Piper Arrow purchase advice

[VWGhiaBob]

Hi everyone,

I’ve been lurking for a while, making my first post. I’m considering purchasing a Piper Arrow and would love to hear from some current owners about their experiences. I already have lots of hours in the plane when I was a member of a flying club so I know I like the plane. Just curious about thoughts on different models (II vs III), maintenance costs, what to look for when buying, etc.

Thanks.

Bet you can get an incredible bargain right now. I know someone selling a pristine retract and can’t seem to give it away. There’s a surplus of retracts due to FAA’s decision not to require complex time for Commercial if applicant uses a TAA (Technically Advanced Aircraft) instead. Prices have plummeted.

 

[hindsight2020]

Bargains? Try Bonanza V-tails if you're gonna come to an Arrow thread and talk about bargains.

 

[Erichh]

Yes, I’m also curious about that bargain, haha. VWGhiaBob, is it an Arrow that your friend is selling? Is it posted on Controller/TAP/etc? Or if you prefer, can you PM me the details?

Do people have experience tying down Arrows on grass, would there be issues with that? Also, has anyone landed on turf or unimproved strips? I’m wondering how the retractable gear would handle that?

Thanks again for all the input everyone.

 

[GRG55]

Yes, I’m also curious about that bargain, haha. VWGhiaBob, is it an Arrow that your friend is selling? Is it posted on Controller/TAP/etc? Or if you prefer, can you PM me the details?

Do people have experience tying down Arrows on grass, would there be issues with that? Also, has anyone landed on turf or unimproved strips? I’m wondering how the retractable gear would handle that?

Thanks again for all the input everyone.

No problem with landing on any reasonable grass surface. The gear is quite robust. I took mine into the same places I flew my fixed gear Cherokees.

I have never liked tying down on grass where I live simply because it's too easy for mice to get into an airplane and trash it.

 

[iamtheari]

Do people have experience tying down Arrows on grass, would there be issues with that? Also, has anyone landed on turf or unimproved strips? I’m wondering how the retractable gear would handle that?

Soft and rough field takeoffs and landings are mostly technique-driven. The landing gear design is also a factor. But retractable vs. fixed, assuming all else is equal, will not be a factor, and may provide an advantage by not having wheel pants. I've landed my Arrow on a friend's grass strip a few times with good results. I also parked it on the grass at Oshkosh for a week but I cheated by putting some plywood under each wheel, pieces about 12"x24".

 

[Arrow76R]

I have owned my '69 Arrow 200 for 17 years and for me it is the right plane (I'm only 5' 11"). I fly solo 99% of the time so rear seat space is not an issue. My home field is at 6800' MSL so virtually all my flights are at or above 10 k. For the 17 years my TAS is a rock solid 140 kts with 8.5 gph fuel flow at cruise altitude (JPI FS 450 and EDM 700), your mileage may vary at low altitudes! I also had a main gear trunion replaced many years ago and a new prop & governor but otherwise maintenance has been cheap. The plane has dual G5s (NO vacuum system!!!) and S-TEC 60 PS autopilot with a GNS 530W, KX 155, KT 76A, FS 210, GDL-88D ADS-B so it works well (for me) on long cross country VFR or IFR flights even over the big rocks here in Colorado to the west coast. I wish it had more fuel because I would rather not have to stop after 4+ hours for gas to maintain a reserve. 2 blade prop version is a bit quicker and cheaper than 3 blades and I don't need the small climb benefit purported for a 3 blade prop. 2 doors would be nice but not a problem for me.

 

[TigerGene]

Grumman Tiger?

As fast as the Arrow, solid airframe, cheaper to insure, cheaper to maintain, great leg room in the back, open the canopy for hot weather ops. Seemed like a better choice to me.

 

[Erichh]

I’ve heard from a few people that $4k a year is a reasonable guess for average annual maintenance ($2k fixed-fee inspection plus another $2k-ish of squawks). Does that sound reasonable to people, or is it overly optimistic?

 

[iamtheari]

I’ve heard from a few people that $4k a year is a reasonable guess for average annual maintenance ($2k fixed-fee inspection plus another $2k-ish of squawks). Does that sound reasonable to people, or is it overly optimistic?

It sounds reasonable to me, assuming the plane does not have a lot of deferred maintenance when you start keeping score. You also have to decide if you will build an engine reserve (dollars per flight hour set aside for the engine overhaul that will eventually be required) or wait until an overhaul is needed to go looking for the money.

 

[Warlock]

I’ve heard from a few people that $4k a year is a reasonable guess for average annual maintenance ($2k fixed-fee inspection plus another $2k-ish of squawks). Does that sound reasonable to people, or is it overly optimistic?

This is a reasonable and very realistic assessment based on my Arrow (And Warrior)

 

[N1120A]

Grumman Tiger?

As fast as the Arrow, solid airframe, cheaper to insure, cheaper to maintain, great leg room in the back, open the canopy for hot weather ops. Seemed like a better choice to me.

Grumman Tiger is always the model answer, but Arrows are trending cheaper these days. Also, if you get the big tank Arrows, you are getting serious range.

 

[Erichh]

What kind of pricing declines are you seeing with Arrows? Unfortunately I wasn’t tracking the market closely a year ago when the CPL requirement changed. Do you think that’s what’s driving it? Or concern about the wing spar AD?

 

[Dave-C]

An Arrow is on my short list also. Any comments / advice on the Arrow IV with the T-tail and also the Turbo Arrow? Adding a turbo doesn't seem to add much if any cost in the used market (of the few I've looked at), assuming because of the additional maintenance and OH cost, but what is the real world extra operating cost and at annual. Maybe a different topic, but I wonder how a TC Arrow would compare to a NA M20 overall and way up high? Thanks.

