Six Seat Single?

J

JamesA320

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jun 29, 2019
Messages
63
Display Name
Display name:
JamesA320
Hello everyone. I am brand new to this community. Not sure if I am posting in the correct place but I wanted to gather opinions on a single for a family of 4. I would like to get back in to general aviation flying as I currently fly an Airbus but it’s not “flying!”

Anyway I love the Cirrus but it is my understanding that one really needs a six seater to carry 4 people and bags. Also, I live in Las Vegas so we have high temps and high mountains.

I just started reading about Piper Lances and Saratogas. Are there significant differences between the two? How about options to look for/avoid? I assume fixed gear would be beneficial. Also if there are other models that I should look into I would be interested in learning more.

Thank you. Sorry for the long post!
 
206/206 Turbo? I find it really comfortable for 4, but fast is only a distant wish. Maybe the 210, but I'm not really a fan of Cessna's Rube Goldbergian gear system.
 
You are a perfect candidate for a Bonanza. 4 peeps and bags is basically what a Bo will do.

The lance and toga are the same plane with different wings. The toga has a tapered wing and flies a bit faster but tends to give up some useful load over the Hershey bar wing Lance.

Fixed gear will be cheaper to insure. My T Lance runs me $2k/yr insurance for standard limits.

The T Lance is much cheaper to buy because of smaller stabilator. It requires a slightly higher approach speed and a little more on the take off roll. However, the difference is so small (mole hill) and the interweberz trash talk it up(mountain) that it really makes it a great deal in the 6 place market.
 
I just looked at some numbers at the SR22 and the M20J speeds are about the same as the T tail Lances.

Edit:

Approach speeds boys..... approach speeds.
 
Hi all,

Thanks for the quick responses. The mission is to just tool around and enjoy. Comfort a priority. Do these planes have a/c, and if so, do they work well? Do they work on the ground or do people still taxi with their doors open? My experience with Cessna: 300 hours between 152/172/182, 800 hours in a 208 Caravan but never a 206/210. My Piper experience is about 100 in an Arrow, 35 in a Seminole, and 75 in a Navajo. I do not have any Beechcraft time but that does not mean that I am opposed to the Bonanza.

I assume I would average about 10 hours a month, speed is not a priority. Comfort, ease of resale, accessibility to maintanence, and affordability are my focus points.
 
Everyone has mentioned all the greats with two exceptions. The C-210 and for me, the perfect 6 place, the C-185. It'll haul a crap load, fly fast, and get me in and out of the smallest strips. Yee Ha!

Oh yeah, and welcome!!!!
 
The 185 suggestion is an intriguing one for the described mission. :thumbsup:
 
Thanks everyone!

Now how about club vs forward facing seats?
 
I fly a straight tail non-turbo Lance. The strengths of the Lance are a huge cabin and great useful load, it's an easy airplane to fly and a very stable IFR platform. I rarely fly from high elevation fields though, and that is definitely not a strong point of this aircraft. If you're flying from high elevations/hot climate I'd get a Turbo.

The main difference between a straight tail Lance and a Saratoga is the Saratoga will have a taper wing vs the older style hershey bar cherokee wing. They also have a different fuel system and various goodies and upgrades that come with being the newer model. Saratogas came in both fixed gear/retract variants as well as turbo/non Turbo.
 
Here's everything you need to know about the payload on a PA-32 series piper(not my plane, just found it on the internets)
122985cf6d6bd637ba.jpg
 
SToL said:
Everyone has mentioned all the greats with two exceptions. The C-210 and for me, the perfect 6 place, the C-185. It'll haul a crap load, fly fast, and get me in and out of the smallest strips. Yee Ha!

Oh yeah, and welcome!!!!
Click to expand...


And both are eye watering on acquisition costs. Priced out a 185 recently?
 
The only way to put six humans in a C-185 is to fold the back seaters like Ho-ho's:

ho-hos.png ho-hos.png
 
The only airplane more awesome than a PA-32 300 would be a C-207!

I use to fly complete Snowmobiles in them, or four fuel drums! Too bad most of them have been crashed in Alaska and are rare and expensive... :(:(
 
Why not a twin?

MUCH lower acquisition cost. Tons of room and ul... Use the Delta in cost for 100LL and engine override for the next 20 years until you break even.

Insurance is easy for you as an Airbus pilot.

I went from a Mooney to a 310. My growing (teenagers) family of 4 prompted the move. Love the hauling capacity and safety. The boys in the pic are 6'1" and average 200 lbs. My wife and I are not small people either. Us, a bunch of bags and full fuel brings us to about 150 under gross.

Just an idea.

As far as resale, nice planes will always sell fast.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
505ec07bff140b5803a69050a8fa2fdb.jpg
 
Last edited:
I assumed Cherokees were 4 seaters. I am not sure why. May I ask: what are differences/similarities/preferences between the Cherokee and Lance and Saratoga?

