
Really any way you want to do it will work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top