 

[Sac Arrow]

In round numbers, annuals for the TA III were $5K, vs. $2K for the Arrow II. And then, there were always MX expenses in between annuals on the TA III, so tack on another grand or two. Others may have been more fortunate.

 

[Unit74]

In round numbers, annuals for the TA III were $5K, vs. $2K for the Arrow II. And then, there were always MX expenses in between annuals on the TA III, so tack on another grand or two. Others may have been more fortunate.

I'm not buying that inference that a Turbo-ed plane ads that kind of expense unless your Turbo blows every year. I've owned a Turbo lance for 4 years and the turbo has added zero cost to annuals. None. Only thinks it's taken is some mouse milk on the linkage every time the cowl is off for an oil change. Same story with TA/TN Bo owners. I'f you are spending $3k more on an Arrow III annual each year over a Arrow II, its a POS and you need to send it to the scrap yard. More $$ at OH, sure. Otherwise, I'm flying the BS flag on that one.

 

[Sac Arrow]

I'm not buying that inference that a Turbo-ed plane ads that kind of expense unless your Turbo blows every year. I've owned a Turbo lance for 4 years and the turbo has added zero cost to annuals. None. Only thinks it's taken is some mouse milk on the linkage every time the cowl is off for an oil change. Same story with TA/TN Bo owners. I'f you are spending $3k more on an Arrow III annual each year over a Arrow II, its a POS and you need to send it to the scrap yard. More $$ at OH, sure. Otherwise, I'm flying the BS flag on that one.

Did you even read what I wrote? I said that was what I experienced. The single biggest issue was the Continental TSIO 360, but I had some other mechanical issues going on as well. The plane turned out not to be in as good of shape as I thought it was after I bought it. Eventually I came to the conclusion I was spending way more than I should be in MX and sold it, at a fairly big loss.

 

[Pilawt]

Unfortunately, comparing a 4-cyl Lyc IO-360 and a 6-cyl Conti TSIO-360 (Arrow and Turbo Arrow engines, respectively) is not the same as comparing an IO-540 and a TIO-540, as in the PA-32R series.

 

[hindsight2020]

Unfortunately, comparing a 4-cyl Lyc IO-360 and a 6-cyl Conti TSIO-360 (Arrow and Turbo Arrow engines, respectively) is not the same as comparing an IO-540 and a TIO-540, as in the PA-32R series.

Exactly. Fairly significant differences in the cost comparison between turbo and NA Lycos, vs a turbo conti to a NA Lyco. It's just not a linear relationship.

Let's also recognize there's a lot of firewall-forward wear by proxy, due to the high heat of the engine compartment in the turbo applications, which lead to earlier repair/replacement of non-turbo related accessory/components. To suggest these mx actions have nothing to do with the turbo simply because they're not turbo components, is disingenuous.

 

[Sac Arrow]

Exactly. Fairly significant differences in the cost comparison between turbo and NA Lycos, vs a turbo conti to a NA Lyco. It's just not a linear relationship.

Let's also recognize there's a lot of firewall-forward wear by proxy, due to the high heat of the engine compartment in the turbo applications, which lead to earlier repair/replacement of non-turbo related accessory/components. To suggest these mx actions have nothing to do with the turbo simply because they're not turbo components, is disingenuous.

Yeah, that.

And by the way I am not attacking @Unit74 I respect the man, and value his posts.

 

[hindsight2020]

And by the way I am not attacking @Unit74 I respect the man, and value his posts.

Indeed. Neither am I. I'm just reiterating the point @Pilawt was making.

 

[dmspilot]

Does the Turbo Lance have a fixed wastegate design and is it ground boosted? I believe the Turbo Arrow is both?

Although the fixed wastegate/ground boosted design is simpler, I believe that it's poorer for efficiency, performance, and engine health.

 

[N1120A]

A Turbo Lance is a completely different animal from any Arrow

 

[Unit74]

Fair enough...... I’ll agree they are differences. But I still hold true to my point that a turbo equipped airframe is not a on its face an instant annual airframe $$$ MX increase. Perhaps I misunderstood what Sac was trying to say. The rubber meets the road on overhaul though......

The TC Lycoming in the Lance and Toga use mechanical wastegates attached to the throttle position. I’ve been thinking of installing a blow off valve on mine though. I like the sound it makes and want the looks on the ramp. I’ll put a Powered by Muugen sticker on the cowl so they know I’m faster than them.... right above the Tanabe Suspension logo.

 

[Sac Arrow]

The stock Turbo Arrow has a fixed waste gate. Also, it has a turbo-supercharged engine, and sea level takeoff MP is 41 inches (mine was 38 inches due to an aftermarket intercooler.) Even cruise power was around 34 inches in mine. I -think- that puts more strain on the engine than a turbo normalized engine which I believe the Lycoming engines are. Most reports I've heard was that the TSIO 360's rarely make it to TBO, but, that's largely a function of how careful you are of managing the engine. I had about 1200 hours on mine when I sold it and it need a top overhaul.

My A&P said that generally you go through two turbocharges for every major engine overhaul. And I did go through one, about midway point. It was a little bit scary, I was about 150 NM from home and had departed a remote north coast airport, and started hearing a grinding sound about half way. I was fairly convinced it was the turbocharger. I didn't lose the turbocharger on the way back, but when the A&P pulled it how he reported it was probably no more than a couple of minutes from seizing. Losing a turbocharger means not only am I losing cruise power, but I'm not taking off again until it gets fixed. Losing a turbocharger in a turbo normalized plane is less of an issue.