Do wheel pants make a difference?

Chrisgoesflying

Chrisgoesflying

Cleared for Takeoff
PoA Supporter
Joined
Dec 7, 2018
Messages
1,343
Location
The Lone Star State
Display Name
Display name:
Chrisgoesflying
I currently have wheel pants on my Cherokee 140/160 on all three wheels. Obviously, the plane looks a lot nicer with them. BUT, at the same time, they seem to be a bit of an inconvenience as inflating the tires is more difficult and winter is coming, hence there is a chance for slush and other crap to accumulate inside. Therefore, I am contemplating to just take them off during the next annual and fly without them. Performance wise, do they make much of a difference? If so, what is it? Like 1 mph? Other than aesthetics, what is the purpose of wheel pants?
 
A couple of knots in cruise. The cherokee doesn't fly near fast enough for them to make any appreciable difference in drag. They're just there for cosmetics and the illusion of aero-slickness. Taking them off for winter isn't a bad idea at all.

I can't stand them personally, I think they look goofy on the trainer-type planes.
 
The difference is maybe 2-3kts if that. Nothing that’s really THAT noticeable or worth leaving them on if you’re concerned about stuff getting jammed inside. I’d say take them off, it would make things easier.
 
Chrisgoesflying said:
Other than aesthetics, what is the purpose of wheel pants?
Click to expand...
Per the manufacturers, wheel fairings and other similar fairings are designed to streamline the airflow and give you more airspeed. Some OEMs even call them speed fairings. In my experience, it depends on the aircraft type and configuration how much more speed you actually get. However, in some cases you can get a 5-10 mph increase. That said, unless you regularly fly long legs you really wont see an overall difference in the end. But from a maintenance standpoint I'm a big fan of removing them and keep them in a safe place till you sell aircraft.;)
 
Chrisgoesflying said:
I currently have wheel pants on my Cherokee 140/160 on all three wheels. Obviously, the plane looks a lot nicer with them. BUT, at the same time, they seem to be a bit of an inconvenience as inflating the tires is more difficult and winter is coming, hence there is a chance for slush and other crap to accumulate inside. Therefore, I am contemplating to just take them off during the next annual and fly without them. Performance wise, do they make much of a difference? If so, what is it? Like 1 mph? Other than aesthetics, what is the purpose of wheel pants?
Click to expand...

Now that you make me think about it I don't recall seeing a Cherokee without wheel pants. Not sure what it would look like?
Like Clip4 said do you want to go even slower?
I bought my "trainer" from a friend for a song in 2018 before the prices went nuts and he did not have the wheel pants on. I found them buried in his hangar made sure they came with the plane when I bought it.

I put them on back then and like the way it looks with them on. It helps maybe set it apart from a trainer plane?
I flew 3 winters with them on in some snowy icy conditions and never had a problem with ice or snow.
The last 2 years I have done a lot of grass/turf landings with no problems.
This past summer I put new tires on the mains and left the wheel pants off until I needed new brake pads so I could inspect them easier. And I wanted a change of pace/look for a while.
I found out they keep my plane much cleaner. I have mud spray on the bottom of the wings, grass stuck in my mains and the front fork is all green and nasty now without wheel pants. I plan to put them back on soon just in time for winter on my 172.
IMG_1927(1).JPG

I have flown my buddy's Cherokee quite a bit on my signature picture.
 
Last edited:
My archer came with them and I had them removed at my first annual. I didn't like that I could not inspect things easily during preflight and it made it a pain to check / inflate the tires. So did it make a difference? Well, not much maybe 2 kts in cruise, hardly noticeable. My plane flies around 123 in smooth, straight and level flight at 75% power.
 
When I had my Cherokee it had no wheel pants. I bought knots pants and had them fitted. It took awhile and I had occasion to fly it without the leg cowlings once. It took a lot more power and fuel during a 100kt cruise, but it would cruise there. After the wheel pants were fitted I could cruise as high as 115 kts TAS while burning more fuel, or I could cruise slightly faster than normal at the same fuel burn. The airplane looked good and flew well but the k2u pants are relatively heavy and I gave up some performance in the climb, but I gained some performance in cruise. I could never cruise at 115kts TAS before they were added. I didn't have any trouble on the grass airstips I used, I don't fly alot in snow so I can't speak to that.

I made a special air chuck to fill the tires by bending a short piece of ridgid brake line into an S shape and adding a screw on Chuck and air hose fittings. Later I put a check valve, a Tee, and a pressure gauge on the air hose side and it worked pretty well. Without it adding air and checking the tires was a challenge. Hope this helps.

