Thinking about a Pacer

N659HB

N659HB

En-Route
Joined
Jul 20, 2013
Messages
2,511
Location
Lather, rinse repeat!
Display Name
Display name:
Pops
as my next airplane, should the LSA limits be revised upward. Yes, a PA-20. Looks like a reasonable cross country as well as bush platform. Any owners care to chime in?
 
Just make sure it has the flames. :D

199021_front_3-4_web.jpg
 
I've always liked the pacers...I think they are good bang for the buck (especially the "not true pacer" but converted-from-tripacer ones).
 
N659HB said:
Can you elaborate?
Click to expand...
I considered a pacer for awhile, and I noted that most of the less expensive PA20s started life as PA22s and were converted...the original PA20s carry a premium for being original, but I found that if the conversion was done right, it shouldn't matter. As a "cheap plane for flying fun"...who cares if it is "original"???
 
N659HB said:
as my next airplane, should the LSA limits be revised upward. Yes, a PA-20. Looks like a reasonable cross country as well as bush platform. Any owners care to chime in?
Click to expand...
Before you buy any rag and tube aircraft, get some with good knowledge of the type to teach you every thing there is to know about the type.
There are many systems of covering systems. and old steel tubing has its own set of problems.
So get smart before you buy.
If you do intend to do off airport get the 180 horse version. they do a find job. :)
 
N659HB said:
as my next airplane, should the LSA limits be revised upward. Yes, a PA-20. Looks like a reasonable cross country as well as bush platform. Any owners care to chime in?
Click to expand...
They are fine airplanes, just a different breed of cat. I have owned two of them, the last one a converted PA-22 with a 160 HP Lycoming in it. Very fun airplane to fly. Quick and nimble. I owned an original 1951 Pacer, 125 HP, never been converted. Low power made little difference in the performance except lower cruise speed. There is a small difference in the fuselage, no hump in the roof over the rear seats in an original PA-20 like the PA-22. Both aircraft were a ball. Both would like to go their own way if even slightly loaded aft. I have heard them described as "ground lovers." I don't listen to that, they just fly a little differently with the short wing. Speed is your friend. That said, base to final was only about 80 and the airplane just found that all by its self. Over the fence at 70 and bleed it back. Very comfy. Bush performance is not quite as good as you might believe due to the fact that they have very small flaps to work with. More HP would be a great addition. Although never manufactured with a 180 HP engine, that conversion is readily available. Hope you find a good one. Not as many around as there once was.
 
Tom-D said:
Before you buy any rag and tube aircraft, get some with good knowledge of the type to teach you every thing there is to know about the type.
There are many systems of covering systems. and old steel tubing has its own set of problems.
So get smart before you buy.
If you do intend to do off airport get the 180 horse version. they do a find job. :)
Click to expand...

Agreed. Fabric can hide a multitude of sins! I'm in no rush, so it should be possible to find a good one in the next 2-3 years.
 
I looked at one a few months ago. It was a little rough around the edges and the owner asked me if I was handy. 160 hp. He said the cruise was great but was a flying brick when you chopped the throttle. It was a little hard for me at 6’2” to climb in, but decent room inside otherwise. Back seat looks for small people only. Inop 3rd fuel tank under seat, missing nav radio, needed control cable trim pieces where they exit the wing, left fuel tank pickup inop, and I didn’t like the upholstery. I also don’t have a hangar yet. Never flew in it. It may be a lovely flyer.
 
N659HB said:
Agreed. Fabric can hide a multitude of sins! I'm in no rush, so it should be possible to find a good one in the next 2-3 years.
Click to expand...
Ever consider a Maule ?
 
If you'd like a pacer, you'd love this.
1949 CESSNA 170A

It's not a 49.. it's 48 rag wing that needs some TLC. ($$)
 
N659HB said:
A fixer-upper for sure. I’d consider something like that. It’s definitely in my price range.
Click to expand...
The wings have been metaled. that detracts from the value. but it should fly OK.
 
Purchased this beauty quite a few years back. She was a good plane. Family just outgrew it.

