Occasionally a well preserved simple old timer comes up on the plane for sale sites. This very original Cherokee 235 with only a bit over 1300 hours TTSN (was it kept in a freezer?) is a very practical, if cosy, true four seater.
www.planecheck.com?ent=da&id=40157
[ advert image added ]
Plunger throttles, roof mounted trim, single brake PA28’s take time to find new homes. The later ones are a non event and sell themselves.
They are fine aeroplanes but feel old I think to people who jump in for the first time. I’m a fan but wouldn’t dream of buying one to resell unless it was a give away. The airframe rate discount per extra flight hour over average, is less than people think. The opposite is also true. So really low time planes might be appealing on paper, sell faster but not really be worth much more.
Actually, that is the very 10kt faster and more capable PA28 people were looking at in the other thread. The 235 is something a lot of people don’t know about and therefore are looking in the wrong direction. It has a much better payload (and even the Cherokee 180 is one of the best in it’s class) and will do about 130-135 kts, only slightly less than most Arrows, but without the retracable gear.
Quick calcs on this one just about sais what it can do and it’s remarkable.
It’s complete usefull load is a staggering 590 kg. With 320 Liters on board, it can still carry a whopping 360 kg which, translated in 4 people, is 90 kgs per person. And it can carry those up to 850 NM with 130 kts or almost 1000 NM at 120 kts. And it can do all that on Mogas which makes the somewhat high consumption rather tolerable.
In other words, if there ever was a quintessential family tourer which will take 4 people and ample baggage and still can take fuel for more than most applications but can also safely do Greece or the North Atlantic, it’s the PA28-235…
Well, there is one right here for taking. Needs a bit of avionic upgrades but otherwise?
m_d sums it up very well, but disagree on an avionics upgrade – it already has a nice up to date 8.33khz NAV/COM/ILS and an IFR GPS COM, plus multi probe analyser and fuel flow. For non turbine, non pressurised GA why invest more than 8.33khz ILS and IFR LNAV GPS?
You have PBNB2 and ILS, hopefully one day Europe will understand the safety benefit of IFR GNSS overlay approaches.
This other old timer with the punchy asking price for an old engine and tired avionics would also be a good four seater but without the useful load of the -235.
www.planecheck.com?ent=da&id=38609
Hello Robert,
RobertL18C wrote:
it already has a nice up to date 8.33khz NAV/COM/ILS and an IFR GPS COM, plus multi probe analyser and fuel flow
you are right, for most applications the avionic fit is adequate. What I would probably do in an airplane which can fly 7-8 hours still is add a pitch channel to the 1 axis AP, something like an S-Tec 30Alt or PSS60. If you don’t need GPSS and all this, then this should do nicely. Otherwise, a WAAS GPS (or at least one which can do GPSS output) would be a reasonable upgrade.
The only thing about the early 182s (we had one in our club in Houston) is that they have a fuel thimble, not a fuel tank.
OK, I exaggerate, but the tanks are a bit small for the fuel burn.
This one has the 18 gallon tank in the luggage, which you then transfer via an electric fuel pump to the left wing, I think. An original option, and useful for helping the CG as the 182 tends to be nose heavy with only two up.