I bought all the parts at Bumper-to-Bumper auto parts.
Wheel Pants air chuck:
500-4 air chuck head
408ST tube as 8in
121400 tube nut
125420 1/4L 45 X 1/8 NPTm
124520 1/4L str X 1/8 NPTm
124420 1/4L str X 1/4 NPTm
 
Last edited:
2 nights ago this picture was taken. 4 days before this I landed at this strip and the grass was 2 feet high in places, it was only halfway cut. I left with a ton of grass stuck in my mains. Would not have had that problem with wheel pants.
I love landing anywhere without asphalt. Give me low and slow.
My buddy sold his cheerokee and bought an arrow. He is afraid of grass now, his loss IMO. lol
IMG_2285.JPG
 
Last edited:
Gary Ward said:
Now that you make me think about it I don't recall seeing a Cherokee without wheel pants. Not sure what it would look like?
Click to expand...
Like this:
IMG_20211014_124456094_HDR.jpg

Flying club always runs pantsless on the trainer planes... hard landings tend to destroy them anyway. Nice for grass ops too. Book said they were worth 5 knots. The later ones after about 1975 or so are more efficient than the earlier ones. Taking them off for winter is probably a good idea. I like the look of wheel pants personally, but there's no denying they're a pain for maintaining tires & struts.
 
Chrisgoesflying said:
I currently have wheel pants on my Cherokee 140/160 on all three wheels. Obviously, the plane looks a lot nicer with them. BUT, at the same time, they seem to be a bit of an inconvenience as inflating the tires is more difficult and winter is coming, hence there is a chance for slush and other crap to accumulate inside. Therefore, I am contemplating to just take them off during the next annual and fly without them. Performance wise, do they make much of a difference? If so, what is it? Like 1 mph? Other than aesthetics, what is the purpose of wheel pants?
Click to expand...

I had a Cherokee 140/160 for 18 years. The main reason (no pun) I took off the wheel pants was to save weight. The 140 simply doesn't have a lot of usual load, and mine was a bit heavier than most.

I also save a few pounds by removing the rear seats.
 
I hate them on my C206 and they're always in storage. The speed difference is tiny, particularly compared to the extra time it takes to manage correct tire pressure. The fuel savings is also relatively small, but can add up with full time usage.
 
There used to be a set of speed fairing for Cherokees that were supposed to be good for a good bit more speed. They were MASSIVE and covered the gear legs also.

At the local FBO, they have a 7GCBC Citabria to fly. It is store in a hangar, unlike all the other rentals. The back wall of the hangar is covered with shelves, covered with wheel pants. WAY more than the rental fleet. :D
 
If you decide to run your mains pantless, then ensure your brake lines are well secured.
 
From what I've read, pants on the mains do little or nothing for speed. Pant on the nose potentially makes a difference because of the higher velocity of propwash. Carefully designed nose pants made to minimize drag from the interference of the strut with the cowl can make a difference. But mostly they look cool.
 
The best I was able to see was 2(ish) knots.
Did the plane look better with them on? Yes it did.
I land in the grass. A lot.
Life is much easier since I took them off and put hub caps on.
IMG_20210907_114556534_HDR.jpg IMG_20220524_104023532.jpg
 
Last edited:
Shepherd said:
The best I was able to see was 2(ish) knots.
Did they look nice? Yes they did.
Life is much easier since I took them off and put hub caps on.
Click to expand...
Thought about that, but I was only able to come up with one that I found in my friends hangar.
067_2.jpg

I think this is the type cap used with wheel pants? Then I would need a different nut also, right?

049_4.jpg
 
Shepherd said:
The best I was able to see was 2(ish) knots.
Did the plane look better with them on? Yes it did.
Click to expand...

fwiw - I think the plane looks better without the wheelpants. A nose-wheel plane can look better with the pants, but the tail-dragger looks better without them.
 
I'm not a fan of the 1957ish styling of the Piper Cherokee wheel pants, especially the nose gear with the fin. And yes, it is a PITA to check tire pressure, but I still think it looks better with them on than off.
 
Pants keep your wing bottoms and belly clean by deflecting spray from the wheels. Like fenders on a bike. They are good for soggy grass strips and slushy runways. I generally keep mine off for local flying and install for longer XC trips. I have a taildragger so only have two fairings, but I can remove and reinstall both in less than 15 minutes.
 