8d3ff69398b81225428546e6bef17e6d.jpg


362dc04aac6f6556f66599a45266be96.jpg
 
Tom-D said:
If you'd like a pacer, you'd love this.
1949 CESSNA 170A

It's not a 49.. it's 48 rag wing that needs some TLC. ($$)
Click to expand...
And obviously it's a straight 170, not a 170A. That's a hilarious ad, even for that broker. "All original inside and out" ... "The plane was kept looking the way it does so that the county would asses it for low property taxes." :rolleyes:
 
Pilawt said:
And obviously it's a straight 170, not a 170A. That's a hilarious ad, even for that broker. "All original inside and out" ... "The plane was kept looking the way it does so that the county would asses it for low property taxes." :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
That aircraft is actually a pretty good deal. If a person of little mechanical skill wanted to do a flying project.
The interior could be done by the local upholstery shop for less than 1500 head liner and all.
Paint ? strip a little at a time, polish or paint as you go.
The only big ticket item I see is maybe the engine. (but maybe not even)

Just hold your nose and fly it. :)
 
ad_detail.php

Nice instrument panel not all cut up. the RMI would have to go, replaced with an A/H.

Its S/N Is above 500, so it is one of the last built (712 total) accounts for the instrument panel looking a lot like a 49. and it has a stall horn, most don't. compass has been moved to make room for the RMI.
 
hand sewn pilot seat cover...check
duck tape rear seat repairs...check
panic button on the panel...check
transponder sitting in rear seat...check
electric tape on the yokes...check
Last annual performed at a skin bar??...check
 
texasclouds said:
hand sewn pilot seat cover...check
duck tape rear seat repairs...check
panic button on the panel...check
transponder sitting in rear seat...check
electric tape on the yokes...check
Last annual performed at a skin bar??...check
Click to expand...
Did you notice 18k ? did you expect new?
 
texasclouds said:
hand sewn pilot seat cover...check. .. not safety related
duck tape rear seat repairs...check...not safety related
panic button on the panel...check ...not safety related
transponder sitting in rear seat...check...not safety related
electric tape on the yokes...check. .. not safety related
Last annual performed at a skin bar??...check.. completely out of your imagination
Click to expand...
 
Just found a nice Pacer (PA-22 conversion) on Barnstormers. It has a placard indicating the right fuel tank for level flight only. Anyone know why?
 
N659HB said:
Just found a nice Pacer (PA-22 conversion) on Barnstormers. It has a placard indicating the right fuel tank for level flight only. Anyone know why?
Click to expand...

That’s standard. My PA22 conversion has the same thing. I think it has to do with the fuel pickup location in the right tank.
 
Digging up an old thread... thought that would be better than a new one!

Tell me about your experiences with Pacers. I've found a few that are in my price range.

I've got two missions in mind:

1. My girlfriend is showing a lot of interest in getting her PPL. I think it would be good for that and save her a fortune in plane rental fees.

2. I'm thinking it would make a fairly cheap photo plane that can do 90% of my missions. I've seen people remove one door and I think this is approved, one only, but either one. This gives me the ability to shoot on both sides of the plane. I would probably just remove the back seat so I could sit back there. I've heard with a pilot up front and me in the back, the plane might be squirrelly on the ground. Any thoughts on this?

Just toying with the idea at this time.
 
Lowflynjack said:
Digging up an old thread... thought that would be better than a new one!

Tell me about your experiences with Pacers. I've found a few that are in my price range.

I've got two missions in mind:

1. My girlfriend is showing a lot of interest in getting her PPL. I think it would be good for that and save her a fortune in plane rental fees.

2. I'm thinking it would make a fairly cheap photo plane that can do 90% of my missions. I've seen people remove one door and I think this is approved, one only, but either one. This gives me the ability to shoot on both sides of the plane. I would probably just remove the back seat so I could sit back there. I've heard with a pilot up front and me in the back, the plane might be squirrelly on the ground. Any thoughts on this?

Just toying with the idea at this time.
Click to expand...
I just sold my project Pacer, but there is a conversion for a left side pilot door, too... The struts are too much in the way for the kind of photo work my company does, but yours might be fine. I'd want a good tailwheel pilot up front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top