As for the multi idea, I just thought it would be cost prohibitive in all areas. But I am intrigued by the idea. I’ll start a new thread for it.

Thank you all for the great ideas!
 
JamesA320 said:
I assumed Cherokees were 4 seaters. I am not sure why. May I ask: what are differences/similarities/preferences between the Cherokee and Lance and Saratoga?

As for the multi idea, I just thought it would be cost prohibitive in all areas. But I am intrigued by the idea. I’ll start a new thread for it.

Thank you all for the great ideas!
Click to expand...

It's kind of confusing because Piper used the name "Cherokee" on just a whole bunch of different airplanes. Usually when people say Cherokee they mean the PA-28 series pipers which are 4-seater airplanes mostly with 4cyl engines(except the -235/236). There are variations between these but we will just say these 4-seat airplanes are all pa-28-xxx models. The typical Piper naming convention is the basic airframe PA-28-horsepower so PA-28-140 PA-28-160 PA-28-180, etc.. if it's PA-28R that means it's a retractable gear airplane such as an Arrow.

So what you're talking about is a PA-32. The first model in this series was the PA-32-260 which was a 6-seat fixed gear airplane making 260hp. The basic design was copied from the PA-28 but everything is stretched out, the cabin is wider and significantly longer, the airframe is beefier, they hung the engine out farther forward and added a front baggage compartment, etc. Then quickly pilots wanted more power so they came out with a 300hp version, the PA-32-300 same airplane, more engine. These fixed gear PA-32s are generally referred to as the "Cherokee six" Then came the Lance which is the PA-32R-300, again same idea but newer and they added retractable landing gear. The basic "straight tail" Lance was only made for a few years and was replaced by the T-tail lance which again same basic plane but with a T tail. There were also turbo versions of the Lance II... and some aftermarket turbos were added on to some of these PA-32 planes. Pilots didn't like the T-tail very much and Piper eventually dropped it and the new straight tail PA-32 was named the Saratoga. The principal difference is the Saratoga has a taper wing and a different cowling as well as a different fuel system. Saratogas came in turbo, N/A and both retract and fixed gear variants.

So, do you want a PA-32? They haul a huge load and they have a huge comfy cabin for the family, my wife absolutely loves ours. If you want a big comfy family hauler airplane it is absolutely the best value out there IMO. There's nothing particularly worrying about them maintenance wise, they're common enough that parts are easy to get, etc. Figure 15-17gph on the N/A model but for your mission I don't think you want the NA. The reason I say that is the one weak point of these planes is they don't do great in high DA situations. Not to say you can't, some pilots do but I'm not the one to ask about that since I fly in the midwest and southern/eastern parts of the US where it's mostly flat.
 
cowman said:
It's kind of confusing because Piper used the name "Cherokee" on just a whole bunch of different airplanes. Usually when people say Cherokee they mean the PA-28 series pipers which are 4-seater airplanes mostly with 4cyl engines(except the -235/236). There are variations between these but we will just say these 4-seat airplanes are all pa-28-xxx models. The typical Piper naming convention is the basic airframe PA-28-horsepower so PA-28-140 PA-28-160 PA-28-180, etc.. if it's PA-28R that means it's a retractable gear airplane such as an Arrow.

So what you're talking about is a PA-32. The first model in this series was the PA-32-260 which was a 6-seat fixed gear airplane making 260hp. The basic design was copied from the PA-28 but everything is stretched out, the cabin is wider and significantly longer, the airframe is beefier, they hung the engine out farther forward and added a front baggage compartment, etc. Then quickly pilots wanted more power so they came out with a 300hp version, the PA-32-300 same airplane, more engine. These fixed gear PA-32s are generally referred to as the "Cherokee six" Then came the Lance which is the PA-32R-300, again same idea but newer and they added retractable landing gear. The basic "straight tail" Lance was only made for a few years and was replaced by the T-tail lance which again same basic plane but with a T tail. There were also turbo versions of the Lance II... and some aftermarket turbos were added on to some of these PA-32 planes. Pilots didn't like the T-tail very much and Piper eventually dropped it and the new straight tail PA-32 was named the Saratoga. The principal difference is the Saratoga has a taper wing and a different cowling as well as a different fuel system. Saratogas came in turbo, N/A and both retract and fixed gear variants.

So, do you want a PA-32? They haul a huge load and they have a huge comfy cabin for the family, my wife absolutely loves ours. If you want a big comfy family hauler airplane it is absolutely the best value out there IMO. There's nothing particularly worrying about them maintenance wise, they're common enough that parts are easy to get, etc. Figure 15-17gph on the N/A model but for your mission I don't think you want the NA. The reason I say that is the one weak point of these planes is they don't do great in high DA situations. Not to say you can't, some pilots do but I'm not the one to ask about that since I fly in the midwest and southern/eastern parts of the US where it's mostly flat.
Click to expand...
Does the taper wing do any better at higher altitudes than the straight wing?
 