Your mechanic might thank you if you removed them, and perhaps the maintenance will cost less. Plus, I don’t think there’s a wheel pant design that I like the looks of aside from a few on newer airplanes.

On a Cherokee, the speed difference with them off vs. on will be negligible. I took mine off almost immediately after getting the plane home.
 
The bigger wheel and brake fairings that Cessna and Piper introduced in the mid-late 1970s do make a significant difference in speed -- maybe 5-6 knots on a typical C-172 or PA-28, compared to 2-3 knots for the older styles. But they make it even more difficult to inspect and service landing gear components. The question about wheel fairings (and retractable landing gear, for that matter) becomes, will they ever save you as much time in the air as you spend fussing with them on the ground?

Wheel fairings were not even available on Cherokees until the Cherokee B of late 1962, and even then they were only standard on the 180 hp model. The bigger factory fairings, introduced in 1978, were never available for the Cherokee 140, which was discontinued in 1977.

It depends on the mission and operating conditions, too. I'd leave 'em off for operations on unimproved surfaces, snow, mud, ice, etc., where the fairings can get gunked up.

N2800W_01.jpg

pa-28-180_1963.jpg

pa-28-161_1979_1204.jpg

My C-172N had the big wheel/brake fairings, as does my current PA-32. On both, you have to access the tire valves through little knuckle-busting trap doors, and push/pull the airplane fore/aft on the ramp to line up the valve with the trap doors. :mad:
 
Bob Noel said:
A nose-wheel plane can look better with the pants, but the tail-dragger looks better without them.
Click to expand...

That depends on the plane. Mine definitely looks better with the wheel pants on!
 
Pilawt said:
The bigger wheel and brake fairings that Cessna and Piper introduced in the mid-late 1970s do make a significant difference in speed -- maybe 5-6 knots on a typical C-172 or PA-28, compared to 2-3 knots for the older styles. But they make it even more difficult to inspect and service landing gear components. The question about wheel fairings (and retractable landing gear, for that matter) becomes, will they ever save you as much time in the air as you spend fussing with them on the ground?

Wheel fairings were not even available on Cherokees until the Cherokee B of late 1962, and even then they were only standard on the 180 hp model. The bigger factory fairings, introduced in 1978, were never available for the Cherokee 140, which was discontinued in 1977.

It depends on the mission and operating conditions, too. I'd leave 'em off for operations on unimproved surfaces, snow, mud, ice, etc., where the fairings can get gunked up.

View attachment 110765

View attachment 110766

View attachment 110767

My C-172N had the big wheel/brake fairings, as does my current PA-32. On both, you have to access the tire valves through little knuckle-busting trap doors, and push/pull the airplane fore/aft on the ramp to line up the valve with the trap doors. :mad:
Click to expand...

Oh look, is that eight zero zero "willy" as seen in the little movie about the husband and wife that take flight lessons unbeknownst to each other?
 
Timbeck2 said:
Oh look, is that eight zero zero "willy" as seen in the little movie about the husband and wife that take flight lessons unbeknownst to each other?
Click to expand...
N2800W was s/n 28-03, the pre-production prototype PA-28-160 that first flew in 1960. The same airframe was later the certification-testing prototype for the Cherokee 180 and Cherokee 235 -- the only 235 ever built without tip tanks.

pa-28-235_1964_1709.jpg
 
Agree. Tail draggers should not have wheel pants, it befits the more utilitarian or classic look

Everything else, yes. There are quite a few Cherokee series planes in our club and about 2/3 of them are missing the pants. I find the planes look ridiculous without the pants, they either look like an RG with the wheel stuck down, or look like an unfinished neglected mess

My favorite 182 :eek:-yes I have one- has a set of wheel pants that look really sharp and complete the look of the airplane.
 
I think about those old racers....like the Gee Bee and many others from those days.... wouldn't look right without the pants
 
Tantalum said:
Agree. Tail draggers should not have wheel pants, it befits the more utilitarian or classic look
Click to expand...

Disagree.

MANY tailwheel aircraft look unfinished without them. Pitts, Eagle, Cap-10, Extra.

Yes, mostly aerobatic aircraft.

Utility aircraft, I pretty much agree no pants for them.
 
I've always wondered why they didn't design pants to have an easy way to pop off a panel to check the air pressure and brakes. I'm guessing not wanting to take chances in the pant dropping off in the air, etc. I do prefer pant less main gear for the pre flight inspection.

NOTE: Idea for new business venture. "Clinton Pants". Uncannily quick dropping pants for any airplane, anytime, anywhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top