Thanks for the wonderful explanation of the PA-32! It seems like a great airplane on paper at least. Again, I haven’t flown one yet so I am trying to gather opinions and then find one for rent and if it all checks out, then I will start the airplane hunting process!

A couple of more questions:
How is the a/c on these planes? I have never flown a light plane with a/c.
Also, when I look at listings, some aircraft will have 3000 hrs on it but not mention the overhaul time. It seems like 2000 is the time between overhaul. Are overhauls required or are people avoiding them or am I just misreading the ads? Also what is a ballpark for a new engine or overhaul? $50k?

Thank You
 
For the TIO540, yes, a top shelf white glove shop OH will be approaching $50k with all accessories.


I have found that if no OH time is listed, TTAF also correlates to the engine as well. However, 3k on any engine is almost impossible I say.

JamesA320 said:
Thanks for the wonderful explanation of the PA-32! It seems like a great airplane on paper at least. Again, I haven’t flown one yet so I am trying to gather opinions and then find one for rent and if it all checks out, then I will start the airplane hunting process!

A couple of more questions:
How is the a/c on these planes? I have never flown a light plane with a/c.
Also, when I look at listings, some aircraft will have 3000 hrs on it but not mention the overhaul time. It seems like 2000 is the time between overhaul. Are overhauls required or are people avoiding them or am I just misreading the ads? Also what is a ballpark for a new engine or overhaul? $50k?

Thank You
Click to expand...
 
cowman said:
...So, do you want a PA-32? They haul a huge load and they have a huge comfy cabin for the family, my wife absolutely loves ours. If you want a big comfy family hauler airplane it is absolutely the best value out there IMO. There's nothing particularly worrying about them maintenance wise, they're common enough that parts are easy to get, etc. Figure 15-17gph on the N/A model but for your mission I don't think you want the NA. The reason I say that is the one weak point of these planes is they don't do great in high DA situations. Not to say you can't, some pilots do but I'm not the one to ask about that since I fly in the midwest and southern/eastern parts of the US where it's mostly flat.
Click to expand...

I'm curious about the "they don't do great in high DA situations...".

I fly out of a 4000 ASL airport in the Rockies. I favor airplanes with high useful loads. I've found the secret to dealing with high DA is to fly an airplane with tons of load carrying capability, but fly it light. The nice thing about a Cherokee 6/PA-32 or my Aztec is you can fly them "light" and still be carrying a decent fuel, people and baggage payload.
 
JamesA320 said:
Also, when I look at listings, some aircraft will have 3000 hrs on it but not mention the overhaul time. It seems like 2000 is the time between overhaul. Are overhauls required or are people avoiding them or am I just misreading the ads? Also what is a ballpark for a new engine or overhaul? $50k?

Thank You
Click to expand...

Depending on the engine model, manufacturers overhaul times typically range from 1400 to 2200 hours, turbocharged engines tend toward the lower times. 2000 hours is pretty common for a lot of NA engines.

It's not uncommon for private owners to run engines "on condition" past the recommended overhaul time, if the engine is running fine, and based on periodic compression checks, monitoring oil consumption and that sort of thing. I've seen Lycomings past 3000 hours; we have a 172 at our airport that made it past 3500 hours before the engine was rebuilt. But it was flown hundreds of hours every year.

Engines that sit for a long time can have problems. Lycomings, for example, are notorious for camshaft corrosion and spalling if they have been sitting for extended periods in the wrong environment in the past.
 
Last edited:
JamesA320 said:
Also what is a ballpark for a new engine or overhaul? $50k?

Thank You
Click to expand...
James,

I use Air Power, Inc to get a feel for the cost of an overhauled, factory rebuilt, and new engine. Add about 10-15% to those prices to account for the R&R by the shop or mechanic doing the engine pull and install.

http://www.airpowerinc.com/

TBO is not mandatory in the part 91 world, you overhaul when the engine tells you it's time. Could be hundreds of hours over or some may not make TBO at all. Engines have a funny way of telling you it's time though.

Cheers,
Brian
 
GRG55 said:
I'm curious about the "they don't do great in high DA situations...".

I fly out of a 4000 ASL airport in the Rockies. I favor airplanes with high useful loads. I've found the secret to dealing with high DA is to fly an airplane with tons of load carrying capability, but fly it light. The nice thing about a Cherokee 6/PA-32 or my Aztec is you can fly them "light" and still be carrying a decent fuel, people and baggage payload.
Click to expand...

You'd have more practical experience than I do. I just know the previous owner of my NA Lance sold it and bought a twin bo because he frequents CO and was having DA issues and this is generally what I've been told about PA-32s. If I was looking to buy and I lived or flew frequently in higher altitude areas I'd want a turbo. Since I don't, I'm happy with the longer TBO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top